President Donald Trump: The Thread

[Jenksismyhero]

Trump strongly opposed the sanctions, but signed them after Congress made it clear they would override any veto. He had no choice. The more of a stink he put up, the worse it would look.

 

I suppose, but again that's not really his MO. He could care less what people think about him and he acts accordingly.

[whitesoxfan99]

I suppose, but again that's not really his MO. He could care less what people think about him and he acts accordingly.

 

Considering his reactions to people who criticize him I believe Trump cares a lot about what people think about him.

[Jenksismyhero]

Mueller is investigating everything, including that meeting with Donald, Jr. Whether Donald, Jr. will be charged with a crime is very unresolved.

 

As to the Russian election meddling, there's abundant evidence that Russia meddled in the election, and that they wanted Trump to win. Mueller is (among other things) investigating the Trump campaign's involvement (if any) in that.

 

Jenks, you know that a case like this is a really, really difficult case to investigate and prove. The Nixon investigation took like 18 months (off the top of my head) and they had tapes of Nixon. As Crimson said, there isn't going to be some contract titled "Collusion to Influence Election" but there is a lot of evidence of impropriety between people close to Trump (Manafort, Flynn, Kushner, and Trump, Jr. at a minimum) and people related to Russia. Maybe there isn't ultimately anything there, but drawing a conclusion that there isn't anything there after 3 months of investigating is really, really shortsighted.

 

1) If he admitted to the clear and obvious federal crime, there would be an indictment. That's all i'm saying. Mueller hasn't yet, despite his investigation, which to me is telling. But yes, it absolutely could come later, i just don't think it's a clear cut case. He may be dumb but his lawyers are not and the lawyers gave him the ok to release those emails.

 

2) Yes, it's difficult, and yes, there's no question Russia tried to and did meddle in the election. But the key is whether the Trump campaign was actively and knowingly in on it. That's the part to me that has not been proven. Even the meeting regarding dirt on Hillary isn't sufficient proof of that. It's showing some shadiness going down for sure, but not straight up collusion. Manafort's notes are the clearest evidence of any exchange and it's not totally conclusive yet because they're jumbled notes on a piece of paper in close proximity.

 

I'm not making up my mind. I'm imploring you all to do the same. You've already concluded what you believe is true with limited and incomplete evidence.

[StrangeSox]

Considering his reactions to people who criticize him I believe Trump cares a lot about what people think about him.

 

He called Schumer and Pelosi up the morning after their negotiation/deal to gush about all of the positive media coverage. He gets two, TWO! briefings a day filled exclusively with positive press stories about himself. Of course he cares.

 

Either way, it doesn't really matter because there was tons of reporting at the time about what he wanted to do on the Russian sanctions bill, and he's had plenty of "whataboutism" deflection for any criticism of Putin or Russia.

[Jenksismyhero]

Considering his reactions to people who criticize him I believe Trump cares a lot about what people think about him.

 

He responds, but he doesn't change. There's a difference.

[Jenksismyhero]

What about the twitter bots? Even Russian media is saying that is true.

 

And with all the contact between Russia and the Trump campaign, the question would have to be why? Why did they want Trump elected? What's in it for them? Trump is America first, is he not? And why so much contact? And why all the denials? And why all the changing of security clearance forms after "fake news" reported on these meetings these people you want running the country couldn't remember?

 

I think in Putin's mind Trump is someone without experience or knowledge of how the world operates and he wants to use that to his advantage. I also think he knows that someone with a business background is more likely to negotiate and make deals, regardless of the public reaction. Clinton would have acted only in the best interests of her being reelected, so it wouldn't be favorable to him.

 

 

[StrangeSox]

1) If he admitted to the clear and obvious federal crime, there would be an indictment. That's all i'm saying. Mueller hasn't yet, despite his investigation, which to me is telling. But yes, it absolutely could come later, i just don't think it's a clear cut case. He may be dumb but his lawyers are not and the lawyers gave him the ok to release those emails.

 

2) Yes, it's difficult, and yes, there's no question Russia tried to and did meddle in the election. But the key is whether the Trump campaign was actively and knowingly in on it. That's the part to me that has not been proven. Even the meeting regarding dirt on Hillary isn't sufficient proof of that. It's showing some shadiness going down for sure, but not straight up collusion. Manafort's notes are the clearest evidence of any exchange and it's not totally conclusive yet because they're jumbled notes on a piece of paper in close proximity.

 

I'm not making up my mind. I'm imploring you all to do the same. You've already concluded what you believe is true with limited and incomplete evidence.

 

1) Trump's legal team hasn't looked particularly bright so far. You've also got a weird standard here. Every week or so we get another small leak from Mueller's investigation about subpeonas, additional high-profile lawyers being added, more and more things they're looking into. If you're potentially trying to bring down the President of the United States, you're going to make sure you case is 100% absolutely air tight. "They didn't immediately indict" seems pretty nonsensical.

