LGR4GM Posted May 29, 2019 Author Report Posted May 29, 2019 Mueller talking for the first time was interesting even if all of what he said was in the report.
SABRES 0311 Posted May 29, 2019 Report Posted May 29, 2019 Sounds like the end of Mueller’s work. I hope the AG declassifies as much as possible. Congress might as well pursue whatever investigations. Let’s get this over with.
SwampD Posted May 29, 2019 Report Posted May 29, 2019 (edited) 57 minutes ago, LGR4GM said: Mueller talking for the first time was interesting even if all of what he said was in the report. All I took away from what he said was that Russia really wanted Trump to win. Take that for what it's worth. Edited May 29, 2019 by SwampD
Weave Posted May 29, 2019 Report Posted May 29, 2019 Since Barr has pretty much made it known that the FBI under his leadership will not indict a sitting President, what do the unwashed masses think the likelihood of post Presidency charges will be?
SABRES 0311 Posted May 30, 2019 Report Posted May 30, 2019 None. Same reason as I doubt a Dem leadership backed impeachment. It sets a potential precedent and Dem leadership probably fear it will hurt them like Republicans and Bill Clinton. Take my thoughts with a grain of salt. I don’t think Trump is an anomaly when it comes to questionable activities. We are on a downhill and I think past the point of a u turn.
Drunkard Posted May 30, 2019 Report Posted May 30, 2019 15 hours ago, Weave said: Since Barr has pretty much made it known that the FBI under his leadership will not indict a sitting President, what do the unwashed masses think the likelihood of post Presidency charges will be? I think it will be highly unlikely because I think Trump will be the first sitting President to pardon himself on his last day in office. That won't stop states like NY or FL from possibly charging him with whatever, but it should put an end to any federal charges.
Weave Posted May 30, 2019 Report Posted May 30, 2019 “The paper” in the first line of this excerpt is The Wall Street Journal. The newspaper reports that the United States Navy, under orders from the White House and with the approval of the acting secretary of defense and the compliance of a chain of naval officers in the Seventh Fleet, did its efficient best to conceal the name John McCain from President Donald Trump’s sight when he recently visited Yokosuka Naval Base. The ship is under repair, so it could not be moved. But sailors hung a tarp over the ship’s name, and other measures (a strategically positioned barge) helped obscure the offending words. Sailors were told to remove all coverings that might indicate that the ship is the USS John S. McCain.
SABRES 0311 Posted May 30, 2019 Report Posted May 30, 2019 6 minutes ago, Weave said: “The paper” in the first line of this excerpt is The Wall Street Journal. The newspaper reports that the United States Navy, under orders from the White House and with the approval of the acting secretary of defense and the compliance of a chain of naval officers in the Seventh Fleet, did its efficient best to conceal the name John McCain from President Donald Trump’s sight when he recently visited Yokosuka Naval Base. The ship is under repair, so it could not be moved. But sailors hung a tarp over the ship’s name, and other measures (a strategically positioned barge) helped obscure the offending words. Sailors were told to remove all coverings that might indicate that the ship is the USS John S. McCain. https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.wsj.com/amp/articles/white-house-wanted-uss-john-mccain-out-of-sight-during-trump-japan-visit-11559173470 I think this is the article you are referring to.
Eleven Posted May 30, 2019 Report Posted May 30, 2019 52 minutes ago, Weave said: “The paper” in the first line of this excerpt is The Wall Street Journal. The newspaper reports that the United States Navy, under orders from the White House and with the approval of the acting secretary of defense and the compliance of a chain of naval officers in the Seventh Fleet, did its efficient best to conceal the name John McCain from President Donald Trump’s sight when he recently visited Yokosuka Naval Base. The ship is under repair, so it could not be moved. But sailors hung a tarp over the ship’s name, and other measures (a strategically positioned barge) helped obscure the offending words. Sailors were told to remove all coverings that might indicate that the ship is the USS John S. McCain. What a petty, disgusting individual.
