Author Topic: So Let's Speculate about the Future of a Full Trump Presidency...  (Read 576791 times)

ysette9

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 4188
  • Location: Bay Area, CA
    • Insert Snappy Title Here (Journal)
Re: So Let's Speculate about the Future of a Full Trump Presidency...
« Reply #6250 on: March 02, 2019, 09:38:12 AM »
I couldn’t care less who plays golf better. Of the skillset I’d like my president to be competent at, good doesn’t even make the top 1000 list.

MasterStache

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 2002
Re: So Let's Speculate about the Future of a Full Trump Presidency...
« Reply #6251 on: March 02, 2019, 09:56:40 AM »
My money would be on Obama in a golf match between the two...as long as somebody else was keeping score. Trump is known to forget to count all of his strokes.

Gambling is illegal at Bushwood and besides, I never slice!

sequoia

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 592
Re: So Let's Speculate about the Future of a Full Trump Presidency...
« Reply #6252 on: March 02, 2019, 11:47:41 PM »
https://www.cnn.com/2019/03/02/politics/fact-checking-cpac/index.html

Wow over two hour of speech. This caught my eyes "as event staff closed the doors and kept anyone from leaving". I wonder if he learns this trick from his buddy Kim.

nereo

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 9847
  • Location: la belle province
    • Here's how you can support science today:
Re: So Let's Speculate about the Future of a Full Trump Presidency...
« Reply #6253 on: March 04, 2019, 04:41:13 AM »
Well Rand Paul says he'll vote for the measure to block Trump's "national emergency". 
Given the almost certain prez veto it's largely about being on record... but I've been wondering:
Given several high-profile legal challenges to this emergency declaration, it seems all but certain that at least one will wind up in SCOTUS.  Will SCOTUS consider the fact that both chambers tried to block the national emergency when considering whether it violates congressional authority?  Or will they just say "well you still had the power - with a 2/3 veto-proof majority"?

I guess we'll find out soon enough (read: in 6-18 months).

talltexan

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 2233
Re: So Let's Speculate about the Future of a Full Trump Presidency...
« Reply #6254 on: March 04, 2019, 07:55:04 AM »
Yes, Pres. Trump goes golfing more than Obama if you count days.

But it's about the same when you go by strokes.

I just now realized that this was not a serious comment, but rather an insult to Barrack Obama's skill at golfing.

An unfounded one, as if that matters.

Sol-
thank you for indulging my shade at Obama here. I'm grateful someone noticed.

I spent years listening to other conservatives in my office (ones who do not care about logical consistency as I do) complain about all the time Obama spent golfing. Now they seem to think golfing is one of the most important things a leader does. It's disheartening.

nereo

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 9847
  • Location: la belle province
    • Here's how you can support science today:
Re: So Let's Speculate about the Future of a Full Trump Presidency...
« Reply #6255 on: March 04, 2019, 07:58:18 AM »
wait, is Trump actually a decent golfer?  I don't play so I have no frame of reference.

sol

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 8213
  • Age: 42
  • Location: Pacific Northwest
Re: So Let's Speculate about the Future of a Full Trump Presidency...
« Reply #6256 on: March 04, 2019, 08:21:06 AM »
wait, is Trump actually a decent golfer?  I don't play so I have no frame of reference.

I think he is, for a senior citizen.  He's been playing golf multiple times per week, for decades and decades now, so he should be good by now.

There have been a couple of pieces of journalism about his golf playing.  He bought several golf courses, and has used the royal treatment he gets from sycophants at his own businesses as a backdrop for business deals.  Lots of people have also reported that he tends to be a little fast and loose with the rules, especially at his own courses where everybody works for him and so nobody will object.  Sound familiar?

RetiredAt63

  • Senior Mustachian
  • ********
  • Posts: 10134
  • Location: Eastern Ontario, Canada
Re: So Let's Speculate about the Future of a Full Trump Presidency...
« Reply #6257 on: March 04, 2019, 10:05:58 AM »
wait, is Trump actually a decent golfer?  I don't play so I have no frame of reference.

I think he is, for a senior citizen.  He's been playing golf multiple times per week, for decades and decades now, so he should be good by now.

There have been a couple of pieces of journalism about his golf playing.  He bought several golf courses, and has used the royal treatment he gets from sycophants at his own businesses as a backdrop for business deals.  Lots of people have also reported that he tends to be a little fast and loose with the rules, especially at his own courses where everybody works for him and so nobody will object.  Sound familiar?

That is actually a terrible character indictment.

Reminds me of Podkayne of Mars, where near the end the younger brother says he knew someone was bad because they cheated at solitaire. 

Little Aussie Battler

  • Stubble
  • **
  • Posts: 186
Re: So Let's Speculate about the Future of a Full Trump Presidency...
« Reply #6258 on: March 04, 2019, 01:10:03 PM »
His swing looks decent for a 70 year old.

marty998

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 6097
  • Location: Sydney, Oz
Re: So Let's Speculate about the Future of a Full Trump Presidency...
« Reply #6259 on: March 04, 2019, 01:21:19 PM »
Yes, Pres. Trump goes golfing more than Obama if you count days.

But it's about the same when you go by strokes.

I just now realized that this was not a serious comment, but rather an insult to Barrack Obama's skill at golfing.

An unfounded one, as if that matters.

I thought it was a dig at Trump cheating so much.... like recording an 8 as a 3 so there are more golfing days but less strokes taken....

talltexan

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 2233
Re: So Let's Speculate about the Future of a Full Trump Presidency...
« Reply #6260 on: March 04, 2019, 01:51:05 PM »
I think the totality of my comments on this thread are anti-Trump. Saying he's a good golfer shouldn't excuse his unfortunate choices as a candidate and a President.

Kris

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 3800
Re: So Let's Speculate about the Future of a Full Trump Presidency...
« Reply #6261 on: March 04, 2019, 02:09:35 PM »
I think the totality of my comments on this thread are anti-Trump. Saying he's a good golfer shouldn't excuse his unfortunate choices as a candidate and a President.

Yeah, whether he's a good golfer really doesn't matter.

