Сделаем Америку снова великой! Trump - Russia megathread

[GannonFan]

The only other thing is the Trump comment on Flynn. I think he is awfully lucky he used the words "I hope". I won't give him credit for carefully choosing those words. But that will likely be enough to save his skin.
Kamala Harris had an interesting statement. Something to the effect of what the intent is of a robber holding a gun to your head and saying "I hope you give me your wallet". That's a bit of a stretch since Trump didn't display the "gun".

Yeah, I'm not a lawyer - but, I don't think that single conversation would be enough to convict someone of obstruction of justice. There's too much haziness and interpretation possible with what he said.

But, there are also the conversations with Rogers and Coats (and, Mueller will be looking into that, I'm sure.).

The other is the conversation with Lavrov in the Oval Office where he said "I faced great pressure because of Russia. That's taken off." That will also be looked at by Mueller.

There's also the fact that he fired Comey and publicly stated he was thinking about the Russia investigation when he made the decision.

Comey confirmed today that he is sure Mueller is looking at obstruction of justice.

An obstruction of justice would need to be a slam dunk for Mueller or anyone to move ahead with it, and right now it's more of a falling away three pointer being shot by someone other than Steph Curry. The quote from Rogers yesterday was clear that he didn't think he'd been asked to do anything illegal or improper, and Coats said he didn't feel pressured. Likely not to get anything from that angle. And then you have Comey's own testimony here that Trump expressed openly if anyone around him did anything illegal that they should be held to task. That's almost the opposite of obstructing. Too much traffic in the lane, to continue the basketball analogy, for a slam dunk on obstruction.

I think if and when there is ever any evidence that there was ever any collusion, it's likely not to be Trump who did any of it, and given his buffoonery, it's probably doubtful he knew about it. But I don't get the sense he'd have a good handle on what his surrogates could've been doing. And even then, it may just amount to a lot of interaction with people who may have been bad actors, that kind of speculative stuff. The Trumpkins will denounce it and the anti-Trumpkins will feel it proves something and we'll likely not do anything about it.

[Ibanez]

Of course Trump had a 'gun'. He's POTUS and he had the Oval Office cleared. He's POUTS.

*He's POTUS

*He POUTS

Both are correct.

[CAA Flagship]

The only other thing is the Trump comment on Flynn. I think he is awfully lucky he used the words "I hope". I won't give him credit for carefully choosing those words. But that will likely be enough to save his skin.
Kamala Harris had an interesting statement. Something to the effect of what the intent is of a robber holding a gun to your head and saying "I hope you give me your wallet". That's a bit of a stretch since Trump didn't display the "gun".

Yeah, I'm not a lawyer - but, I don't think that single conversation would be enough to convict someone of obstruction of justice. There's too much haziness and interpretation possible with what he said.

But, there are also the conversations with Rogers and Coats (and, Mueller will be looking into that, I'm sure.).

The other is the conversation with Lavrov in the Oval Office where he said "I faced great pressure because of Russia. That's taken off." That will also be looked at by Mueller.

There's also the fact that he fired Comey and publicly stated he was thinking about the Russia investigation when he made the decision.

Comey testified today that he is sure Mueller is looking at obstruction of justice. The Comey conversation will be a piece... but, only a piece of that investigation, imo.

But there is just too much potential material "between the lines". A reasonable person can hit every part of the spectrum with speculation.

[CAA Flagship]

*He's POTUS

*He POUTS

Both are correct.

[Skjellyfetti]

An obstruction of justice would need to be a slam dunk for Mueller or anyone to move ahead with it, and right now it's more of a falling away three pointer being shot by someone other than Steph Curry. The quote from Rogers yesterday was clear that he didn't think he'd been asked to do anything illegal or improper, and Coats said he didn't feel pressured. Likely not to get anything from that angle. And then you have Comey's own testimony here that Trump expressed openly if anyone around him did anything illegal that they should be held to task. That's almost the opposite of obstructing. Too much traffic in the lane, to continue the basketball analogy, for a slam dunk on obstruction.

I don't disagree.

Yeah, right now there Mueller can't go forward with obstruction of justice charges. I agree that it's far too early.

He's been on the job for about 2 week. A LONG way to go.

The point is - there is enough for an investigation. A criminal investigation into the President of the United States. That's a huge deal. It doesn't become one when Trump is put in handcuffs or absolved.

