Not necessarily . It could mean something but we don't know yet.
Last edited:
Trump Impeachment
- Thread starter Mr. Deez
- Start date
Not necessarily . It could mean something but we don't know yet.
LongestHorn
2,500+ Posts
You're right. It could be diplomatic immunity.
Note the Clinton campaign paid Perkins Coie to funnel money to FusionGPS for the fake dossier and falsely claimed it was legal expenses. If it ain’t grossly larger than that, it’s not going to fly.You're right. It could be diplomatic immunity.
Joe Fan
10,000+ Posts
One thing is certain, as noted in here on the first day this idea hit this forum, none of it has anything to do with Russian Collusion in the 2016 election. Which was always nonsense. An excuse. A misdirection. An opportunity to manipulate the mentally and emotionally weak.
What it is about is overturning the expressed will of the people. It's about the Party who lost the last election in part, but it is clearly bigger than just them. It is DC fighting back. The Swamp does not want to be drained. There are some very large financial interests at stake because of Trump. Besides the money, it is the age old power and control. Trump is a clear and present danger to their hold on it. Ask yourself, do these people ever just lay back and take it? Never. What do they do? They fight back. With money, lawyers, spies and dirty tricksters. DC is full of this type. And with our governmental Intelligence Apparatus, which always seems a little too efficient when in comes to information on US citizens, they know everything about everyone.
Even if they cannot remove Trump from office (which I still maintain they cannot) they still want to tie his hands. Keep him busy fighting them off and unable to follow through with his agenda. Maybe one part of the Congress will be enough to do this, we will see.
However, to finally get to the point, if they are able to unseat Trump, there will consequences for this as well. A reaction to the reaction. One obvious place is the ballot box, but I think it will go further. Much further. There are going to be a lot of extremely unhappy people out there. They finally have someone in DC who speaks for them and DC takes him out in the first term? So I say, if this happens, some of these extremely unhappy people are going to become violent -- fights, shootings and probably even bombings. But, unlike the Antifa stuff, this will not be a bunch of pale, skinny, art school poofters hiding behind masks. Instead, it is going to be people with the means and capability to make it really ugly. Perhaps Oklahoma City ugly. Which, of course, wont dent the monied and political interests behind all of this.
What it is about is overturning the expressed will of the people. It's about the Party who lost the last election in part, but it is clearly bigger than just them. It is DC fighting back. The Swamp does not want to be drained. There are some very large financial interests at stake because of Trump. Besides the money, it is the age old power and control. Trump is a clear and present danger to their hold on it. Ask yourself, do these people ever just lay back and take it? Never. What do they do? They fight back. With money, lawyers, spies and dirty tricksters. DC is full of this type. And with our governmental Intelligence Apparatus, which always seems a little too efficient when in comes to information on US citizens, they know everything about everyone.
Even if they cannot remove Trump from office (which I still maintain they cannot) they still want to tie his hands. Keep him busy fighting them off and unable to follow through with his agenda. Maybe one part of the Congress will be enough to do this, we will see.
However, to finally get to the point, if they are able to unseat Trump, there will consequences for this as well. A reaction to the reaction. One obvious place is the ballot box, but I think it will go further. Much further. There are going to be a lot of extremely unhappy people out there. They finally have someone in DC who speaks for them and DC takes him out in the first term? So I say, if this happens, some of these extremely unhappy people are going to become violent -- fights, shootings and probably even bombings. But, unlike the Antifa stuff, this will not be a bunch of pale, skinny, art school poofters hiding behind masks. Instead, it is going to be people with the means and capability to make it really ugly. Perhaps Oklahoma City ugly. Which, of course, wont dent the monied and political interests behind all of this.
Last edited:
According to NYT, immunity was granted months ago and it was narrow (things related to the harlot payments). Like I said, they need more than this.You're right. It could be diplomatic immunity.
Apparently it doesn’t. It was related to the harlot payments and it was granted months ago on a narrow basis. If anything, it shows how desperate the prosecutors are.
Looking more and more like a biased political witch hunt every day. Somehow we swerved from collusion and treason to tax fraud and campaign finance violations. Unless they find conclusive evidence of collusion between Trump and Russian officials then I cannot envision a Republican Senate (or even Democratic Senate less than a super majority) removing Trump from office. Even if a felony is found but unrelated to Russian collusion, it can easily be argued that the investigation was tainted and politically motivated.
Last edited:
That's pretty much fact at this point.