I've read from a lot of different sources that he cheats like hell. Which really doesn't come as any sort of surprise.

nereo

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 9847
  • Location: la belle province
    • Here's how you can support science today:
Re: So Let's Speculate about the Future of a Full Trump Presidency...
« Reply #6262 on: March 04, 2019, 05:17:49 PM »
I think the totality of my comments on this thread are anti-Trump. Saying he's a good golfer shouldn't excuse his unfortunate choices as a candidate and a President.

Yeah, whether he's a good golfer really doesn't matter.

I've read from a lot of different sources that he cheats like hell. Which really doesn't come as any sort of surprise.

To be fair, Bill Clinton was well known for giving himself a mulligan or four after poor shots.

GreenEggs

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 656
  • Location: Here & There
Re: So Let's Speculate about the Future of a Full Trump Presidency...
« Reply #6263 on: March 04, 2019, 09:03:00 PM »
I'll probably try golf one day.  When I get too old and gimpy to do much else!  The little shoes are cute though.


I shouldn't make fun of golf.  It's been good for the real estate prices around here.  Fortunately we've always been on the waterfront side of the street.  I've never felt the need to rub elbows. 


Next time I find myself praying I'll try to remember to ask for a lightening bolt for Trump on the greens.  Seriously, what could possibly be a more fitting farewell to the "Really Smart Guy". 

talltexan

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 2233
Re: So Let's Speculate about the Future of a Full Trump Presidency...
« Reply #6264 on: March 05, 2019, 08:22:46 AM »
Shouldn't a guy who commands a nuclear arsenal be allowed to take a couple of mulligans on the Links?

nereo

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 9847
  • Location: la belle province
    • Here's how you can support science today:
Re: So Let's Speculate about the Future of a Full Trump Presidency...
« Reply #6265 on: March 05, 2019, 08:25:14 AM »
Shouldn't a guy who commands a nuclear arsenal be allowed to take a couple of mulligans on the Links?

Let me rephrase your question:  Do you want someone who controls nuclear weapons to get used to the idea of a perpetual "do over"?

talltexan

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 2233
Re: So Let's Speculate about the Future of a Full Trump Presidency...
« Reply #6266 on: March 05, 2019, 08:43:43 AM »
A hit, a very palpable hit!

JLee

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 5319
Re: So Let's Speculate about the Future of a Full Trump Presidency...
« Reply #6267 on: March 05, 2019, 09:17:34 AM »
https://www.cnn.com/2019/03/05/politics/michael-cohen-lawyer-pardon/index.html

Wall Street Journal: Cohen's lawyer discussed possible pardon with Trump lawyers

GuitarStv

  • Senior Mustachian
  • ********
  • Posts: 12883
  • Age: 37
  • Location: Toronto, Ontario, Canada
Re: So Let's Speculate about the Future of a Full Trump Presidency...
« Reply #6268 on: March 05, 2019, 09:24:38 AM »
I wonder why Trump didn't give him a pardon.

nereo

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 9847
  • Location: la belle province
    • Here's how you can support science today:
Re: So Let's Speculate about the Future of a Full Trump Presidency...
« Reply #6269 on: March 05, 2019, 09:36:56 AM »
I wonder why Trump didn't give him a pardon.
Apparently Sessions and Graham (among others) talked him out of it, saying he'd look really bad pardoning his own personal lawyer.

Guess that backfired...


sol

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 8213
  • Age: 42
  • Location: Pacific Northwest
Re: So Let's Speculate about the Future of a Full Trump Presidency...
« Reply #6270 on: March 05, 2019, 09:40:22 AM »
I wonder why Trump didn't give him a pardon.

I think that the real story here is left unstated in that article:  this is another example of obstruction. 

If you go to a witness and offer him something of value (in this case, a future pardon) in exchange for his refusal to cooperate with law enforcement, that's textbook obstruction of justice.  Everyone admits that's what happened in this case, and the whitehouse is claiming it's not illegal. 

thd7t

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1277
Re: So Let's Speculate about the Future of a Full Trump Presidency...
« Reply #6271 on: March 05, 2019, 11:14:21 AM »
I wonder why Trump didn't give him a pardon.

I think that the real story here is left unstated in that article:  this is another example of obstruction. 

If you go to a witness and offer him something of value (in this case, a future pardon) in exchange for his refusal to cooperate with law enforcement, that's textbook obstruction of justice.  Everyone admits that's what happened in this case, and the whitehouse is claiming it's not illegal.
It would be unwise for Trump to pardon anyone at this point.  After a pardon, people lose the ability to plead the fifth in testimony.  Either they would have to reveal information about him or incur new legal jeopardy.  I'm sure his lawyers have made this clear.

GuitarStv

  • Senior Mustachian
  • ********
  • Posts: 12883
  • Age: 37
  • Location: Toronto, Ontario, Canada
Re: So Let's Speculate about the Future of a Full Trump Presidency...
« Reply #6272 on: March 05, 2019, 11:30:21 AM »
I wonder why Trump didn't give him a pardon.

I think that the real story here is left unstated in that article:  this is another example of obstruction. 

If you go to a witness and offer him something of value (in this case, a future pardon) in exchange for his refusal to cooperate with law enforcement, that's textbook obstruction of justice.  Everyone admits that's what happened in this case, and the whitehouse is claiming it's not illegal.
It would be unwise for Trump to pardon anyone at this point.  After a pardon, people lose the ability to plead the fifth in testimony.  Either they would have to reveal information about him or incur new legal jeopardy.  I'm sure his lawyers have made this clear.

Yeah, but once the pardons start rolling there's no real reason to talk as another pardon can be issued just as readily.  Granted it would look bad, but this administration is not held accountable for anything they do that looks bad.  Just throw the new concern on the pile.

Glenstache

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 2084
  • Location: Seattle!
  • Target FI date 2027 (maybe?)
Re: So Let's Speculate about the Future of a Full Trump Presidency...
« Reply #6273 on: March 12, 2019, 10:07:43 AM »
Apparently the guy who can't figure out how to use AOL thinks planes are now too complex... before the actual crash report has been completed.
https://talkingpointsmemo.com/livewire/president-of-the-united-states-planes-are-becoming-far-too-complex-to-fly

FFS.