TrueBlueGED Posted May 30, 2019 Report Posted May 30, 2019 20 hours ago, Weave said: Since Barr has pretty much made it known that the FBI under his leadership will not indict a sitting President, what do the unwashed masses think the likelihood of post Presidency charges will be? To be fair, DOJ policy on not being able to indict a sitting president long predates Barr's arrival as AG. Anywho, I think the odds are really low, but greater than zero. Maybe 5%? Assuming a Democratic candidate replaces him, whether that's 2021 or 2025, I expect they'll be considerably more focused on reversing his policies than dealing with his obstruction of a closed investigation. That said, I'm sure there would be some interest among the fringe of the party to be out for blood. 2 hours ago, Eleven said: What a petty, disgusting individual. Obligatory "but her emails" snark.
Marvin Posted May 30, 2019 Report Posted May 30, 2019 1 hour ago, TrueBlueGED said: To be fair, DOJ policy on not being able to indict a sitting president long predates Barr's arrival as AG. Anywho, I think the odds are really low, but greater than zero. Maybe 5%? Assuming a Democratic candidate replaces him, whether that's 2021 or 2025, I expect they'll be considerably more focused on reversing his policies than dealing with his obstruction of a closed investigation. That said, I'm sure there would be some interest among the fringe of the party to be out for blood. This "rule" dates back to at least 1972 with the Special Prosecutor's office. This was the approximate consensus from later interviews with Archibald Cox, Eliot Richardson, William Ruckleshaus, Robert Bork, Leon Jaworski, and Sam Dash. The actual memoranda are at https://www.lawfareblog.com/indicting-president-not-foreclosed-complex-history Here is how it played out in real life. When the Watergate Grand Jury was going to wrap up, the foreman wanted to know if they could indict the President. ("He was the man giving all the orders!") It had been the considered opinion of the Special Prosecutor's office that they could name Nixon as an unindicted co-conspirator, but could not indict the President. Leon Jaworski and Sam Dash said that the only people whom everyone agreed could "indict" the President was Congress via impeachment, so their work was packed up to be sent to the House Judiciary Committee and, I believe, the Senate Watergate Committee. Ford's pardon of Nixon was to stem any potential crimes that could have been prosecuted after Nixon's resignation. Because I witnessed the collective sigh of relief from Watergate -- often coupled with outrage -- I expect that there will not be too much stomach to indict Trump on the Federal Level unless there are tax-related charges. On the other hand, if, say, New York State has been regularly screwed by Trump on taxes and can prove that Trump's handing of properties on the federal level are different from his tax filings on the state level, then we should expect the state to try and recover the lost money.
LGR4GM Posted May 31, 2019 Author Report Posted May 31, 2019 Here we go... a man who has no real idea how economics works is about to tank the economy. Best part is that with the last tax cut there won't be money to help stabilize it. https://www.cnn.com/2019/05/31/investing/dow-stock-market-today/index.html Quote The broadside against Mexico comes at a delicate time in global financial markets. The Dow is on track to close lower this week, for the sixth week in a row. That would be the worst losing streak since summer 2011. With one trading session left, the Dow has fallen nearly 5.4% in May. The last time stocks fell in May was in 2012, when the Do w fell 6.2%. This has been the worst month since December, when the Dow fell about 8.7% US stocks have slumped and bond yields have plunged in part because of worries about the escalating trade war between the United States and China. Investors fear the tit-for-tat tariffs — and threats of non-tariff retaliation — will slow economic growth, dent consumer confidence and derail business investment. Imposing tariffs on Mexico may only exacerbate those trade concerns. The US Chamber of Commerce has estimated that about 6 million US jobs depend on trade with Mexico.
Sabel79 Posted May 31, 2019 Report Posted May 31, 2019 Obligatory reminder that “the economy” in no way explains the experience of the average citizen. Which, of course, is about to get a whole lot worse. And it was bad to begin with.
