President Donald Trump: The Thread

[caulfield12]

President's son says Democrats are "not even people"

 

I hope it was Barron.

 

Somehow, I'm sure the answer turns out to be Eric, Donald Jr or Jared (honorary son, but cast out now for Bannon).

 

 

Eric for the win. With his hair slicked back like a wanna be Gordon Gekko/Charlie Sheen in Wall Street, that guy just oozes Drakkar Noir sleaziness. At least Donald Jr's something like a "'true believer," Eric is always the one behind the scenes directing money (often charity events) in the opposite direction from which it SHOULD be flowing.

Edited June 7, 2017 by caulfield12

[caulfield12]

https://www.yahoo.com/gma/trump-nominate-ch...topstories.html

Christopher Wray nominated to head FBI

 

 

In his Twitter announcement, Trump described Wray as a "man of impeccable credentials."

 

Wray, a lawyer, was nominated by President George W. Bush to be the assistant attorney general in charge of the Department of Justice's criminal division in 2003. He served in that position until 2005 and then returned to private practice, specializing in white collar and internal investigations.

 

 

 

 

[Kyyle23]

It appears Wray and his employer have quite a few conflicts of interest. Trump org is a client, Rosneft is a client, and Wray lobbies Saudi Arabia. So this should be fun

[Big Hurtin]

In his Twitter announcement...

 

Wait, I thought we weren't supposed to pay attention to what he puts on Twitter. I'm so confused.

[caulfield12]

Wait, I thought we weren't supposed to pay attention to what he puts on Twitter. I'm so confused.

 

Speaking of Twitter, perfect timing...

 

NEW YORK (AP) — President Donald Trump may be the nation's tweeter-in-chief, but some Twitter users say he's violating the First Amendment by blocking people from his feed after they posted scornful comments.

 

Lawyers for two Twitter users sent the White House a letter Tuesday demanding they be un-blocked from the Republican president's @realDonaldTrump account.

 

"The viewpoint-based blocking of our clients is unconstitutional," wrote attorneys at the Knight First Amendment Institute at Columbia University in New York.

 

The White House didn't immediately respond to a request for comment.

 

The tweeters — one a liberal activist, the other a cyclist who says he's a registered Republican — have posted and retweeted plenty of complaints and jokes about Trump.

 

https://www.yahoo.com/tech/twitter-users-bl...-200138165.html

[bmags]

Speaking of Twitter, perfect timing...

 

NEW YORK (AP) — President Donald Trump may be the nation's tweeter-in-chief, but some Twitter users say he's violating the First Amendment by blocking people from his feed after they posted scornful comments.

 

Lawyers for two Twitter users sent the White House a letter Tuesday demanding they be un-blocked from the Republican president's @realDonaldTrump account.

 

"The viewpoint-based blocking of our clients is unconstitutional," wrote attorneys at the Knight First Amendment Institute at Columbia University in New York.

 

The White House didn't immediately respond to a request for comment.

 

The tweeters — one a liberal activist, the other a cyclist who says he's a registered Republican — have posted and retweeted plenty of complaints and jokes about Trump.

 

Yeah that's actually pretty interesting. Kinda love when new tech needs to be defined for laws like that.

[caulfield12]

Fox News host Neil Cavuto tears into Trump: News media is not your problem — 'it's you'

https://www.yahoo.com/news/fox-news-host-te...-040202721.html

 

[CrimsonWeltall]

Comey's statement for tomorrow is out: https://www.intelligence.senate.gov/sites/d...omey-060817.pdf

 

Items of note:

1) Comey did tell Trump that he personally was not being investigated under counter-intelligence (in particular regarding the pee pee tapes).

1b) Trump wanted Comey to make this public.

 

2) Trump asked for Comey's loyalty multiple times while alone at dinner.

 

3) Trump cleared out the Oval Office to be alone with Comey and said he hoped Comey could let the Mike Flynn investigation go.

3b) Comey expressed his discomfort about being left alone with Trump to Sessions, who did not respond.

 

4) Trump repeatedly talked to Comey to complain about the Russia investigation being a "cloud" over his administration and asking how it could be resolved.

[greg775]

Comey's statement for tomorrow is out: https://www.intelligence.senate.gov/sites/d...omey-060817.pdf

 

Items of note:

1) Comey did tell Trump that he personally was not being investigated under counter-intelligence (in particular regarding the pee pee tapes).

1b) Trump wanted Comey to make this public.

 

2) Trump asked for Comey's loyalty multiple times while alone at dinner.

 

3) Trump cleared out the Oval Office to be alone with Comey and said he hoped Comey could let the Mike Flynn investigation go.

3b) Comey expressed his discomfort about being left alone with Trump to Sessions, who did not respond.