GuitarStv

  • Senior Mustachian
  • ********
  • Posts: 12883
  • Age: 37
  • Location: Toronto, Ontario, Canada
Re: So Let's Speculate about the Future of a Full Trump Presidency...
« Reply #6274 on: March 12, 2019, 10:10:40 AM »
Apparently the guy who can't figure out how to use AOL thinks planes are now too complex... before the actual crash report has been completed.
https://talkingpointsmemo.com/livewire/president-of-the-united-states-planes-are-becoming-far-too-complex-to-fly

FFS.

Not using AOL is possibly the most likable thing about Donald Trump.  :P

gentmach

  • Bristles
  • ***
  • Posts: 302
Re: So Let's Speculate about the Future of a Full Trump Presidency...
« Reply #6275 on: March 12, 2019, 11:13:04 AM »
https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/congress/pelosi-s-impeachment-skepticism-draws-little-pushback-fellow-dems-n982191

“Impeachment is so divisive to the country that unless there's something so compelling and overwhelming and bipartisan, I don't think we should go down that path, because it divides the country," she said in an interview with the Washington Post published Monday. "And he's just not worth it."

House Intelligence Committee Chairman Adam Schiff, D-Calif., agreed with Pelosi.

“I certainly agree that in the absence of very compelling evidence that either Mueller produces or we’re able to find, gaining the bipartisan support necessary, impeachment, to be successful, would be enormously difficult,” Schiff told reporters Monday night. “While I don’t exclude that possibility, I don’t think we should put the country through impeachment without that amount evidence.”

Many Democrats said that Pelosi has not changed her tune on impeachment, pointing out that she has not yet ruled it out.

“She said essentially what I’ve been saying. We’re not nearly there yet. We may or may not get there,” said House Judiciary Committee Chairman Jerry Nadler, D-N.Y.

Impeachment seems to be off the table at the moment. Ah well.

Glenstache

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 2084
  • Location: Seattle!
  • Target FI date 2027 (maybe?)
Re: So Let's Speculate about the Future of a Full Trump Presidency...
« Reply #6276 on: March 12, 2019, 11:21:03 AM »
https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/congress/pelosi-s-impeachment-skepticism-draws-little-pushback-fellow-dems-n982191

“Impeachment is so divisive to the country that unless there's something so compelling and overwhelming and bipartisan, I don't think we should go down that path, because it divides the country," she said in an interview with the Washington Post published Monday. "And he's just not worth it."

House Intelligence Committee Chairman Adam Schiff, D-Calif., agreed with Pelosi.

“I certainly agree that in the absence of very compelling evidence that either Mueller produces or we’re able to find, gaining the bipartisan support necessary, impeachment, to be successful, would be enormously difficult,” Schiff told reporters Monday night. “While I don’t exclude that possibility, I don’t think we should put the country through impeachment without that amount evidence.”

Many Democrats said that Pelosi has not changed her tune on impeachment, pointing out that she has not yet ruled it out.

“She said essentially what I’ve been saying. We’re not nearly there yet. We may or may not get there,” said House Judiciary Committee Chairman Jerry Nadler, D-N.Y.

Impeachment seems to be off the table at the moment. Ah well.
I read this as saying that until it is bipartisan, it is not going to actually result in impeachment and will simply be even more divisive. This is utterly pragmatic.

nereo

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 9847
  • Location: la belle province
    • Here's how you can support science today:
Re: So Let's Speculate about the Future of a Full Trump Presidency...
« Reply #6277 on: March 12, 2019, 11:24:14 AM »
Here I happen to agree with Pelosi.  So long as there are 34 senators that will not support a vote to remove DJT from office (and currently there are 52 GOP senators, with ~45 solidly supporting him), starting impeachment proceedings would harm more than help the country.

As long as impeachment hasn't sucked all the air out of the room the House can continue to investigate, legislate and exercise its powers as a co-equal branch of govenment to block this WH's most egregious overreaches and set spending priorities.  They would largely lose that ability the moment impeachment moves forward, so unless there's the votes to remove in the Senate its counterproductive.

Versatile

  • Stubble
  • **
  • Posts: 118
Re: So Let's Speculate about the Future of a Full Trump Presidency...
« Reply #6278 on: March 12, 2019, 12:12:58 PM »
https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/congress/pelosi-s-impeachment-skepticism-draws-little-pushback-fellow-dems-n982191

“Impeachment is so divisive to the country that unless there's something so compelling and overwhelming and bipartisan, I don't think we should go down that path, because it divides the country," she said in an interview with the Washington Post published Monday. "And he's just not worth it."

House Intelligence Committee Chairman Adam Schiff, D-Calif., agreed with Pelosi.

“I certainly agree that in the absence of very compelling evidence that either Mueller produces or we’re able to find, gaining the bipartisan support necessary, impeachment, to be successful, would be enormously difficult,” Schiff told reporters Monday night. “While I don’t exclude that possibility, I don’t think we should put the country through impeachment without that amount evidence.”

Many Democrats said that Pelosi has not changed her tune on impeachment, pointing out that she has not yet ruled it out.

“She said essentially what I’ve been saying. We’re not nearly there yet. We may or may not get there,” said House Judiciary Committee Chairman Jerry Nadler, D-N.Y.

Impeachment seems to be off the table at the moment. Ah well.
I read this as saying that until it is bipartisan, it is not going to actually result in impeachment and will simply be even more divisive. This is utterly pragmatic.

I have a different interpretation.

The Mueller investigation has provided no evidence that Trump colluded with Russia to win the election. The Mueller investigation has provided no evidence that Trump committed any crimes much less an impeachable offense.

I really hope they make Mueller's findings public for all of us, but I wouldn't hold my breath. I think Pelosi and company are setting the stage for when Mueller does present his final assessment. And I think that is also why Schiff is suddenly now pushing for more investigations into Trump's private business dealings. If Mueller had solid evidence then this wouldn't be necessary.

JLee

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 5319
Re: So Let's Speculate about the Future of a Full Trump Presidency...
« Reply #6279 on: March 12, 2019, 12:31:35 PM »
https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/congress/pelosi-s-impeachment-skepticism-draws-little-pushback-fellow-dems-n982191

“Impeachment is so divisive to the country that unless there's something so compelling and overwhelming and bipartisan, I don't think we should go down that path, because it divides the country," she said in an interview with the Washington Post published Monday. "And he's just not worth it."

House Intelligence Committee Chairman Adam Schiff, D-Calif., agreed with Pelosi.

