What's new
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

Welcome to Our Forums. Once you've registered and logged in, you're primed to talk football, among other topics, with the sharpest and most experienced fantasy players on the internet.

The Trump Years- Every day something more shocking than the last! (11 Viewers)

Status
Not open for further replies.
SaintsInDome2006 said:
Hm, that's the Paula Jones theory, but it only applies to court cases. Like I've said before sue for his tax returns any which way you can, but no a sitting president can't be hauled before a Congressional committee. I agree with everything Tobias said above fwiw, hearings-away, but constitutionally that particular thing is not going to happen. Trump's tax returns could be subpoenaed and I think that's a necessary and has been since before inauguration.
Click to expand...
The Jones decision is not really similar as that was a civil suit not directly connected to his position. This is very different.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
shader said:
Proving quid pro quo is important. Remember Trump's statement that HRC approved a transfer of uranium to Russia and got 145M?

It looks VERY fishy and if that happened to Trump, people might literally lose their minds.  But if you can't prove quid pro quo, then what do you have?  Just a bunch of people convinced that Trump (or in this case Hilary) is crooked.

http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2016/jun/30/donald-trump/donald-trump-inaccurately-suggests-clinton-got-pai/
Click to expand...
1. QPQ is not always necessary. Pay To Play is different.

2. That claim, which has a poison pill in it about Hillary 'approving' and 'getting 145M' is technically false in a number of ways.

3. 145M pales in comparison to what Russia is looking at for dropped sanctions.

4. This isn't influence/bribery, this is espionage.

-> Get a new comp.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Sabertooth said:
Hopefully this is just the first ripple that brings this #### show to a halt.  I look forward to President Paul Ryan quite honestly.  
Click to expand...
Me too.  And then it'll look like the Canadian PM and POTUS are related and can do some real duets together that should rock the house!

 
Ditkaless Wonders said:
I think it is plausible that Trump was unaware of the law.  I think the man is stupid, and coupled with his arrogance, dangerous.  he actually celebrates ignorance.  Now that all said I do not allow that his stupidity, or his lack of being reasonably informed, which was his absolute obligation, is any defense to these matters.  I also happen to believe that he did become informed, and rather than take decisive steps at that juncture he reacted with wishful thinking, like a small child, he lied and hoped it would all just go away.  As adults could have predicted, it didn't.
Click to expand...
I think it's also plausible that Trump doesn't respect the laws he does know.  He simply assumes he's above the law because, well...he won.  

 
jon_mx said:
What is the alleged crime that is supposed to be investigated.  Most everyone knows Flynn went way beyond his authority and was probably in violation of a 200 year old law which has never been enforced.  So he has resigned.  Now what is the end game?  What law did Trump break that necessitates an investigation?
Click to expand...
Isn't this backwards?  Don't we investigate to determine if any crimes were committed? :confused:  

 
Rookie_Whisperer said:
The Jones decision is not really similar as that was a civil suit not directly connected to his position. This is very different.
Click to expand...
All i can say is look to prior impeachments - Andrew Johnson and William Clinton.

Reagan had to testify, you can consider that, but again it was in court in a criminal case (like Hillary in Whitewater IIRC).

I think you need to get a bill of impeachment going to even consider this. Like I said subpoena his tax returns, consider Nadler's motion, consider a special prosecutor, then move from there. Like Nixon if it even gets near this discussion in practicality he probably resigns anyway.

 
Trump is just one man.  Breitbart is a massive shift.  If the democrats pour all their energy into removing trump and ignore breitbart and allow it to become mainstream, liberalism is dead. It is a mistake the left cannot recover from.  I almost wonder if its trumps real plan but i dont think hes that saavy. 

 
jon_mx said:
timschochet said:
Do you support a full investigation? 
Click to expand...
What is the alleged crime that is supposed to be investigated.  Most everyone knows Flynn went way beyond his authority and was probably in violation of a 200 year old law which has never been enforced.  So he has resigned.  Now what is the end game?  What law did Trump break that necessitates an investigation?
Click to expand...
So either Flynn went rogue, completely on his own, to reassure the Russians that sanctions against them would be handled differently under a Trump administration - which is illegal, and really runs contrary to the way our country should work, having one administration at a time communicating with foreign governments and leaders...