LGR4GM Posted May 31, 2019 Author Report Posted May 31, 2019 1 hour ago, Sabel79 said: Obligatory reminder that “the economy” in no way explains the experience of the average citizen. Which, of course, is about to get a whole lot worse. And it was bad to begin with. Middle class? We don't need no stinking middle class. (sarcasm)
Sabel79 Posted May 31, 2019 Report Posted May 31, 2019 2 hours ago, LGR4GM said: Middle class? We don't need no stinking middle class. (sarcasm) Feudalism: not just for Libertarians anymore...
LGR4GM Posted June 5, 2019 Author Report Posted June 5, 2019 Nothing like more Tariff's. Also starting to hear warnings from economists that a recession is brewing.
LTS Posted June 7, 2019 Report Posted June 7, 2019 The number of messages I am getting from our technology suppliers about their costs going up is certainly not going to help anything in the short run. The truth is that a rise in tariffs could be an instigator for manufacturing build up in the United States. But, it doesn't happen overnight and during that lag period everyone suffers. There's a lot of ways I could go on this topic. But the one certain way that is wrong is to just fire off a tariff overnight and not expect negative ramifications. 1
SwampD Posted June 9, 2019 Report Posted June 9, 2019 He still thinks the other countries pay the tariffs. Will no one tell him?
North Buffalo Posted June 11, 2019 Report Posted June 11, 2019 On 6/8/2019 at 11:08 PM, SwampD said: He still thinks the other countries pay the tariffs. Will no one tell him? It wont matter... he wont listen any better than Wolfe Blitzer
LGR4GM Posted June 13, 2019 Author Report Posted June 13, 2019 oh look Conway violated the Hatch Act.... and also look Trump won't follow the law. Guy is a pile of trash and a crook.
LGR4GM Posted June 15, 2019 Author Report Posted June 15, 2019 And now we're getting pushed towards war in Iran while selling arms to the Saudis. Wonder what money trump will get from this. Sometimes when I'm trying to understand someone, I play a little game... #GoT #littelfinger #whatstheworstreason
SABRES 0311 Posted June 17, 2019 Report Posted June 17, 2019 On 6/14/2019 at 2:48 AM, LGR4GM said: oh look Conway violated the Hatch Act.... and also look Trump won't follow the law. Guy is a pile of trash and a crook. Reading an article on what she did I still don't see what exactly happened. It says she used her government position to disparage democrats during television appearances. I think her position is counselor to the president. How does talking bad about another political party while holding that specific job violate the act? Has congress talked about brining this to the floor? Is this the first time someone in her position has ever done this? Not defending her as I honestly cant seem to wrap my head around it.
SwampD Posted June 17, 2019 Report Posted June 17, 2019 1 hour ago, SABRES 0311 said: Reading an article on what she did I still don't see what exactly happened. It says she used her government position to disparage democrats during television appearances. I think her position is counselor to the president. How does talking bad about another political party while holding that specific job violate the act? Has congress talked about brining this to the floor? Is this the first time someone in her position has ever done this? Not defending her as I honestly cant seem to wrap my head around it. I think the law basically states, if you are in power, don't be a dick. People have differing views on things and that is what makes America great. I can't say yet if Trump's policies are good or bad, but he is a dick. Kellyanne Bobblehead is a dick and they have the bully pulpit. Just shut up and do what you believe in. Don't be a dick.
SABRES 0311 Posted June 17, 2019 Report Posted June 17, 2019 6 hours ago, SwampD said: I think the law basically states, if you are in power, don't be a dick. People have differing views on things and that is what makes America great. I can't say yet if Trump's policies are good or bad, but he is a dick. Kellyanne Bobblehead is a dick and they have the bully pulpit. Just shut up and do what you believe in. Don't be a dick. That’s probably the only thing politicians do good. 2
Recommended Posts