“I certainly agree that in the absence of very compelling evidence that either Mueller produces or we’re able to find, gaining the bipartisan support necessary, impeachment, to be successful, would be enormously difficult,” Schiff told reporters Monday night. “While I don’t exclude that possibility, I don’t think we should put the country through impeachment without that amount evidence.”

Many Democrats said that Pelosi has not changed her tune on impeachment, pointing out that she has not yet ruled it out.

“She said essentially what I’ve been saying. We’re not nearly there yet. We may or may not get there,” said House Judiciary Committee Chairman Jerry Nadler, D-N.Y.

Impeachment seems to be off the table at the moment. Ah well.
I read this as saying that until it is bipartisan, it is not going to actually result in impeachment and will simply be even more divisive. This is utterly pragmatic.

I have a different interpretation.

The Mueller investigation has provided no evidence that Trump colluded with Russia to win the election. The Mueller investigation has provided no evidence that Trump committed any crimes much less an impeachable offense.

I really hope they make Mueller's findings public for all of us, but I wouldn't hold my breath. I think Pelosi and company are setting the stage for when Mueller does present his final assessment. And I think that is also why Schiff is suddenly now pushing for more investigations into Trump's private business dealings. If Mueller had solid evidence then this wouldn't be necessary.

Would this then mean that Trump was utterly clueless about everything that was going on around him?

Versatile

  • Stubble
  • **
  • Posts: 118
Re: So Let's Speculate about the Future of a Full Trump Presidency...
« Reply #6280 on: March 12, 2019, 01:00:11 PM »
https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/congress/pelosi-s-impeachment-skepticism-draws-little-pushback-fellow-dems-n982191

“Impeachment is so divisive to the country that unless there's something so compelling and overwhelming and bipartisan, I don't think we should go down that path, because it divides the country," she said in an interview with the Washington Post published Monday. "And he's just not worth it."

House Intelligence Committee Chairman Adam Schiff, D-Calif., agreed with Pelosi.

“I certainly agree that in the absence of very compelling evidence that either Mueller produces or we’re able to find, gaining the bipartisan support necessary, impeachment, to be successful, would be enormously difficult,” Schiff told reporters Monday night. “While I don’t exclude that possibility, I don’t think we should put the country through impeachment without that amount evidence.”

Many Democrats said that Pelosi has not changed her tune on impeachment, pointing out that she has not yet ruled it out.

“She said essentially what I’ve been saying. We’re not nearly there yet. We may or may not get there,” said House Judiciary Committee Chairman Jerry Nadler, D-N.Y.

Impeachment seems to be off the table at the moment. Ah well.
I read this as saying that until it is bipartisan, it is not going to actually result in impeachment and will simply be even more divisive. This is utterly pragmatic.

I have a different interpretation.

The Mueller investigation has provided no evidence that Trump colluded with Russia to win the election. The Mueller investigation has provided no evidence that Trump committed any crimes much less an impeachable offense.

I really hope they make Mueller's findings public for all of us, but I wouldn't hold my breath. I think Pelosi and company are setting the stage for when Mueller does present his final assessment. And I think that is also why Schiff is suddenly now pushing for more investigations into Trump's private business dealings. If Mueller had solid evidence then this wouldn't be necessary.

Would this then mean that Trump was utterly clueless about everything that was going on around him?

You'll have to be more specific. Do you have an example?

sherr

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 611
  • Age: 33
  • Location: North Carolina
Re: So Let's Speculate about the Future of a Full Trump Presidency...
« Reply #6281 on: March 12, 2019, 01:15:40 PM »
The Mueller investigation has provided no evidence that Trump colluded with Russia to win the election. The Mueller investigation has provided no evidence that Trump committed any crimes much less an impeachable offense.

Except for his kids meeting with Russian agents to discuss dirt on Hillary and his campaign manager giving internal polling data to the Russians so that they can more effectively target their misinformation campaigns? And that's just what we know about currently.

Oh you mean Trump himself, that we can prove? How about asking Russia to hack the DNC to find "Hillary's missing emails" on TV?

Then you add in his obvious pattern of behavior or kowtowing to Putin at every opportunity and refusing to implement the sanctions that Congress places on Russian companies or people and the bizarre Helsinki joint speech where Trump essentially said "I asked him about interference and he says he didn't do it and I believe him over our all our own intelligence agencies" and on and on and on.

Come on.

thd7t

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1277
Re: So Let's Speculate about the Future of a Full Trump Presidency...
« Reply #6282 on: March 12, 2019, 01:28:57 PM »
https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/congress/pelosi-s-impeachment-skepticism-draws-little-pushback-fellow-dems-n982191

“Impeachment is so divisive to the country that unless there's something so compelling and overwhelming and bipartisan, I don't think we should go down that path, because it divides the country," she said in an interview with the Washington Post published Monday. "And he's just not worth it."

House Intelligence Committee Chairman Adam Schiff, D-Calif., agreed with Pelosi.

“I certainly agree that in the absence of very compelling evidence that either Mueller produces or we’re able to find, gaining the bipartisan support necessary, impeachment, to be successful, would be enormously difficult,” Schiff told reporters Monday night. “While I don’t exclude that possibility, I don’t think we should put the country through impeachment without that amount evidence.”

Many Democrats said that Pelosi has not changed her tune on impeachment, pointing out that she has not yet ruled it out.

“She said essentially what I’ve been saying. We’re not nearly there yet. We may or may not get there,” said House Judiciary Committee Chairman Jerry Nadler, D-N.Y.

Impeachment seems to be off the table at the moment. Ah well.
I read this as saying that until it is bipartisan, it is not going to actually result in impeachment and will simply be even more divisive. This is utterly pragmatic.

I have a different interpretation.

The Mueller investigation has provided no evidence that Trump colluded with Russia to win the election. The Mueller investigation has provided no evidence that Trump committed any crimes much less an impeachable offense.

I really hope they make Mueller's findings public for all of us, but I wouldn't hold my breath. I think Pelosi and company are setting the stage for when Mueller does present his final assessment. And I think that is also why Schiff is suddenly now pushing for more investigations into Trump's private business dealings. If Mueller had solid evidence then this wouldn't be necessary.

Would this then mean that Trump was utterly clueless about everything that was going on around him?