Joe Fan
10,000+ Posts
I had this very argument with someone in here the first week of the SP. My analogy was Scooter Libby/Valerie Plame. On the day he took the oath, Patrick Fitzgerald knew two things: (1) Plame was not an operative covered by the relevant statute and (2) he knew who the "leaker" was (and it was not Libby). But Fitzgerald charged forward like a bull anyway. Why? If you can remember this period, the liberals really hated Dick Cheney. They were obsessed with him. And they thought they could get him on the Plame BS. So Fitzgerald charged Libby with a completely unrelated crime and tried to force him to roll on Cheney (Libby was Cheney's Chief of Staff). But Libby couldnt roll on Cheney because there was nothing to roll on, only liberal imagination. The whole Fitzgerald matter was a stunt -- a political witch hunt. The star witness even later said Fitzgerald lied to her to coerce wrongful testimony.
Now, get this, can you guess who was in the middle of Fitzgerald' s zealous pursuit of Cheney?
James Comey
He had authority bc the actual AG recused himself -- sound familiar?
Oh, and guess who Comey has hired to be a part of his current criminal defense team?
He had authority bc the actual AG recused himself -- sound familiar?
Oh, and guess who Comey has hired to be a part of his current criminal defense team?
They used the same template again this time. When he took the oath, Mueller knew there was no "collusion" between Trump and the Russians in the 2016 election just like Fitzgerald knew when he took office there was no procecutable CIA leak. But, just like Fitzgerald, Mueller charged forward anyway. Why? Because just like Fitzgerald, he was after something else. For Fitzgerald, it was Cheney. But he failed (Libby was later pardoned (by Trump)). Mueller will probably fail to get his man too. But he has already cut a path of destruction through several other folks' lives who would never had been charged with anything had they not associated themselves with Mueller's primary target. Of this, there is no doubt.
Last edited:
Joe Fan
10,000+ Posts
Speaking of Comey, here is an interesting sidenote which once again makes one wonder what exactly is going on at the FBI/DOJ.
Remember all those Clinton emails discovered on Anthony Weiner's laptop?
The ones that supposedly cause the Clinton case to be re-opened.
The ones to which James Comey subsequently testified to Congress that the FBI had “reviewed all of the communications .... Thanks to the wizardry of our technology”?
Turns out Comey lied. Again. The FBI actually reviewed less than 10% of that material on the Weiner laptop.
Certainly a different standard of review is employed by these people depending how they feel about the target
https://www.realclearinvestigations...k_of_weiner_laptop_emails_never_examined.html
Remember all those Clinton emails discovered on Anthony Weiner's laptop?
The ones that supposedly cause the Clinton case to be re-opened.
The ones to which James Comey subsequently testified to Congress that the FBI had “reviewed all of the communications .... Thanks to the wizardry of our technology”?
Turns out Comey lied. Again. The FBI actually reviewed less than 10% of that material on the Weiner laptop.
" .... But virtually none of his account was true, a growing body of evidence reveals.
In fact, a technical glitch prevented FBI technicians from accurately comparing the new emails with the old emails. Only 3,077 of the 694,000 emails were directly reviewed for classified or incriminating information. Three FBI officials completed that work in a single 12-hour spurt the day before Comey again cleared Clinton of criminal charges....."
In fact, a technical glitch prevented FBI technicians from accurately comparing the new emails with the old emails. Only 3,077 of the 694,000 emails were directly reviewed for classified or incriminating information. Three FBI officials completed that work in a single 12-hour spurt the day before Comey again cleared Clinton of criminal charges....."
Certainly a different standard of review is employed by these people depending how they feel about the target
https://www.realclearinvestigations...k_of_weiner_laptop_emails_never_examined.html
Last edited:
Here is your proof right here that dem leadership doesn’t plan to impeach trump if they control the House. They want to start multiple investigations to control the narrative in order to win in 2020. If they impeach, all of that potential is lost.
towersniper
100+ Posts
"... and of course, Cohen is a dolt. No reason to assume he advised Trump correctly."
Dead on. It is quite possible that Cohen his took gutter NY City sleaze lawyer tactics and tried to apply them on a different stage. Trump is a neophyte - a canny one, but still a neophyte -, and may have (improvidently) trusted Cohen's astonishing legal acumen. (Can Thomas Cooley School of Law's reputation sink any lower? The faculty must be dying). The old canard "ignorance of the law is no excuse" is, of course, often completely wrong in crimes where intent is an essential element. ( I know very little about criminal law, but I do know that. ) I hesitate to say that he may be innocent, but it is quite possible that Trump may be not guilty of a crime here. Impeachable? Way too early for me to have an opinion.
Dead on. It is quite possible that Cohen his took gutter NY City sleaze lawyer tactics and tried to apply them on a different stage. Trump is a neophyte - a canny one, but still a neophyte -, and may have (improvidently) trusted Cohen's astonishing legal acumen. (Can Thomas Cooley School of Law's reputation sink any lower? The faculty must be dying). The old canard "ignorance of the law is no excuse" is, of course, often completely wrong in crimes where intent is an essential element. ( I know very little about criminal law, but I do know that. ) I hesitate to say that he may be innocent, but it is quite possible that Trump may be not guilty of a crime here. Impeachable? Way too early for me to have an opinion.