I think if and when there is ever any evidence that there was ever any collusion, it's likely not to be Trump who did any of it, and given his buffoonery, it's probably doubtful he knew about it. But I don't get the sense he'd have a good handle on what his surrogates could've been doing. And even then, it may just amount to a lot of interaction with people who may have been bad actors, that kind of speculative stuff. The Trumpkins will denounce it and the anti-Trumpkins will feel it proves something and we'll likely not do anything about it.

Yeah, I've always said I really doubt we find direct collusion between Trump himself and Russia.

But, after Comey's testimony - we now know that even Trump had some concerns about his "satellites."

[Skjellyfetti]

But there is just too much potential material "between the lines". A reasonable person can hit every part of the spectrum with speculation.

I don't see nearly as much with this one:

I faced great pressure because of Russia. That's taken off.

What's your speculation there?

The best hope there is that the report was Fake News. McMaster, Dina Powell, and any other (Americans) there will surely be interviewed by Mueller. If any transcript or summary exists of the meeting he'll look at it.

[CAA Flagship]

But there is just too much potential material "between the lines". A reasonable person can hit every part of the spectrum with speculation.

I don't see nearly as much with this one:

I faced great pressure because of Russia. That's taken off.

What's your speculation there?

The best hope there is that the report was Fake News. McMaster, Dina Powell, and any other (Americans) there will surely be interviewed by Mueller. If any transcript or summary exists of the meeting he'll look at it.

"Russia" can mean so many things. Again, wide spectrum. Not worth focusing on that line because it won't lead anywhere. I wish Comey said "What do you mean?" several times.

[Skjellyfetti]

Keep in mind that it was the day after he fired Comey. And, before saying it he says:

I just fired the head of the F.B.I. He was crazy, a real nut job.

Trying to argue he wasn't talking about Russia is a huge reach.




Again, I also don't think it's a "slam dunk" on obstruction. That's for Mueller to decide. All I'm saying is that there is clearly enough there to warrant a thorough investigation of it. It's not a witchunt.

[CID1990]

Man I was expecting more from the Media Super Bowl

[CAA Flagship]

Keep in mind that it was the day after he fired Comey. And, before saying it he says:

I just fired the head of the F.B.I. He was crazy, a real nut job.

Trying to argue he wasn't talking about Russia is a huge reach.




Again, I also don't think it's a "slam dunk" on obstruction. That's for Mueller to decide. All I'm saying is that there is clearly enough there to warrant a thorough investigation of it. It's not a witchunt.

"Obstruction" boils down to the Flynn investigation. So what's the end game? Trump could pardon him.

[HI54UNI]

So was McCain as goofy as I'm hearing?

[CID1990]

Keep in mind that it was the day after he fired Comey. And, before saying it he says:



Trying to argue he wasn't talking about Russia is a huge reach.




Again, I also don't think it's a "slam dunk" on obstruction. That's for Mueller to decide. All I'm saying is that there is clearly enough there to warrant a thorough investigation of it. It's not a witchunt.

"Obstruction" boils down to the Flynn investigation. So what's the end game? Trump could pardon him.

And technically speaking, Trump could also order the investigation stopped.

That would get him impeached if the Senate was 2/3rds Democrat, but that isn't the case.

[Skjellyfetti]

"Obstruction" boils down to the Flynn investigation. So what's the end game? Trump could pardon him.

Well, that's why this whole story has been so fascinating. I don't know what the endgame is. Trump doesn't know. Mueller doesn't know.

Clinton hadn't even met Lewinski at this point in the Whitewater investigation. Who knows where it will go.

We'll see.

[CAA Flagship]

"Obstruction" boils down to the Flynn investigation. So what's the end game? Trump could pardon him.

And technically speaking, Trump could also order the investigation stopped.

That would get him impeached if the Senate was 2/3rds Democrat, but that isn't the case.

I'm thinking there are enough Republicans in the Senate that would rather have Pence.

[Skjellyfetti]

So was McCain as goofy as I'm hearing?

Yeah, it was bizarre. He had to release a statement afterwards to clarify what he was trying to ask. Said he had been up too late watching a Diamonbacks game.

[GannonFan]

So was McCain as goofy as I'm hearing?

Yeah, it was bizarre. He had to release a statement afterwards to clarify what he was trying to ask. Said he had been up too late watching a Diamonbacks game.

He's been up 80 years too late. Time to enjoy the retirement. I don't get why guys like him keep hanging around into their 80's - turn it over to the next generation and find another hobby other than being a Senator. I'll find something far more fun to do than my job if I'm lucky enough to hit 80 or beyond.