You'll have to be more specific. Do you have an example?
During his campaign, he hired a (now convicted) criminal to run the campaign, his deputy campaign manager was actively involved in a criminal conspiracy (now plead guilty), his top foreign policy advisor (and first Sec. Def.) was an unregistered foreign agent and lied to the FBI about contacts with Russia (now plead guilty), another campaign aide pleaded guilty to lying to the FBI about contacts with Russia.  He alleges that he didn't know about meetings taken by his campaign with representatives of foreign governments.  He had his personal lawyer appointed deputy finance chair of the RNC.  The same lawyer pursued Trump's business interests in Russia throughout the campaign.

That's a lot that was going on around him.  All of the aforementioned worked for his campaign and some worked directly for him.  The assumption that he was unaware of all of this would be ridiculous, even if Trump had not admitted (after some of these were made public) that he was aware of several parts of it.  These were some of his top people.

sherr

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 611
  • Age: 33
  • Location: North Carolina
Re: So Let's Speculate about the Future of a Full Trump Presidency...
« Reply #6283 on: March 12, 2019, 01:48:18 PM »
The Mueller investigation has provided no evidence that Trump colluded with Russia to win the election. The Mueller investigation has provided no evidence that Trump committed any crimes much less an impeachable offense.

Except for his kids meeting with Russian agents to discuss dirt on Hillary and his campaign manager giving internal polling data to the Russians so that they can more effectively target their misinformation campaigns? And that's just what we know about currently.

Oh you mean Trump himself, that we can prove? How about asking Russia to hack the DNC to find "Hillary's missing emails" on TV?

Then you add in his obvious pattern of behavior or kowtowing to Putin at every opportunity and refusing to implement the sanctions that Congress places on Russian companies or people and the bizarre Helsinki joint speech where Trump essentially said "I asked him about interference and he says he didn't do it and I believe him over our all our own intelligence agencies" and on and on and on.

Come on.

This is a relevant and worthwhile article @Versatile, I suggest you read it.

No, there hasn't been any video proof of Trump saying "I colluded with Russia to win the election." But there has been a ton of evidence, and any naked and unsupported claim to the contrary is pretty ridiculous. Especially considering that the Mueller investigation hasn't, you know, finished yet.
« Last Edit: March 12, 2019, 01:51:05 PM by sherr »

JLee

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 5319
Re: So Let's Speculate about the Future of a Full Trump Presidency...
« Reply #6284 on: March 12, 2019, 02:17:44 PM »
https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/congress/pelosi-s-impeachment-skepticism-draws-little-pushback-fellow-dems-n982191

“Impeachment is so divisive to the country that unless there's something so compelling and overwhelming and bipartisan, I don't think we should go down that path, because it divides the country," she said in an interview with the Washington Post published Monday. "And he's just not worth it."

House Intelligence Committee Chairman Adam Schiff, D-Calif., agreed with Pelosi.

“I certainly agree that in the absence of very compelling evidence that either Mueller produces or we’re able to find, gaining the bipartisan support necessary, impeachment, to be successful, would be enormously difficult,” Schiff told reporters Monday night. “While I don’t exclude that possibility, I don’t think we should put the country through impeachment without that amount evidence.”

Many Democrats said that Pelosi has not changed her tune on impeachment, pointing out that she has not yet ruled it out.

“She said essentially what I’ve been saying. We’re not nearly there yet. We may or may not get there,” said House Judiciary Committee Chairman Jerry Nadler, D-N.Y.

Impeachment seems to be off the table at the moment. Ah well.
I read this as saying that until it is bipartisan, it is not going to actually result in impeachment and will simply be even more divisive. This is utterly pragmatic.

I have a different interpretation.

The Mueller investigation has provided no evidence that Trump colluded with Russia to win the election. The Mueller investigation has provided no evidence that Trump committed any crimes much less an impeachable offense.

I really hope they make Mueller's findings public for all of us, but I wouldn't hold my breath. I think Pelosi and company are setting the stage for when Mueller does present his final assessment. And I think that is also why Schiff is suddenly now pushing for more investigations into Trump's private business dealings. If Mueller had solid evidence then this wouldn't be necessary.

Would this then mean that Trump was utterly clueless about everything that was going on around him?

You'll have to be more specific. Do you have an example?

1) George Papadopoulos, former Trump campaign foreign policy adviser, was arrested in July 2017 and pleaded guilty in October 2017 to making false statements to the FBI. He got a 14-day sentence.

2) Paul Manafort, Trump’s former campaign chair, was indicted on a total of 25 different counts by Mueller’s team, related mainly to his past work for Ukrainian politicians and his finances. He had two trials scheduled, and the first ended in a conviction on eight counts of financial crimes. To avert the second trial, Manafort struck a plea deal with Mueller in September 2018 (though Mueller’s team said in November that he breached that agreement by lying to them).

3) Rick Gates, a former Trump campaign aide and Manafort’s longtime junior business partner, was indicted on similar charges to Manafort. But in February 2018 he agreed to a plea deal with Mueller’s team, pleading guilty to just one false statements charge and one conspiracy charge.

4) Michael Flynn, Trump’s former national security adviser, pleaded guilty in December 2017 to making false statements to the FBI.

5-20) 13 Russian nationals and three Russian companies were indicted on conspiracy charges, with some also being accused of identity theft. The charges related to a Russian propaganda effort designed to interfere with the 2016 campaign. The companies involved are the Internet Research Agency, often described as a “Russian troll farm,” and two other companies that helped finance it. The Russian nationals indicted include 12 of the agency’s employees and its alleged financier, Yevgeny Prigozhin.

21) Richard Pinedo: This California man pleaded guilty to an identity theft charge in connection with the Russian indictments, and has agreed to cooperate with Mueller. He was sentenced to 6 months in prison and 6 months of home detention in October 2018.

22) Alex van der Zwaan: This London lawyer pleaded guilty to making false statements to the FBI about his contacts with Rick Gates and another unnamed person based in Ukraine. He was sentenced to 30 days in jail and has completed his sentence.

23) Konstantin Kilimnik: This longtime business associate of Manafort and Gates, who’s currently based in Russia, was charged alongside Manafort with attempting to obstruct justice by tampering with witnesses in Manafort’s pending case last year.

24-35) 12 Russian GRU officers: These officers of Russia’s military intelligence service were charged with crimes related to the hacking and leaking of leading Democrats’ emails in 2016.