Or...Flynn was relaying that information on behalf of the Trump team, and likely Trump himself, to ease concerns of Russians for some unknown reason, which is still illegal, and still contrary to how our country works, but in this case Trump becomes complicit in actively undermining a sitting administration, and further calls into question his ties to Russia.

The end game is getting people in positions of responsibility in our government who are responsible people who are good at their jobs and uphold american principles.  The end game is investigating this administration's ties to Russia, which are just getting more and more ridiculous as the days go by.  

How much garbage around Trump dealing with Russia has to pile up before more folks say something stinks, and that we need to get to the bottom of it?

 
Riversco said:
Trump is just one man.  Breitbart is a massive shift.  If the democrats pour all their energy into removing trump and ignore breitbart and allow it to become mainstream, liberalism is dead. It is a mistake the left cannot recover from.  I almost wonder if its trumps real plan but i dont think hes that saavy. 
Click to expand...
Trump fanned the flames of the Breitbart stuff with his fake news and us against them mentality.  Without their leader to rally around Breitbart will be relegated back to the same level as the National Enquirer where it belongs.

 
Freedom of the press is a wonderful thing. Easy to see why Trump wants to shut it down.

Important to remember Flynn didn't resign because he did anything wrong. He resigned because he got caught. 

It defies common sense to believe he was a rogue element in the administration. More investigations and further strong reporting needs to continue to find out the extent of the corruption going on. 

But this is a good day when Trump is shown there are consequences for his corrupt actions. He is not a king. He must continue to be held accountable.

Oh, and please stop putting Conway on TV.

 
TobiasFunke said:
link
Click to expand...
I guess I am a bit slow on the uptake this morning.  Everyone is so serious I was not remotely prepared to read a joke.  Actually damn funny, and poignant too, that he, of all puppy holding, recipe sharing, pop-tart interviewing morning happy talkers was able to dominate the Administration's apologist in chief.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Quez said:
Once again, Trump takes a bad situation & will use it to his advantage.  Flynn is the scapegoat, and Trump will end up getting the advisor he wanted from the beginning.  Petreus.
Click to expand...
:confused:

Because he thinks it's a reality show where you have to backdoor in the person you really want?  Sounds about right :lol:  

 
DailyCaller article yesterday: Why We Should All Support Michael Flynn Against A Plot To Weaken America

As the designated National Security Advisor of then President-Elect Trump, Flynn was effectively authorized to speak to the Russian Ambassador and other foreign leaders. “General Flynn has been in touch with diplomatic leaders, security leaders in some 30 countries. That’s exactly what the incoming national security advisor should do,” Vice President Pence told CBS anchor John Dickerson in January.

There has never been any prosecution ever under the Logan Act, which forbids unauthorized citizens from negotiating with foreign governments having a dispute with the United States. Yet the aging, pot smoking hippies at the New York Times and the Washington Post want the first prosecution in history under that act to be against the General designated by President Trump to be National Security Advisor. For starting his job a couple of days early.

These simpletons calling for Flynn’s head are nuts. They don’t have the national security interests of America at heart.
Click to expand...
:lmao:

 
Riversco said:
Trump is just one man.  Breitbart is a massive shift.  If the democrats pour all their energy into removing trump and ignore breitbart and allow it to become mainstream, liberalism is dead. It is a mistake the left cannot recover from.  I almost wonder if its trumps real plan but i dont think hes that saavy. 
Click to expand...
You keep saying this as if the Democrats have some kind of power to stop Breitbart from existing.

What exactly is your suggestion here?

 
packersfan said:
Freedom of the press is a wonderful thing. Easy to see why Trump wants to shut it down.

Important to remember Flynn didn't resign because he did anything wrong. He resigned because he got caught. 

It defies common sense to believe he was a rogue element in the administration. More investigations and further strong reporting needs to continue to find out the extent of the corruption going on. 

But this is a good day when Trump is shown there are consequences for his corrupt actions. He is not a king. He must continue to be held accountable.

Oh, and please stop putting Conway on TV.
Click to expand...
He resigned because of public outrage and perception.  He got caught over a month ago, but only when the information was released to the public, did anything happen.

It strains credibility to believe that Flynn did this without the express direction of Trump.  It just doesn't make any sense that this would be the case.

 
SaintsInDome2006 said:
1. QPQ is not always necessary. Pay To Play is different.