[Ibanez]

So was McCain as goofy as I'm hearing?

Yeah, it was bizarre. He had to release a statement afterwards to clarify what he was trying to ask. Said he had been up too late watching a Diamonbacks game.

He was as bad as Caitlyn Upton.



A grad of ASU, btw.

[Skjellyfetti]

He was as bad as Caitlyn Upton.



A grad of ASU, btw.

She attended for a semester or two. Didn't graduate.

[Ibanez]

He was as bad as Caitlyn Upton.



A grad of ASU, btw.

She attended for a semester or two. Didn't graduate.

AH...the quick blurb i saw in the googles said grad. More fake news.

[Skjellyfetti]

Yeah, and I could be wrong. I remember her leaving pretty quickly. But, perhaps she went back and finished after her infamy/fame, idk.

I was at App through some pivotal moments. "Hot, Hot, Hot", Michigan 34-32, and Caitlin Upton.

[CID1990]

And technically speaking, Trump could also order the investigation stopped.

That would get him impeached if the Senate was 2/3rds Democrat, but that isn't the case.

I'm thinking there are enough Republicans in the Senate that would rather have Pence.

They don't have the spine.

[CID1990]

BTW Comey during his testimony characterized this story as being almost completely untrue:

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/02/14/us/p ... .html?_r=1

And WaPo piles on (because democracy dies in the dark, dontcha know):

https://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/er ... b706a5377e

Remember when the NYT responded to Reince Priebus that attacking the story doesn't make it less true? Good times

Comey took the opportunity to put the smackdown on the NYT over this and that's good for the media. It will make a lot of these outlets think twice about running full on with leaks just because they dovetail with what they hope to be true.

So it appears that the goalposts have been moved for now. First it was collusion. Now it's obstruction. By the end of the year CNN and the NYT will be back to starving schoolchildren and the homeless.

And during all this time there has been no real substantive analysis of the shifting politics in the Middle East, Turkey and the Kurds are largely being ignored, and domestic policy is getting almost zero coverage. The stories that will cost Trump the midterms and 2020 are out there but they don't satisfy the "Trump is Hitler" mob so they wind up on page 13.

[Skjellyfetti]

Yeah, I'd be curious to know what exactly was wrong in the NYT report.

The whole thing? There were no undisclosed contacts?

Even though, we now know there were undisclosed contacts that have been confirmed that we didn't know about in February - Sessions and Kushner admit to this. Maybe it was the number of contacts?

I think it's probably the characterization of the contacts. He made a point that Kislyak is a diplomat. The NYT story refers to "intelligence officials." Reuters report of 18 "undisclosed contacts" doesn't refer to them as "intelligence officials" but, simply "Russian officials." It could be that a CIA or NSA official who deals with foreign intelligence looks at Kislyak in a different light than someone in the FBI who deals with counterintelligence.

I don't know, but would like to know more about it.

[CID1990]

Yeah, I'd be curious to know what exactly was wrong in the NYT report.

The whole thing? There were no undisclosed contacts?

Even though, we now know there were undisclosed contacts that have been confirmed that we didn't know about in February - Sessions and Kushner admit to this. Maybe it was the number of contacts?

I think it's probably the characterization of the contacts. He made a point that Kislyak is a diplomat. The NYT story refers to "intelligence officials." Reuters report of 18 "undisclosed contacts" doesn't refer to them as "intelligence officials" but, simply "Russian officials." It could be that a CIA or NSA official who deals with foreign intelligence looks at Kislyak in a different light than someone in the FBI who deals with counterintelligence.

I don't know, but would like to know more about it.

Keep on wondering and reaching.

The former FBI director said "almost" as a caveat. He clarified later to say that it was substantively untrue.

None of this matters. Mueller is on the case.

Time to start finding ways to impugn him because he's going to disappoint

Maybe he'll find Trump underpaid on his taxes or something


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Skjellyfetti]

None of this matters. Mueller is on the case.

Yeah, I agree on this.

And, I'm fully on board the Mueller train. I trust his judgement on this even more than Comey's.

I also think it's fascinating that Comey volunteered that he was the one that passed on his memos to be printed in the press with the express intention of forcing the appointment of a special counsel. 3D chess. I also think he had a very good idea that Mueller, his mentor and the person who pushed for him to be FBI director, would be the pick. Comey is playing a long game and has a very good idea on where it's heading, imo. But, we'll see.