36) Michael Cohen: In August 2018, Trump’s former lawyer pleaded guilty to 8 counts — tax and bank charges, related to his finances and taxi business, and campaign finance violations — related to hush money payments to women who alleged affairs with Donald Trump, as part of a separate investigation in New York (that Mueller had handed off). But in November, he made a plea deal with Mueller too, for lying to Congress about efforts to build a Trump Tower in Moscow.

37) Roger Stone: In January 2019, Mueller indicted longtime Trump adviser Roger Stone on 7 counts. He accused Stone of lying to the House Intelligence Committee about his efforts to get in touch with WikiLeaks during the campaign, and tampering with a witness who could have debunked his story.

source

GuitarStv

  • Senior Mustachian
  • ********
  • Posts: 12883
  • Age: 37
  • Location: Toronto, Ontario, Canada
Re: So Let's Speculate about the Future of a Full Trump Presidency...
« Reply #6285 on: March 12, 2019, 02:21:11 PM »
Yeah, but isn't it also possible that Trump is so extraordinarily and massively incompetent (as well as self absorbed) that he simply missed all of that stuff?  Being an idiot, he hired all of these people, and being a stupid he simply failed to realize what they were doing.  Maybe that's what Versatile is arguing . . .

JLee

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 5319
Re: So Let's Speculate about the Future of a Full Trump Presidency...
« Reply #6286 on: March 12, 2019, 02:30:56 PM »
Yeah, but isn't it also possible that Trump is so extraordinarily and massively incompetent (as well as self absorbed) that he simply missed all of that stuff?  Being an idiot, he hired all of these people, and being a stupid he simply failed to realize what they were doing.  Maybe that's what Versatile is arguing . . .

Quote from: JLee
Would this then mean that Trump was utterly clueless about everything that was going on around him?

;)

nereo

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 9847
  • Location: la belle province
    • Here's how you can support science today:
Re: So Let's Speculate about the Future of a Full Trump Presidency...
« Reply #6287 on: March 12, 2019, 02:36:28 PM »
Much like the word "collusion", what is an impeachable offense is largely ambiguous.  There is no legal statute for 'collusion' (only 'conspiracy'). 

As for an impeachable offense, the constitution defines it as "treason, bribery, or other high crimes and misdemeanors".  Short a conviction on treason or bribery (and many legal scholars will say that a sitting president cannot be indicted, only impeached) then the people who get to decide whether or not a particular action or series of actions warrants impeachment are the legislature.  In a kind of circular logic, a crime is only impeachable after a president gets impeached for doing it.

So supporters of DJT can shout "no collusion" and "none of it is impeachable" and technically be correct - unless the House votes to impeach. Nothing Nixon did was impeachable because he left office.  Now with Pelosi's statement and 2020 just around the bend it seems likely that nothing DJT has done will be impeachable either.

Versatile

  • Stubble
  • **
  • Posts: 118
Re: So Let's Speculate about the Future of a Full Trump Presidency...
« Reply #6288 on: March 12, 2019, 09:45:19 PM »
Yeah, but isn't it also possible that Trump is so extraordinarily and massively incompetent (as well as self absorbed) that he simply missed all of that stuff?  Being an idiot, he hired all of these people, and being a stupid he simply failed to realize what they were doing.  Maybe that's what Versatile is arguing . . .

I'll let you know what I am arguing or better yet explaining tomorrow. Keep in mind I want to answer your guys questions as best I can but I fear that the mods are going ban me or put up walls to prevent me from doing so. But I will continue to be respectful and answer as truthfully as I can.

gentmach

  • Bristles
  • ***
  • Posts: 302
Re: So Let's Speculate about the Future of a Full Trump Presidency...
« Reply #6289 on: March 13, 2019, 01:59:44 AM »
https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/congress/pelosi-s-impeachment-skepticism-draws-little-pushback-fellow-dems-n982191

“Impeachment is so divisive to the country that unless there's something so compelling and overwhelming and bipartisan, I don't think we should go down that path, because it divides the country," she said in an interview with the Washington Post published Monday. "And he's just not worth it."

House Intelligence Committee Chairman Adam Schiff, D-Calif., agreed with Pelosi.

“I certainly agree that in the absence of very compelling evidence that either Mueller produces or we’re able to find, gaining the bipartisan support necessary, impeachment, to be successful, would be enormously difficult,” Schiff told reporters Monday night. “While I don’t exclude that possibility, I don’t think we should put the country through impeachment without that amount evidence.”

Many Democrats said that Pelosi has not changed her tune on impeachment, pointing out that she has not yet ruled it out.

“She said essentially what I’ve been saying. We’re not nearly there yet. We may or may not get there,” said House Judiciary Committee Chairman Jerry Nadler, D-N.Y.

Impeachment seems to be off the table at the moment. Ah well.
I read this as saying that until it is bipartisan, it is not going to actually result in impeachment and will simply be even more divisive. This is utterly pragmatic.

I have a different interpretation.

The Mueller investigation has provided no evidence that Trump colluded with Russia to win the election. The Mueller investigation has provided no evidence that Trump committed any crimes much less an impeachable offense.

I really hope they make Mueller's findings public for all of us, but I wouldn't hold my breath. I think Pelosi and company are setting the stage for when Mueller does present his final assessment. And I think that is also why Schiff is suddenly now pushing for more investigations into Trump's private business dealings. If Mueller had solid evidence then this wouldn't be necessary.

Would this then mean that Trump was utterly clueless about everything that was going on around him?

You'll have to be more specific. Do you have an example?

1) George Papadopoulos, former Trump campaign foreign policy adviser, was arrested in July 2017 and pleaded guilty in October 2017 to making false statements to the FBI. He got a 14-day sentence.

2) Paul Manafort, Trump’s former campaign chair, was indicted on a total of 25 different counts by Mueller’s team, related mainly to his past work for Ukrainian politicians and his finances. He had two trials scheduled, and the first ended in a conviction on eight counts of financial crimes. To avert the second trial, Manafort struck a plea deal with Mueller in September 2018 (though Mueller’s team said in November that he breached that agreement by lying to them).