 

2) The Trump campaign eagerly met with a foreign agent representing themselves as working for and with the Russian government in order to discuss damaging political information on Clinton.

 

You haven't made up your mind, but you're deflecting and minimizing everything as much as possible.

[StrangeSox]

Putin's MO is to sow chaos and discord. He helped Trump not exactly with the expectation that he would actually win but in an attempt to grow political divisions and make America look dumb for even considering electing Trump. There was earlier reporting that around mid-October they switched from "undermine and damage Clinton as much as possible to weaken her as she takes office" to "holy lol Trump could actually win."

 

[Jenksismyhero]

1) Trump's legal team hasn't looked particularly bright so far. You've also got a weird standard here. Every week or so we get another small leak from Mueller's investigation about subpeonas, additional high-profile lawyers being added, more and more things they're looking into. If you're potentially trying to bring down the President of the United States, you're going to make sure you case is 100% absolutely air tight. "They didn't immediately indict" seems pretty nonsensical.

 

2) The Trump campaign eagerly met with a foreign agent representing themselves as working for and with the Russian government in order to discuss damaging political information on Clinton.

 

You haven't made up your mind, but you're deflecting and minimizing everything as much as possible.

 

1) You (and Vox) are telling me those e-mails are all the proof you need that he committed a crime. If you discover a murderer at the scene with a gun in his hand you don't wait for weeks to investigate further. You file your charges. I'm just saying it's more of a grey area than what you believe, not that there's absolutely nothing there that should be investigated.

 

2) And I've said I would have done the same thing. Why on earth wouldn't you want to hear what dirt is out there on your opponent? Report it to the FBI afterwards but certainly have that meeting.

 

And i'm deflecting and minimizing (without ever denying that something could be there) because i'd like to see the full evidence before deciding, conclusively, without doubt, what you already believe is true.

[Jenksismyhero]

Putin's MO is to sow chaos and discord. He helped Trump not exactly with the expectation that he would actually win but in an attempt to grow political divisions and make America look dumb for even considering electing Trump. There was earlier reporting that around mid-October they switched from "undermine and damage Clinton as much as possible to weaken her as she takes office" to "holy lol Trump could actually win."

 

If so that's really short-sighted on their part. Trump was riding a wave a year before the election that showed the country was divided. And being divided isn't anything new, by the way.

[StrangeSox]

You're not denying that something could be there, you're just setting an impossibly high standard for ever believing it.

 

I'm sorry that you think betraying your own country in exchange for political favors is something that is normal and acceptable. That's what this is--discussions to undermine and change US policy in exchange for political help from a foreign government.

[StrangeSox]

If so that's really short-sighted on their part. Trump was riding a wave a year before the election that showed the country was divided. And being divided isn't anything new, by the way.

 

It's been their MO globally for awhile. Weaker west means a relatively stronger Russia. Russia's economy is actually in really, really bad shape and day to day life in parts of the country is brutal.

[Jenksismyhero]

You're not denying that something could be there, you're just setting an impossibly high standard for ever believing it.

 

I'm sorry that you think betraying your own country in exchange for political favors is something that is normal and acceptable. That's what this is--discussions to undermine and change US policy in exchange for political help from a foreign government.

 

I don't think i'm asking for an impossible standard. I'm saying more than one example with circumstantial evidence is needed to prove this very large conspiracy to work with the Russians.

 

edit: but I forget, innocent until proven guilty except when it comes to people you don't like/believe.

Edited September 21, 2017 by JenksIsMyHero

[Dick Allen]

I think in Putin's mind Trump is someone without experience or knowledge of how the world operates and he wants to use that to his advantage. I also think he knows that someone with a business background is more likely to negotiate and make deals, regardless of the public reaction. Clinton would have acted only in the best interests of her being reelected, so it wouldn't be favorable to him.

Almost every politician acts only in the best interests of being reelected. In fact Trump tries to scare senators by saying they won't be reelected if they disagree with him.

 

Trump acts in what he deems the best interest of Trump. Not the country.

 

 

[StrangeSox]

It's not circumstantial evidence. It's explicitly a meeting to discuss the Russian government's help to get Trump elected, and they eagerly went to it. They never reported this meeting, and then when initially reported, lied multiple times about what the meeting was about and who was there.

 

I'm honestly not sure how you can even get a more explicit example of evidence of willingness and desire to collude.

[Dick Allen]

It's not circumstantial evidence. It's explicitly a meeting to discuss the Russian government's help to get Trump elected, and they eagerly went to it. They never reported this meeting, and then when initially reported, lied multiple times about what the meeting was about and who was there.

 

I'm honestly not sure how you can even get a more explicit example of evidence of willingness and desire to collude.

Yes. Too many story changes. For a campaign that called a Republican opponent "lyin' Ted", and accuses the media of always lying, they have an unbelievably hard time with the truth.