 

4) Trump repeatedly talked to Comey to complain about the Russia investigation being a "cloud" over his administration and asking how it could be resolved.

Is that enough to fire Trump? Begin impeachment?

[bmags]

I am saddened to read that, and feel pretty cynical about it. This was a line I grew up thinking was the one thing that could not be crossed or tolerated. But it will be now.

[StrangeSox]

We're all still living in Nixonland.

 

Comey's statement for tomorrow is out: https://www.intelligence.senate.gov/sites/d...omey-060817.pdf

 

Items of note:

1) Comey did tell Trump that he personally was not being investigated under counter-intelligence (in particular regarding the pee pee tapes).

1b) Trump wanted Comey to make this public.

 

2) Trump asked for Comey's loyalty multiple times while alone at dinner.

 

3) Trump cleared out the Oval Office to be alone with Comey and said he hoped Comey could let the Mike Flynn investigation go.

3b) Comey expressed his discomfort about being left alone with Trump to Sessions, who did not respond.

 

4) Trump repeatedly talked to Comey to complain about the Russia investigation being a "cloud" over his administration and asking how it could be resolved.

 

 

5) he was also clearly attempting to threaten Comey here:

 

The President began by asking me whether I wanted to stay on as FBI

Director, which I found strange because he had already told me twice in earlier

conversations that he hoped I would stay, and I had assured him that I intended to.

He said that lots of people wanted my job and, given the abuse I had taken during

the previous year, he would understand if I wanted to walk away.

 

 

Edited June 7, 2017 by StrangeSox

[Kyyle23]

i feel like we should make a separate thread for the Comey testimony

[Jenksismyhero]

I am saddened to read that, and feel pretty cynical about it. This was a line I grew up thinking was the one thing that could not be crossed or tolerated. But it will be now.

 

Honestly I took it as, this doesn't really strengthen the Dems' claims and in fact in a lot of ways makes them less serious (e.g., he never told Comey not to investigate him and Trump is actually right in that Comey did confirm to him that he was not being investigated personally), yet on the other hand, it clearly shows Trumps efforts to, at a minimum, push or influence Comey in his duties (with Flynn and with the Russia probe generally). Trump was also not using the appropriate "traditions" of going through third parties to talk with Comey and instead elected to speak to him directly on a number of occasions.

 

I'm not really sure any of this is actionable though. Inappropriate, yes, but impeachable? Ehhhh. I was hoping for something more.

Edited June 7, 2017 by JenksIsMyHero

[bmags]

Honestly I took it as, this doesn't really strengthen the Dems' claims and in fact in a lot of ways makes them less serious (e.g., he never told Comey not to investigate him and Trump is actually right in that Comey did confirm to him that he was not being investigated personally), yet on the other hand, it clearly shows Trumps efforts to, at a minimum, push or influence Comey in his duties (with Flynn and with the Russia probe generally). Trump was also not using the appropriate "traditions" of going through third parties to talk with Comey and instead elected to speak to him directly on a number of occasions.

 

I'm not really sure any of this is actionable though. Inappropriate, yes, but impeachable? Ehhhh. I was hoping for something more.

 

 

Perhaps in isolation, I find it hard to see your point with the knowledge that trump eventually fired Comey and told Lester Holt that he was thinking about the Russia investigation.

 

If he was just giving Flynn a recommendation of character by dismissing all from the room and then saying to let the investigation go, I don't find it necessary to then fire the FBI director.

 

And again, Nixon was never found to have ordered the Watergate break-in. But I don't see how you could look at this behavior and not think that Trump is demanding that federal law enforcement will not be allowed to hold his administration to account.

[StrangeSox]

If this had been Clinton (or Obama or any Dem), Republicans would already be holding impeachment trials in the Senate.

Edited June 7, 2017 by StrangeSox

[bmags]

If this had been Clinton (or Obama or any Dem), Republicans would already be holding impeachment trials in the Senate.

 

And they would be right to.

[southsider2k5]

If this had been Clinton (or Obama or any Dem), Republicans would already be holding impeachment trials in the Senate.

 

And if it were a Clinton, the Dems would already have their list of reasons why they weren't trying to influence the AG... er, Head of FBI.

[bmags]

And if it were a Clinton, the Dems would already have their list of reasons why they weren't trying to influence the AG... er, Head of FBI.

 

I too remember when Lynch met with Bill Clinton and then fired Comey to prevent investigation into her emails.

[StrangeSox]

And they would be right to.

 

Absolutely.

[Jenksismyhero]

Perhaps in isolation, I find it hard to see your point with the knowledge that trump eventually fired Comey and told Lester Holt that he was thinking about the Russia investigation.