2. That claim, which has a poison pill in it about Hillary 'approving' and 'getting 145M' is technically false in a number of ways.

3. 145M pales in comparison to what Russia is looking at for dropped sanctions.

4. This isn't influence/bribery, this is espionage.

-> Get a new comp.
Click to expand...
You're probably right, I just happened to see that and wanted to see how it compared.

To me, that looks extremely shady for HRC.

Just like all this Russian stuff looks extremely shady for DJT. 

In the end, though, you have to prove that they knew or signed off on the matter, right?

Even if it's proven that Trump told Flynn that he could "placate Russia" a month or two ahead of time, that's not impeachment material, imo.

But if it's proven that Trump directly asked Russia to release the Podesta emails, then he's in deep trouble, imo.

 
shader said:
Proving quid pro quo is important. Remember Trump's statement that HRC approved a transfer of uranium to Russia and got 145M?

It looks VERY fishy and if that happened to Trump, people might literally lose their minds.  But if you can't prove quid pro quo, then what do you have?  Just a bunch of people convinced that Trump (or in this case Hilary) is crooked.

http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2016/jun/30/donald-trump/donald-trump-inaccurately-suggests-clinton-got-pai/
Click to expand...
This is textbook false equivalence. The Clinton uranium non-scandal has been explained over and over and over again. I've done it myself at least five times around these parts. There's no unanswered questions, no evidence of corruption, nothing. She played zero role personally in the decision, her agency didn't have much more of a role than that, and there's no national security risk anyway since the uranium can't be exported.  End of analysis.

In contrast, here we have a pile of questions, most prominent among them being why did the Trump White House keep Flynn on board and involved in the highest levels of government decision-making after being told of his potentially treasonous activity and that he had possibly been compromised and that he had (supposedly) lied to them about these things?  And the most obvious explanation to this and other questions is that Trump knew all along what Flynn was doing and that he's been working with Putin for months, if not years. You're right that we can't conclude he's crooked based on this, but these questions need to be answered.

 
SaintsInDome2006 said:
All i can say is look to prior impeachments - Andrew Johnson and William Clinton.

Reagan had to testify, you can consider that, but again it was in court in a criminal case (like Hillary in Whitewater IIRC).

I think you need to get a bill of impeachment going to even consider this. Like I said subpoena his tax returns, consider Nadler's motion, consider a special prosecutor, then move from there. Like Nixon if it even gets near this discussion in practicality he probably resigns anyway.
Click to expand...
BTW, whitewater is some serious conspiracy theory BS, but OK...point made.

 
In addition, the Army has been investigating whether Mr. Flynn received money from the Russian government during a trip he took to Moscow in 2015, according to two defense officials. Such a payment might violate the Emoluments Clause of the Constitution, which prohibits former military officers from receiving money from a foreign government without consent from Congress.
Click to expand...
https://www.nytimes.com/2017/02/13/us/politics/donald-trump-national-security-adviser-michael-flynn.html

 
TobiasFunke said:
This is textbook false equivalence. The Clinton uranium non-scandal has been explained over and over and over again. I've done it myself at least five times around these parts. There's no unanswered questions, no evidence of corruption, nothing. She played zero role personally in the decision, her agency didn't have much more of a role than that, and there's no national security risk anyway since the uranium can't be exported.  End of analysis.

In contrast, here we have a pile of questions, most prominent among them being why did the Trump White House keep Flynn on board and involved in the highest levels of government decision-making after being told of his potentially treasonous activity and that he had possibly been compromised and that he had (supposedly) lied to them about these things?  And the most obvious explanation to this and other questions is that Trump knew all along what Flynn was doing and that he's been working with Putin for months, if not years. You're right that we can't conclude he's crooked based on this, but these questions need to be answered.
Click to expand...
I agree that there are piles of questions for Trump.

I wasn't really trying to "equate" the two things.  I was just pointing out that in any accusation, you have to have proof or it goes away.

 
adonis said:
So either Flynn went rogue, completely on his own, to reassure the Russians that sanctions against them would be handled differently under a Trump administration - which is illegal, and really runs contrary to the way our country should work, having one administration at a time communicating with foreign governments and leaders...

Or...Flynn was relaying that information on behalf of the Trump team, and likely Trump himself, to ease concerns of Russians for some unknown reason, which is still illegal, and still contrary to how our country works, but in this case Trump becomes complicit in actively undermining a sitting administration, and further calls into question his ties to Russia.