3) Rick Gates, a former Trump campaign aide and Manafort’s longtime junior business partner, was indicted on similar charges to Manafort. But in February 2018 he agreed to a plea deal with Mueller’s team, pleading guilty to just one false statements charge and one conspiracy charge.

4) Michael Flynn, Trump’s former national security adviser, pleaded guilty in December 2017 to making false statements to the FBI.

5-20) 13 Russian nationals and three Russian companies were indicted on conspiracy charges, with some also being accused of identity theft. The charges related to a Russian propaganda effort designed to interfere with the 2016 campaign. The companies involved are the Internet Research Agency, often described as a “Russian troll farm,” and two other companies that helped finance it. The Russian nationals indicted include 12 of the agency’s employees and its alleged financier, Yevgeny Prigozhin.

21) Richard Pinedo: This California man pleaded guilty to an identity theft charge in connection with the Russian indictments, and has agreed to cooperate with Mueller. He was sentenced to 6 months in prison and 6 months of home detention in October 2018.

22) Alex van der Zwaan: This London lawyer pleaded guilty to making false statements to the FBI about his contacts with Rick Gates and another unnamed person based in Ukraine. He was sentenced to 30 days in jail and has completed his sentence.

23) Konstantin Kilimnik: This longtime business associate of Manafort and Gates, who’s currently based in Russia, was charged alongside Manafort with attempting to obstruct justice by tampering with witnesses in Manafort’s pending case last year.

24-35) 12 Russian GRU officers: These officers of Russia’s military intelligence service were charged with crimes related to the hacking and leaking of leading Democrats’ emails in 2016.

36) Michael Cohen: In August 2018, Trump’s former lawyer pleaded guilty to 8 counts — tax and bank charges, related to his finances and taxi business, and campaign finance violations — related to hush money payments to women who alleged affairs with Donald Trump, as part of a separate investigation in New York (that Mueller had handed off). But in November, he made a plea deal with Mueller too, for lying to Congress about efforts to build a Trump Tower in Moscow.

37) Roger Stone: In January 2019, Mueller indicted longtime Trump adviser Roger Stone on 7 counts. He accused Stone of lying to the House Intelligence Committee about his efforts to get in touch with WikiLeaks during the campaign, and tampering with a witness who could have debunked his story.

source

We had a thread going over this. It seems to have lost steam after the Cohen testimony. Cohen seemingly making Trump look incompetent and over his head.

Personally the nail in the coffin was when Democrats gave Trump the FISA act without amending it so the FBI  would be required to obtain a warrant to search the gathered intelligence. Giving a traitorous potential dictator the capability to comb through people's electronic communications seems like a very, very bad idea, but it made sense to enough people to take the risk.

GuitarStv

  • Senior Mustachian
  • ********
  • Posts: 12883
  • Age: 37
  • Location: Toronto, Ontario, Canada
Re: So Let's Speculate about the Future of a Full Trump Presidency...
« Reply #6290 on: March 13, 2019, 06:38:48 AM »
Yeah, but isn't it also possible that Trump is so extraordinarily and massively incompetent (as well as self absorbed) that he simply missed all of that stuff?  Being an idiot, he hired all of these people, and being a stupid he simply failed to realize what they were doing.  Maybe that's what Versatile is arguing . . .

I'll let you know what I am arguing or better yet explaining tomorrow. Keep in mind I want to answer your guys questions as best I can but I fear that the mods are going ban me or put up walls to prevent me from doing so. But I will continue to be respectful and answer as truthfully as I can.

I have it on good authority (the best really) that any walls moderators erect on this forum will be paid for by Mexico.

tralfamadorian

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1168
Re: So Let's Speculate about the Future of a Full Trump Presidency...
« Reply #6291 on: March 13, 2019, 07:04:58 AM »
Trump is proposing eliminating the PSLF in his latest budget.

talltexan

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 2233
Re: So Let's Speculate about the Future of a Full Trump Presidency...
« Reply #6292 on: March 13, 2019, 07:41:57 AM »
@Versatile, I hope you'll give some consideration to the ideas here. I feel like there's a very high bar for you to believe that these investigations into Trump are anything other than a witch hunt. I, too, have often wondered why I dismissed books by obvious political hacks like Clinton Cash and The Amateur so readily.

While I don't exactly know your background, my guess is that you believe that the media are only ganging up on Trump now that he's threatening them with real political power. When he was merely rich and famous, they loved him. Perhaps you're jaded by political correctness and feel like a lot of glue that held society together has melted in the face of Chinese imports. I'd encourage you to go into more detail about why you're so skeptical of the Mueller investigation.

GuitarStv

  • Senior Mustachian
  • ********
  • Posts: 12883
  • Age: 37
  • Location: Toronto, Ontario, Canada
Re: So Let's Speculate about the Future of a Full Trump Presidency...
« Reply #6293 on: March 13, 2019, 08:08:47 AM »
Trump is proposing eliminating the PSLF in his latest budget.


Makes sense.

Everyone's dad pays for schooling.  And then when you can't cut it, your dad just makes multi-million dollar contributions to the school until your failures go away magically, right?

sol

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 8213
  • Age: 42
  • Location: Pacific Northwest
Re: So Let's Speculate about the Future of a Full Trump Presidency...
« Reply #6294 on: March 13, 2019, 08:33:14 AM »
Makes sense.

Everyone's dad pays for schooling.  And then when you can't cut it, your dad just makes multi-million dollar contributions to the school until your failures go away magically, right?

Does the current college admissions scandal also lead back to Trump?  You know, like every other scandal in the country seems to these days?

Like how the Patriot's team owner was caught patronizing a handjob parlor, and everyone was like "oooh, dirty sex scandal in the NFL!"  And then it turns out that the person who owned the chain of handjob parlors was actually running a sex slavery ring and was close enough friends with Donald Trump that she was literally selling access to the Trump family to Chinese investors?  That's another case where a seemingly unrelated case of morally reprehensible illegal activity ties back to the Trumps in a seemingly inevitable circle-jerk of corruption and graft, with spokes all connected to DJT.

Maybe this college cheating/bribery scam also ties back to Trump?  Did his parent's buy his way into college?  Did he buy his own children's way into college?  Did he personally start the current scandal-ridden process by opening negotiations with colleges to circumvent their admission policies?  These days, every time a new scandal hits the news cycle I just sort of automatically assume the Trumps are involved somehow even if it's not immediately obvious how.

Cool Friend

  • Stubble
  • **
  • Posts: 221
Re: So Let's Speculate about the Future of a Full Trump Presidency...
« Reply #6295 on: March 13, 2019, 08:38:20 AM »
Makes sense.

Everyone's dad pays for schooling.  And then when you can't cut it, your dad just makes multi-million dollar contributions to the school until your failures go away magically, right?

Does the current college admissions scandal also lead back to Trump?  You know, like every other scandal in the country seems to these days?

Like how the Patriot's team owner was caught patronizing a handjob parlor, and everyone was like "oooh, dirty sex scandal in the NFL!"  And then it turns out that the person who owned the chain of handjob parlors was actually running a sex slavery ring and was close enough friends with Donald Trump that she was literally selling access to the Trump family to Chinese investors?  That's another case where a seemingly unrelated case of morally reprehensible illegal activity ties back to the Trumps in a seemingly inevitable circle-jerk of corruption and graft, with spokes all connected to DJT.

Maybe this college cheating/bribery scam also ties back to Trump?  Did his parent's buy his way into college?  Did he buy his own children's way into college?  Did he personally start the current scandal-ridden process by opening negotiations with colleges to circumvent their admission policies?  These days, every time a new scandal hits the news cycle I just sort of automatically assume the Trumps are involved somehow even if it's not immediately obvious how.

Well, if Cohen's recent testimony is to be believed, Trump ordered him to threaten the schools he attended in order to cover up his records.  So he would definitely have something to hide where his education is concerned.

JLee

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 5319
Re: So Let's Speculate about the Future of a Full Trump Presidency...
« Reply #6296 on: March 13, 2019, 08:52:39 AM »
Makes sense.

Everyone's dad pays for schooling.  And then when you can't cut it, your dad just makes multi-million dollar contributions to the school until your failures go away magically, right?

Does the current college admissions scandal also lead back to Trump?  You know, like every other scandal in the country seems to these days?

Like how the Patriot's team owner was caught patronizing a handjob parlor, and everyone was like "oooh, dirty sex scandal in the NFL!"  And then it turns out that the person who owned the chain of handjob parlors was actually running a sex slavery ring and was close enough friends with Donald Trump that she was literally selling access to the Trump family to Chinese investors?  That's another case where a seemingly unrelated case of morally reprehensible illegal activity ties back to the Trumps in a seemingly inevitable circle-jerk of corruption and graft, with spokes all connected to DJT.

Maybe this college cheating/bribery scam also ties back to Trump?  Did his parent's buy his way into college?  Did he buy his own children's way into college?  Did he personally start the current scandal-ridden process by opening negotiations with colleges to circumvent their admission policies?  These days, every time a new scandal hits the news cycle I just sort of automatically assume the Trumps are involved somehow even if it's not immediately obvious how.

https://www.thedp.com/article/2016/11/trumps-history-of-donating-to-penn

Quote
This string of donations Trump may have made in the late nineties roughly coincides with his children’s enrollment at Penn. Donald J. Trump Jr. began classes at Penn in 1996 and Ivanka Trump in 2000.

and: https://theweek.com/speedreads/828809/donald-trump-jr-tried-mock-hollywood-college-admissions-bribery-scandal-didnt-well

Dabnasty

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1496
Re: So Let's Speculate about the Future of a Full Trump Presidency...
« Reply #6297 on: March 13, 2019, 08:54:08 AM »
@Versatile, I hope you'll give some consideration to the ideas here. I feel like there's a very high bar for you to believe that these investigations into Trump are anything other than a witch hunt. I, too, have often wondered why I dismissed books by obvious political hacks like Clinton Cash and The Amateur so readily.

While I don't exactly know your background, my guess is that you believe that the media are only ganging up on Trump now that he's threatening them with real political power. When he was merely rich and famous, they loved him. Perhaps you're jaded by political correctness and feel like a lot of glue that held society together has melted in the face of Chinese imports. I'd encourage you to go into more detail about why you're so skeptical of the Mueller investigation.

Doesn't look like Versatile will be responding on account of the new 100 post policy to participate in "Off Topic"

JLee

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 5319
Re: So Let's Speculate about the Future of a Full Trump Presidency...
« Reply #6298 on: March 13, 2019, 09:32:39 AM »
@Versatile, I hope you'll give some consideration to the ideas here. I feel like there's a very high bar for you to believe that these investigations into Trump are anything other than a witch hunt. I, too, have often wondered why I dismissed books by obvious political hacks like Clinton Cash and The Amateur so readily.

While I don't exactly know your background, my guess is that you believe that the media are only ganging up on Trump now that he's threatening them with real political power. When he was merely rich and famous, they loved him. Perhaps you're jaded by political correctness and feel like a lot of glue that held society together has melted in the face of Chinese imports. I'd encourage you to go into more detail about why you're so skeptical of the Mueller investigation.

Doesn't look like Versatile will be responding on account of the new 100 post policy to participate in "Off Topic"

They're at 101 posts now, could be back at any moment!

Dabnasty

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1496
Re: So Let's Speculate about the Future of a Full Trump Presidency...
« Reply #6299 on: March 13, 2019, 09:46:08 AM »
@Versatile, I hope you'll give some consideration to the ideas here. I feel like there's a very high bar for you to believe that these investigations into Trump are anything other than a witch hunt. I, too, have often wondered why I dismissed books by obvious political hacks like Clinton Cash and The Amateur so readily.

While I don't exactly know your background, my guess is that you believe that the media are only ganging up on Trump now that he's threatening them with real political power. When he was merely rich and famous, they loved him. Perhaps you're jaded by political correctness and feel like a lot of glue that held society together has melted in the face of Chinese imports. I'd encourage you to go into more detail about why you're so skeptical of the Mueller investigation.

Doesn't look like Versatile will be responding on account of the new 100 post policy to participate in "Off Topic"

They're at 101 posts now, could be back at any moment!

The requirement is for 100 posts in threads that are not "off topic". Since Versatile was posting in off topic before the rule was implemented, most (all?) of their posts are in the off topic section. Not sure how closely or strictly mods will look at that, but I for one don't mind if Versatile wants to participate in this thread. I think they've shown they're not here just to stir things up and gave a decent explanation for reading but not participating in other threads - already financially independent.