Do you think Trump will be impeached or forced to resign?

[Jingthing]

Breaking News!

Quote

As Trump campaign chairman, Manafort offered ‘private briefings’ on the 2016 race to a Russian ally of Putin 

https://www.washingtonpost.com/

 

Collusion no delusion. 

Edited September 20, 2017 by Jingthing

[ilostmypassword]

7 hours ago, Jingthing said:

Not so much a coincidence when you can consider how significant the Russian background is in Israel. 

I think it has a lot more to do with the general Israeli dislike of Trump's predecessor than any attachment to mother Russia.

[iReason]

Mueller Seeks White House Documents Related to Trump’s Actions as President

"WASHINGTON — Robert S. Mueller III, the special counsel, has asked the White House for documents about some of President Trump’s most scrutinized actions since taking office, including the firing of his national security adviser and F.B.I. director, according to White House officials."

 

"Mr. Mueller is also interested in an Oval Office meeting Mr. Trump had with Russian officials in which he said the dismissal of the F.B.I. director had relieved “great pressure” on him."

 

"The document requests provide the most details to date about the breadth of Mr. Mueller’s investigation, and show that several aspects of his inquiry are focused squarely on Mr. Trump’s behavior in the White House."

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/09/20/us/politics/mueller-trump-russia.html?mcubz=0

[iReason]

Manafort used Trump campaign account to email Ukrainian operative

"Former Donald Trump aide Paul Manafort used his presidential campaign email account to correspond with a Ukrainian political operative with suspected Russian ties, according to people familiar with the correspondence."

 

"Manafort sent emails to seek repayment for previous work he did in Ukraine and to discuss potential new opportunities in the country, even as he chaired Trump’s presidential campaign, these people said."

 

"During the 2016 U.S. presidential campaign, Ukrainian investigators said they had discovered evidence that Manafort received millions of dollars in off-the-books payments for his work there."

http://www.politico.com/story/2017/09/20/paul-manafort-trump-campaign-email-ukrainian-operative-242949

[CaptHaddock]

Now that I am following the daily news about the Russia investigation I have, for the first time, found myself watching a variety of American newscasts on youtube, e.g. CNN, MSNBC, but also independents like David Pakman, etc.  I notice that not only do every one of these broadcasters have exactly the same news to report, i.e. search warrant for Manafort house no-knock, FBI picked lock, entered with guns drawn, searched Mrs. M. for weapons, etc., but even what I would naively have assumed was original commentary matches all the other broadcasters virtually word for word.  For example, after recounting these facts all of these people then go on to explain, breathlessly, that these actions mean that Mueller must have convinced a FISA judge that a crime had probably been committed, evidence of the crime could probably be found at Manafort's house, and Manafort would likely destroy that evidence given the chance.  These people, whom I now recognize as actors playing the part of broadcast journalists, express the same wonder at the implications.

 

What none of them talk about is that we have encountered these FISA courts before.  They are secret courts set up by the Bush Administration after 9/11 whose judges are not identified.  FISA courts do not try cases, because they have a sole purpose which is to decide whether to approve subpoenas and warrants from intelligence agencies.  The scandal that emerged when the FISA courts were first discussed was that up until that time no FISA judge had ever refused a subpoenas from the spooks.  So, they were Soviet-style kangaroo courts that rubber-stamped every government request.  Although claims were made that FISA courts were to be reformed, I have never read any followup as to whether and to what extent they were.

 

This history has direct bearing on how much we should be persuaded that the fact that Mueller got FISA warrants should encourage us to believe in Manafort's guilt.  Therefore, if the commentators were actual newsmen doing actual analysis of events they ought to have recapitulated this relevant history.  Yet not a single one of them whom I have reviewed has done so.

 

So much for the independence of the American media.

[iReason]

DID JARED KUSHNER’S DATA OPERATION HELP SELECT FACEBOOK TARGETS FOR THE RUSSIANS?

“I called somebody who works for one of the technology companies that I work with, and I had them give me a tutorial on how to use Facebook micro-targeting,” Kushner told Steven Bertoni of Forbes."

 

“We brought in Cambridge Analytica."

 

"And I asked them how to scale this stuff . . . We basically had to build a $400 million operation,

with 1,500 people operating in 50 states.”

https://www.vanityfair.com/news/2017/09/jared-kushner-data-operation-russia-facebook

 

Cambridge Analytica

"Cambridge Analytica (CA) is a privately held company that combines data mining and data analysis 

with strategic communication for the electoral process."

 

"On May 18, 2017, Time Magazine reported that the US Congress is investigating CA in connection with

Russian attempts to interfere in the 2016 presidential election."

 

"The report alleges that CA may have coordinated the spread of Russian propaganda using its microtargetting capabilities."

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cambridge_Analytica#Investigations_into_Russian_involvement_in_the_2016_US_Presidential_election

 

 

Robert Mercer is a major investor in Cambridge Analytica, and principal financier of Breitbart News and Steve Bannon, vice president of Cambridge Analytica until he joined the Trump campaign:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_Mercer_(businessman)

[CaptHaddock]

1 hour ago, iReason said:

DID JARED KUSHNER’S DATA OPERATION HELP SELECT FACEBOOK TARGETS FOR THE RUSSIANS?

“I called somebody who works for one of the technology companies that I work with, and I had them give me a tutorial on how to use Facebook micro-targeting,” Kushner told  Steven Bertoni of Forbes."

 

“We brought in Cambridge Analytica."

 

"And I asked them how to scale this stuff . . . We basically had to build a $400 million operation, with 1,500 people operating in 50 states.”

https://www.vanityfair.com/news/2017/09/jared-kushner-data-operation-russia-facebook

 

Cambridge Analytica

"Cambridge Analytica (CA) is a privately held company that combines data mining and data analysis with strategic communication for the electoral process."

 

"On May 18, 2017, Time Magazine reported that the US Congress is investigating CA in connection with Russian attempts to interfere in the 2016 presidential election."

 

"The report alleges that CA may have coordinated the spread of Russian propaganda using its microtargetting capabilities."

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cambridge_Analytica#Investigations_into_Russian_involvement_in_the_2016_US_Presidential_election

 

 

Robert Mercer is a major investor in Cambridge Analytica, and principal financier of Breitbart News and Steve Bannon, vice president of Cambridge Analytica until he joined the Trump campaign:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_Mercer_(businessman)

Jared,

 

Just be sure to pick a fight the very first day.  Doesn't matter who.  Doesn't matter that you'll lose.  But you'll be better off in the long run.  Ask your dad.

[Thakkar]

12 minutes ago, CaptHaddock said:

Jared,

 

Just be sure to pick a fight the very first day.  Doesn't matter who.  Doesn't matter that you'll lose.  But you'll be better off in the long run.  Ask your dad.

Alternative move: walk up to the biggest, baddest guy in the place and offer to become his bitch; in prison, going steady with Bruno is better than being everybody's slut.

[rhodie]

199 pages and Trump is still in office and not impeached. I predict the same by page 398. Go Trumpy. 

[iReason]

Fake news machine gears up for 2020

"There's a whole industry dedicated to producing fake US news in Macedonia -- and it's gearing up for 2020."

 

 

[Thakkar]

15 minutes ago, rhodie said:

199 pages and Trump is still in office and not impeached. I predict the same by page 398. Go Trumpy. 

 

Expectations for Trump are so low, even from his supporters, that merely still being in office a mere seven months in, is cause for a victory dance.

 

[rhodie]

1 minute ago, Thakkar said:

 

Expectations for Trump are so low, even from his supporters, that merely still being in office a mere seven months in, is cause for a victory dance.

 

In your dreams. Still can't accept that Trump won. Get over it and let him work on his mandate.   He will most likely finish 2 terms. Just occasionally check back to see if the huffing and puffing is still going on and I see it is in volumes.

 

Go Trumpy. 

[Thakkar]

16 minutes ago, rhodie said:

In your dreams. Still can't accept that Trump won. Get over it and let him work on his mandate.   He will most likely finish 2 terms. Just occasionally check back to see if the huffing and puffing is still going on and I see it is in volumes.

 

His "man date" is with Putin!

[Skywalker69]

3 hours ago, rhodie said:

199 pages and Trump is still in office and not impeached. I predict the same by page 398. Go Trumpy. 

Tick...tock...

[Jingthing]

3 hours ago, rhodie said:

In your dreams. Still can't accept that Trump won. Get over it and let him work on his mandate.   He will most likely finish 2 terms. Just occasionally check back to see if the huffing and puffing is still going on and I see it is in volumes.

 

Go Trumpy. 

He had no mandate. I know trumpists want to change the very concept of truth and reality. It won't wash. trump lost the popular vote by a historic margin. He did win based on three state's electoral votes by very thin margins. It's becoming very clear now that without Putin's aggressive propaganda efforts, Hillary Clinton would be president. trump won. It is legal. There is no constitutional way to redo the election. But he had no mandate. Period. Also, his LEGITIMACY has a very dark RUSSIAN cloud over it. Deal with that reality, dude. 

[heybruce]

3 hours ago, rhodie said:

In your dreams. Still can't accept that Trump won. Get over it and let him work on his mandate.   He will most likely finish 2 terms. Just occasionally check back to see if the huffing and puffing is still going on and I see it is in volumes.

 

Go Trumpy. 

I  see.  You check in, troll a little, then run away so you don't have to acknowledge Trump is getting nowhere with his mandate and has made politics more toxic than ever.

[Thakkar]

34 minutes ago, Jingthing said:

Really? 

 

 

I’d venture Trump’s mouth is elsewhere on Putin’s anatomy.

[rhodie]

1 minute ago, Jingthing said:

Never said he didn't won.