The end game is getting people in positions of responsibility in our government who are responsible people who are good at their jobs and uphold american principles.  The end game is investigating this administration's ties to Russia, which are just getting more and more ridiculous as the days go by.  

How much garbage around Trump dealing with Russia has to pile up before more folks say something stinks, and that we need to get to the bottom of it?
Click to expand...
If Flynn went rogue, why?  And, why would Russia believe he had the power to back up what he was telling them if he was acting alone?

 
Yes, Donald....leaks.  That's what happens when you are the leader of the greatest democratic country in the world.  There's accountability.  You don't get to cover up something as dangerous as this.  I know you think you can try and limit what information gets out but that's not how it works here.  There's plenty of countries, i.e. Russia, that do things that way.  Perhaps you'll be more comfortable there.

####### idiot.

 
Skoo said:
Riversco said:
Trump is just one man.  Breitbart is a massive shift.  If the democrats pour all their energy into removing trump and ignore breitbart and allow it to become mainstream, liberalism is dead. It is a mistake the left cannot recover from.  I almost wonder if its trumps real plan but i dont think hes that saavy. 
Click to expand...
You keep saying this as if the Democrats have some kind of power to stop Breitbart from existing.

What exactly is your suggestion here?
Click to expand...
I may be wrong Skoo, but I have been reading it as:

Eliminating DJT is just one part..."fighting Breitbart", is not about actually fighting the publication, but rather fighting the "group-think", "hive-mind", "bubble", etc. that BB caters to.

Am I close Riversco?

:shrug:

 
The correct way to stop breitbart is to co opt the message.  Mainstream news sites need to move to the right so that the public doesnt feel compelled to go there to get right wing news.  The wrong way would be to try to discredit it or have the website closed because that will make it worse. 

Theres very little time to get this right.  Months. The democrats for decades have made so MANY horrible moves to get to the point where the republicans own the entire govt and breitbart is ascendant.  Now the window is very small. 

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Riversco said:
The correct way to stop breitbart is to co opt the message.  Mainstream news sites need to move to the right so that the public doesnt feel compelled to go there to get right wing news.  The wrong way would be to try to discredit it or have the website closed because that will make it worse. 
Click to expand...
No way buddy.  Now is the time to remain reality based news, not right wing fantasies, conspiracy theories, and overt racism. Leave that trash right where they are.

 
Riversco said:
The correct way to stop breitbart is to co opt the message.  Mainstream news sites need to move to the right so that the public doesnt feel compelled to go there to get right wing news.  The wrong way would be to try to discredit it or have the website closed because that will make it worse. 
Click to expand...
This is one of the dumbest things I've read this week.

 
Riversco said:
The correct way to stop breitbart is to co opt the message.  Mainstream news sites need to move to the right so that the public doesnt feel compelled to go there to get right wing news.  The wrong way would be to try to discredit it or have the website closed because that will make it worse. 
Click to expand...
Bull-#######-#### Breitbart is a racist, fascist, proprietor of lies.  The farther the real media moves away from them the better we are.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Riversco said:
The correct way to stop breitbart is to co opt the message.  Mainstream news sites need to move to the right so that the public doesnt feel compelled to go there to get right wing news.  The wrong way would be to try to discredit it or have the website closed because that will make it worse. 
Click to expand...
I agree.   This is why the Dems need to totally switch course on gun control.  Just say screw it, we are all in on guns.  The more the better to defense yourself from Russian spies.  

 
Riversco said:
The correct way to stop breitbart is to co opt the message.  Mainstream news sites need to move to the right so that the public doesnt feel compelled to go there to get right wing news.  The wrong way would be to try to discredit it or have the website closed because that will make it worse. 
Click to expand...
Breitbart is a huge problem, and the media should get rid of Breitbart by being more like Breitbart?

I'm sorry, but that is one of the most ridiculous things I have ever read.

 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

knowledge dropper
  • Locked
The Biden Years - Every day something more shocking than the last!!
36 37 38
Replies
2K
Views
49K
Joe Bryant
Joe Bryant
Hipple Long Ware & Peete
FWIW The NSA IS READING/SAVING ur emails/calls/texts etc
2
Replies
62
Views
3K
kevzilla
kevzilla

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 12 (members: 0, guests: 12)
Top