The attached pdf purports to be the order guiding Mueller's investigation. It appears he has some latitude to pursue "... matters that arose or may arise directly from the investigation..."
Likely unconstitutional if it goes to SCOTUS. How do you define “directly”?
Information that would not be known in the absence of the investigation?
Yeah, but prosecutors don’t have free reign to investigate anyone without probable cause.
I'm not a lawyer but if a crime is uncovered in the investigation unrelated to the basis of the appointing the special prosecutor it sounded as if he was bound or permitted to pursue it. And if in applying leverage he extracts direct testimony against someone else is he not also bound or permitted to pursue that? Or is he not to extract testimony against bigger fish and take it to court, rejecting all deals?
Where does it end? this is nothing more than investigating a person in search of crime.
Seattle Husker
10,000+ Posts
Here is Kenneth Starr's order. Does this passage sound familiar?
What mchammer claims is "unconstitutional" is standard fair for Special Counsel's since the 1994 law that created them.
Then that law needs to be reexamined and probably modified.
At a minimum he's guilty of having terrible dick judgment. Bill Clinton was wrong and shallow to cheat on Hillary, but I understand why he did it.
Trump has always had a hot wife over whom he had tremendous leverage. Melania is hot. Marla Maples was hot. In her day, Ivana was hot. Furthermore, I've never heard that any of them were bad people. With that going for him, why would a guy cheat with some filthy, plastic looking porn star? Very dumb. Hell, I'd feel dirty shaking Stormy Daniels's hand.
Bystander, SH, Hammer, and SN,
You guys are all chasing your tails a little. First, the Cohen stuff is being handled by the Justice Department, not the Special Counsel. The Justice Department has jurisdiction. Mueller does not. (I don't think he has it in the Manafort matter either, but a federal judge disagrees, and I understand the rationale even if I disagree with it.)
Second, though Mueller's jurisdiction matters to prosecuting somebody for a crime, it has no bearing on impeachment. Congress can impeach Trump based on Mueller's work, DoJ's work (the Cohen stuff), the NYAG's work (Trump tax fraud stuff), or Congress' own investigations.
Third, just to avoid any misunderstandings, Starr didn't investigate the Lewinsky matter based on the 1994 order. He investigated it based on a 1998 order that Janet Reno asked the special circuit judges panel to grant. It specifically mentioned the Lewinsky matter. It wasn't treated as related to or arising from the Whitewater order from 1994 or its investigation.
You guys are all chasing your tails a little. First, the Cohen stuff is being handled by the Justice Department, not the Special Counsel. The Justice Department has jurisdiction. Mueller does not. (I don't think he has it in the Manafort matter either, but a federal judge disagrees, and I understand the rationale even if I disagree with it.)
Second, though Mueller's jurisdiction matters to prosecuting somebody for a crime, it has no bearing on impeachment. Congress can impeach Trump based on Mueller's work, DoJ's work (the Cohen stuff), the NYAG's work (Trump tax fraud stuff), or Congress' own investigations.
Third, just to avoid any misunderstandings, Starr didn't investigate the Lewinsky matter based on the 1994 order. He investigated it based on a 1998 order that Janet Reno asked the special circuit judges panel to grant. It specifically mentioned the Lewinsky matter. It wasn't treated as related to or arising from the Whitewater order from 1994 or its investigation.
Last edited:
Yeah... well the thing is it does seem to have a very open end but at the same time if it's a swamp then you know it takes a while to drain it...
ProdigalHorn
10,000+ Posts
I think the most comical aspect of this whole clown show is that between some of the richest, most powerful men in the country, they manage to scrape up Lanny Davis, Michael Cohen, and Rudy Giulliani to represent them. Rudy at least was strong as a mayor, but he's pure garbage as a legal spokesman. So basically between the three of these, it seems to be a contest to see which can look the most clueless and inept. It's too close to call at this point, but Cohen has the lead for sheer transparent sleaze and self-interest.
To be fair, Giuliani and Davis were pretty accomplished lawyers at one time, though neither have done much real law practice in quite some time. Cohen has pretty much always been a hack for somebody. I think he has more experience with baseball bats and kneecaps than law.
Last edited:
ProdigalHorn
10,000+ Posts
Welcome to New York Real Estate! Reminds me of Rodney Dangerfield in Econ 101 in "Back to School"
Lol! That is exactly what it is. This seen is often overshadowed by the legendary History class seen with the great Sam Kinison, but it's quite good.
Weekly Prediction Contest
* Predict HORNS-AGGIES *
Sat, Nov 30 • 6:30 PM on ABC
Recent Threads
-
The Media Industry
- Started by texas_ex2000
- Replies: 8K
- West Mall
-
President Biden Accountability Thread
- Started by 2003TexasGrad
- Replies: 4K
- West Mall
Prediction Results Threads