But he had no mandate and the legitimacy question won't go away, and he knows it, which explains a lot of his twitter behavior. 

So how do you get a mandate? I thought you got that when you won office in an election! No? So which president got a mandate?

[heybruce]

3 minutes ago, rhodie said:

So how do you get a mandate? I thought you got that when you won office in an election! No? So which president got a mandate?

Those that won by a clear popular vote majority have a mandate.  Duh!

[Jingthing]

2 minutes ago, rhodie said:

So how do you get a mandate? I thought you got that when you won office in an election! No? So which president got a mandate?

I'm not here to school you in basic political realities. You obviously lack that knowledge. I will say one thing. This is basic. All presidents in American history that won by electoral vote but lost the popular vote enter office with a question of legitimacy over their heads. trump is probably the worst case ever because of the now strongly confirmed involvement by the Russians.

[heybruce]

6 minutes ago, rhodie said:

No trolling here. Just checking to see how the wind is blowing. Still blowing hot air over a lost election. And to continue saying that he won't be impeached. I think that is the topic, not all the other BS that keeps getting TRUMPpeted! 

 

Not hot air over a lost election, concern over a chaotic, incompetent president that may have been elected by illegal collusion with Russia.  "He (barely, and perhaps illegally) won the election" seems to be all that you've got.

[rhodie]

1 minute ago, Jingthing said:

I'm not here to school you in basic political realities. You obviously lack that knowledge. I will say one thing. This is basic. All presidents in American history that won by electoral vote but lost the popular vote enter office with a question of legitimacy over their heads. trump is probably the worst case ever because of the now strongly confirmed involvement by the Russians.

No need to school me mate. He won therefore he won office therefore he has a mandate. If it is wrong then change the system, but until then, no need to school me, he won the mandate. If that was not the case, the way the voting is done would have changed. But it has not because it is accepted by most obviously. Just a few who continue to not believe that he WON. Go Trumpy!

[Jingthing]

Just now, rhodie said:

No need to school me mate. He won therefore he won office therefore he has a mandate. If it is wrong then change the system, but until then, no need to school me, he won the mandate. If that was not the case, the way the voting is done would have changed. But it has not because it is accepted by most obviously. Just a few who continue to not believe that he WON. Go Trumpy!

Sorry. You're not fooling anyone that has any basic knowledge of politics. Legally winning is not the same things as having a mandate. You can't change the reality and facts about that no matter how many times you try to sell big lies. 

[rhodie]

1 minute ago, heybruce said:

Not hot air over a lost election, concern over a chaotic, incompetent president that may have been elected by illegal collusion with Russia.  "He (barely, and perhaps illegally) won the election" seems to be all that you've got.

Show me your evidence that has been tested in a court. Ever heard of innocent until proven guilty. Show me the court case not some biased editorial. 

[rhodie]

1 minute ago, Jingthing said:

Sorry. You're not fooling anyone that has any basic knowledge of politics. Legally winning is not the same things as having a mandate. You can't change the reality and facts about that no matter how many times you try to sell big lies. 

He won the election in the, arguably, most democratic country in the world. What is in question?

[Jingthing]

Just now, rhodie said:

He won the election in the, arguably, most democratic country in the world. What is in question?

He has no mandate. The massive Russian involvement has now been strongly confirmed by many credible sources, including U.S. intelligence agencies. The question of direct COLLUSION is still under active investigation. Deal with it. Also, objective sources have rated the USA as a flawed democracy and nowhere even close to the most democratic country in the world.

[Thakkar]

21 minutes ago, rhodie said:

Why are you looking for every excuse in the book. He won. Plain and simple. Why can't you accept it? He WON! Deal with the reality dude! 

 

For decent people everywhere, opposing Trump’s destructive policies *IS* dealing with the reality.

[heybruce]

4 minutes ago, rhodie said:

Show me your evidence that has been tested in a court. Ever heard of innocent until proven guilty. Show me the court case not some biased editorial. 

Investigations, subpoenas, sworn testimonies, all are in work.  The courts will come later.  Until then all we have is clear incompetence, which may be grounds for impeachment.  The constitution is vague on what qualifies as "high crimes and misdemeanors".

[Jingthing]

He's legally impeachable already but ultimately it's a POLITICAL decision. Which is why he's still in office and may be for his full term. But I wouldn't bet the house on him staying or leaving. Stay tuned. 

[rhodie]

2 minutes ago, heybruce said:

Investigations, subpoenas, sworn testimonies, all are in work.  The courts will come later.  Until then all we have is clear incompetence, which may be grounds for impeachment.  The constitution is vague on what qualifies as "high crimes and misdemeanors".

I think he may be impeached if he is convicted in a court of law, but somehow, politicians of all persuasions seem to get out of these predicaments.  But no conviction. Why do you guys keep asking speculative questions for me to answer but nobody will show me where he has been convicted in a court of law. Until then he is the president with a mandate.