 

Everyone knows Trump is a con man whether they want to admit it or not. Whoever heard of a guy running for President whose own hometown voted against him 9-1? They know him better than the rest.

[Jenksismyhero]

It's not circumstantial evidence. It's explicitly a meeting to discuss the Russian government's help to get Trump elected, and they eagerly went to it. They never reported this meeting, and then when initially reported, lied multiple times about what the meeting was about and who was there.

 

I'm honestly not sure how you can even get a more explicit example of evidence of willingness and desire to collude.

 

It's circumstantial. Not sure why you're arguing about it. The e-mail sets forth their desire to help the campaign and get sanction relief and their offer of dirt on Hillary. There's no evidence of what Trump's campaign offered in response, if anything, or even if those issues were discussed or if the dirt was a gift or if they wanted to exchange info for the promise of sanction relief. All of the details are unknown at this point. Manafort's notes are all circumstantial too.

Edited September 21, 2017 by JenksIsMyHero

[Dick Allen]

It's circumstantial. Not sure why you're arguing about it. The e-mail sets forth their desire to help the campaign and get sanction relief and their offer of dirt on Hillary. There's no evidence of what Trump's campaign offered in response, if anything, or even if those issues were discussed or if the dirt was a gift or if they wanted to exchange info for the promise of sanction relief. All of the details are unknown at this point.

I have a feeling if this were Hillary's people, you would have a different take.

[Jenksismyhero]

I have a feeling if this were Hillary's people, you would have a different take.

 

I really wouldn't. I would argue that there is smoke and something worth investigating but I wouldn't make grand statements that it's proof of collusion.

 

 

[StrangeSox]

Law Firm Faces Questions for Ukraine Work With Manafort

 

WASHINGTON — Five years ago, Paul Manafort arranged for a prominent New York-based law firm to draft a report that was used by allies of his client, Viktor Yanukovych, the Russia-aligned president of Ukraine, to justify the jailing of a political rival. And now the report is coming back to haunt it.

 

The Justice Department, according to two people with direct knowledge of the situation, recently asked the firm, Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom, for information and documents related to its work on behalf of Mr. Yanukovych’s government, which crumbled after he fled to Russia under pressure.

 

The request comes at a time when Mr. Manafort, his work for Mr. Yanukovych’s party and for Russian and Ukrainian oligarchs as well as the handling of payments for that work have become focal points in the investigation of the special counsel, Robert S. Mueller III, into Russian meddling in the 2016 presidential election, and connections between Russia, Mr. Trump and his associates.

 

It’s unclear if the Justice Department’s request to Skadden, as the firm is known, is part of Mr. Mueller’s inquiry. But the interest from prosecutors in what Skadden did for the Ukrainian government is one indication of the wide-ranging nature of the inquiries related to Mr. Manafort. It also highlights the risks associated with advising authoritarian governments overseas, a lucrative sideline among Washington lawyers, lobbyists and public relations consultants.

[StrangeSox]

1) If he admitted to the clear and obvious federal crime, there would be an indictment. That's all i'm saying. Mueller hasn't yet, despite his investigation, which to me is telling. But yes, it absolutely could come later, i just don't think it's a clear cut case. He may be dumb but his lawyers are not and the lawyers gave him the ok to release those emails.

 

BTW he only tweeted them out because the NYT contacted his team for comment before they were going to publish them. Trump Jr's team asked for 30 minutes (or something like that) to respond and then released them themselves. There wasn't anything noble or forthcoming about it.

[Jenksismyhero]

BTW he only tweeted them out because the NYT contacted his team for comment before they were going to publish them. Trump Jr's team asked for 30 minutes (or something like that) to respond and then released them themselves. There wasn't anything noble or forthcoming about it.

 

But he still legitimized the emails by providing them himself. If they were clear proof of criminal conduct there's no way he releases them on his own. You play the PR game that the emails are taken out of context, changed, photoshopped, whatever.

[StrangeSox]

Something to consider with all of the "then why haven't they indicted!" deflection is that Nixon wasn't ever actually charged with a crime, but he stilled resigned in disgrace and was threatened with impeachment.

[Jenksismyhero]

Something to consider with all of the "then why haven't they indicted!" deflection is that Nixon wasn't ever actually charged with a crime, but he stilled resigned in disgrace and was threatened with impeachment.

 

lol, "deflection." You can't stand disagreement.

[StrangeSox]

sorry I guess I just take it more seriously when there's direct evidence of the President's own son, son-in-law and campaign manager eagerly and willingly going to a meeting to collude with Russian agents representing themselves as working on behalf of the Russian government to get Trump elected.

 

This is such a large and high profile case. Why would you expect them to just start throwing out piecemeal indictments before they've finished anyway?

Edited September 21, 2017 by StrangeSox