 

If he was just giving Flynn a recommendation of character by dismissing all from the room and then saying to let the investigation go, I don't find it necessary to then fire the FBI director.

 

And again, Nixon was never found to have ordered the Watergate break-in. But I don't see how you could look at this behavior and not think that Trump is demanding that federal law enforcement will not be allowed to hold his administration to account.

 

The problem is he asked Comey to take it easy on Flynn AFTER Flynn was let go and he never told Comey not to investigate his admn, he just kept complaining about the problem and wanted Comey to make it publicly known that he wasn't going to investigate Trump personally (or wasn't investigating him personally). Unless I glossed over it, I don't see Comey saying that Trump ordered him or inferred to him that he should drop all investigations. I guess if you take "lift the cloud" to mean "stop the investigation" then I see your point, but I don't think I can make that leap in light of the context of the conversation (Trump: "Dude, these people won't shut up about this and they claim I pee'd on hookers! Can't you do something about this?")

[Jenksismyhero]

And yes, firing Comey was the biggest, dumbest move Trump could have made. That is the big move that counters what i'm arguing. Seemingly Trump could have fired Comey simply for not being good at the PR game and pissing everyone in Washington off, but it sure comes off as Comey being fired for not "taking care" of the Russia problem for him.

[bmags]

The problem is he asked Comey to take it easy on Flynn AFTER Flynn was let go and he never told Comey not to investigate his admn, he just kept complaining about the problem and wanted Comey to make it publicly known that he wasn't going to investigate Trump personally (or wasn't investigating him personally). Unless I glossed over it, I don't see Comey saying that Trump ordered him or inferred to him that he should drop all investigations. I guess if you take "lift the cloud" to mean "stop the investigation" then I see your point, but I don't think I can make that leap in light of the context of the conversation (Trump: "Dude, these people won't shut up about this and they claim I pee'd on hookers! Can't you do something about this?")

 

I'm referring to the part where Trump cleared the room to talk about Flynn and ask that he let this thing go.

 

Yes, he had been fired, but he was still under investigation for lying on his classification, for one thing, and his communication with Russia more broadly.

 

"The President then returned to the topic of Mike Flynn, saying, “He is a

 

good guy and has been through a lot.” He repeated that Flynn hadn’t done

 

anything wrong on his calls with the Russians, but had misled the Vice President.

 

He then said, “I hope you can see your way clear to letting this go, to letting Flynn

 

go. He is a good guy. I hope you can let this go.”"

 

I don't understand what this means then to you.

[StrangeSox]

Trump also openly admitted on national TV that his motivation behind firing Comey was the Russia investigation(s).

[bmags]

And yes, firing Comey was the biggest, dumbest move Trump could have made. That is the big move that counters what i'm arguing. Seemingly Trump could have fired Comey simply for not being good at the PR game and pissing everyone in Washington off, but it sure comes off as Comey being fired for not "taking care" of the Russia problem for him.

 

This part is crucial to me. You can't separate A from B

 

He fired Comey and we know from Rosenstein he said he was going to fire him and asked for a memo for rationale

 

Trump himself then said that the rationale given wasn't why, and that he was thinking about the Russia thing.

 

These things don't need to be inferred, he did this. And I think he did them because he doesn't understand that the FBI director being independent means anything. He is the president, all work for him. Why should I not be able to tell him to stop investigating my friend?

 

And just because he's obtuse doesn't mean it's dangerously wrong.

[Jenksismyhero]

I'm referring to the part where Trump cleared the room to talk about Flynn and ask that he let this thing go.

 

Yes, he had been fired, but he was still under investigation for lying on his classification, for one thing, and his communication with Russia more broadly.

 

"The President then returned to the topic of Mike Flynn, saying, “He is a

 

good guy and has been through a lot.” He repeated that Flynn hadn’t done

 

anything wrong on his calls with the Russians, but had misled the Vice President.

 

He then said, “I hope you can see your way clear to letting this go, to letting Flynn

 

go. He is a good guy. I hope you can let this go.”"

 

I don't understand what this means then to you.

 

To be clear: i'm not saying Trump shouldn't be impeached. I would be all for getting rid of him. However, I think that's such a huge step in our democracy that it shouldn't be based on "ifs" or "maybes" or "this is what he meant..." It should be pretty concrete, otherwise we open the door to impeachment proceedings for every little thing.

 

To me, his statements about Flynn are Blago-like act with the horse trading. Is it wrong? Yes. Are these sorts of things (protect your friends and put in good words for them) done all the time in politics? Perhaps i'm wrong, but I assume this is rather common practice.

 

His more egregious act, IMO, was firing Comey, not asking Comey to be nice to his friend.