The Trump Card...
- Thread starter muttly
- Start date
It's not a defense of Trump. It's more about The Left willingness to believe anything that they want to believe if it affects Trump negatively. They'll believe collusion is a crime. It's not. A president firing a subordinate FBI Director is a crime. It's not. And Trump using his own money to enter into NDAS is a crime. It's not.I see what you did there. If the Left only believes that all Trump does is lie. Then they would have to believe that what he is saying on the tape is the absolute truth.
That's an interesting defense of Trump. He is a known liar, so it's possible he is lying on the tapes. And since it is possible this known liar is lying, he's not in trouble.
Regardless, its not a crime. If anything Trump was a victim of extortion. Just a coincidence I guess that one of the NDAS happened about a week before the election. An affair that happened around 12 years ago and one of the parties comes forward after all those years.
At least Clinton didn't pay for the BJ. It may have cost him a ceeegar though.
Hmmm. Interesting. No outcries for impeachment back then. Just crickets.
The ‘bribe’ to silence Wright
The ‘bribe’ to silence Wright
It would really help further discourse if the citizens of the US were not merely separated into Left/Right ... CNN/FOX ... Blue/Red.
I understand it's easier to do that but the reality is there's many more layers.
Handing out immunity like that, much like they did with Hillary's cohorts, should tell you that Mueller isn't really interested in the truth as much as he is in arriving at a report here he can recommend impeachment. Plea deals and immunity in lieu of prosecution are strong coercive incentives to embellish, stretch and outright lie. You may or may not think that's the case, but it's something to keep in mind, nevertheless.
Agree there's many more layers. But if you look at CNN or pretty much all of the major news networks, its opposition to most anything he does because they have an agenda. It would help with discourse if they didn't have one.
The MSM at large, and CNN in particular, has become propagandists with press passes.
People in general, liberals especially, tend to engage in projection, in order to deflect attention, where they conspicuously allege others are doing precisely what they are doing themselves. Trump colluded with Russia. Well, no, Hillary and the DNC did that. Cnn calls Fox News the State Media. Well, no, CNN is engaging in the propaganda. CNN is, afterall, Facts First, despite acting just the opposite.
Fox News really isn't the propaganda arm that it was when it was invented and when Roger Ailes was still there. They're still homers, still rooting for the (conservative) home team, the taking heads and commentary and opinion show hosts in particular, but they no longer play the propaganda game. It's funny, too, because as CNN dialed it up, Fox dialed it back down the other way. It's also funny that when Fox News stopped using the Fair and Balanced slogan, they actually became leaps and bounds more fair and balanced (just the opposite of when CNN started saying they were all about Facts First and pretty much put facts on the back burner as an afterthought).
Still, Fox programing is mostly opinion and commentary, so you have to be selective. The Five is almost all commentary, but it's well rounded with the Left, the Right, the Independent Libertarian, and the more pragmatic, how-the-sausage-is-made former White House Press Secretary (who isn't a fan of Trump).
But the ones to really pay attention to are Brett Baier who does straight news with the occasional balanced panel to discuss certain issues, and any on-air reporting by Catherine Herridge, who is strictly a Five Ws kind of journalist who refuses to interject bias or opinion into her reporting. When she reports, it's worth a close listen.
The rest of their programming is mostly slanted commentary, although you can pretty easily pick out the slants and take it for what it's worth.
Trump's favorite show, Fox and Friends in the mornings is, in my opinion, less that worthless as a news source. It's the SNL of morning cable news, where there's some valuable information there, but you have to wade through 90 percent of crap to get at it.
I'm thinking they are going to need much more than what has been presented so far. Democrats may even themselves slow the process when they see Pence waiting in the wings.
They won't need more to charge or evidence to present. Existing cases already provide more than enough material for articles of impeachment. Remember, impeachment happens in congress, not in court. It's a political process, not a legal process. If the House impeaches and the Senate votes to confirm, there is no appeal to challenge the validity of the charging document. If the Senate votes to confirm, impeachment is a done deal.
What will have to change is the direction of the political winds. I believe that will happen as the various investigations continue to erode Trump's strength by bringing more and more truth to light, and as Trump responds in his typical self-harming ways.
The Democratic leadership is discouraging impeachment talk now because they know that impeachment talk will fire up Trump's base and encourage them to vote in the mid-terms. Trump knows this too which is why he's mentioning the impeachment threat in his rallies and other venues.
After the election, the Democrats will be more willing to beat the impeachment drum. They'd take Pence over Trump in an instant for a number of reasons, one of which will be intense pressure from the Democratic rank and file to impeach if they win the House.
That's right. Collusion is not a crime. Trump initially denied that collusion happened. After it was established that collusion did happen, he started saying collusion is not a crime. And that is true. Collusion is not a crime (actually, it is defined as a crime in anti-trust law, but that definition does not apply in this case.)
If the Muller report presents evidence that Trump colluded with Russia to influence the election, the report will not charge him with collusion, which is not a crime. It will charge him with conspiracy, which is a crime.
It is if the president's intent in firing the director was to impede an investigation. That is called obstruction of justice.
It is if the intent of the NDAs was to influence an election. That is called violation of various campaign finance laws.
That timing strengthens the case that Trump entered into the NDA to influence the election. He was content to go without that NDA for a long time. Then when it became apparent that he had an actual chance to win the election, he directed that the NDA be created and paid the hush money.
The Right does the same thing. It's not like critics on the right gave Obama a free pass when he was in office. Spin is an ongoing activity on the left and the right.
Point taken
A talking head on CNN or MSNBC (I don't remember who) reminded the audience how Nixon came to resign. Congressional leaders from his party met privately with Nixon to tell him he was done. If Nixon did not resign, they would allow impeachment proceedings to begin. Nixon, realizing the battle was lost, resigned.
I've been predicting Trump's impeachment but the Nixon scenario may repeat. When more truth comes out and the political winds shift, Republican leaders may become quite eager for a Trump exit and tell Trump he's done. That would be quicker and less messy for the Republicans (and the country) than a full-on impeachment trial would be. They get Trump out after the midterms, the more time the Republicans will have to let the Trump taint fade and cultivate a different image to the 2020 electorate.
This presumes the Trump base loses its energy, which I believe will happen. Trump appeals to his base partly because he is seen as strong. As his friends betray him and the investigations and court cases proceed, Trump's weaknesses will be more widely seen. As Trump's perceived strength erodes, so will his base. Many in the base will remain Trump supporters, some to the day they die. But their energy will fade and they will not be the force they once were.
I've been predicting Trump's impeachment but the Nixon scenario may repeat. When more truth comes out and the political winds shift, Republican leaders may become quite eager for a Trump exit and tell Trump he's done. That would be quicker and less messy for the Republicans (and the country) than a full-on impeachment trial would be. They get Trump out after the midterms, the more time the Republicans will have to let the Trump taint fade and cultivate a different image to the 2020 electorate.
This presumes the Trump base loses its energy, which I believe will happen. Trump appeals to his base partly because he is seen as strong. As his friends betray him and the investigations and court cases proceed, Trump's weaknesses will be more widely seen. As Trump's perceived strength erodes, so will his base. Many in the base will remain Trump supporters, some to the day they die. But their energy will fade and they will not be the force they once were.
Last edited:
Last edited by a moderator: