Is the end near for Trump?

[Colt]

Compared to

So what did you think Trump's political ideology was when you voted for him, and have you changed your mind about what that is? If not, why would you post that you would vote for either Clinton over Trump, and if so, you misjudged his character, and you misjudged his intentions. Yet you still seem to have confidence in your political judgment.

And it seems that you still support the Republican party, which is nothing but his puppet now, and if they ever get another candidate into the White House, it will be somebody with Trump's ethics and authoritarian vision, but smarter. Republicans don't respect any other kind of person and they tolerate no dissent from their ranks as we saw with Liz Cheney and Adam Kinzinger. I consider that an error in judgment, too. Those people are not your friends.

Not a good reason. You should have stopped at caustic and add a threat to democracy. I'm guessing that you don't believe that.

And here's the judgment thing again. You seem to accept the idea that Trump is being treated unfairly when he is investigated then prosecuted, that these aren't valid criminal investigations that Trump inspires. Your main objection to Trump isn't the man but rather the response he elicits. If so, you've missed the mark again. Divisive and caustic are reason enough to reject the man.

Yes, but your judgment is suspect. You keep getting it wrong. Haven't you noticed?

What do you think the Republican party stands for? Please answer what it is now with Trump leading it, and what it would be if he dropped dead tomorrow. What do you think its goals and agenda are now and would be then?

I'll bet your answers would look nothing like mine. But then, I didn't make the mistakes you have. I didn't make errors in judgment regarding Trump, nor about the Republican party. Don't you think you should defer your judgment to people that didn't make the mistakes you did?

If you had a friend that correctly predicted the winner of the last ten Super Bowls during which time you kept getting it wrong, at what point would you begin to think that maybe you should defer your judgment to his?

If every time you opened a business it failed, at what point would you realize that your business judgment was bad and not to be trusted again?

Compared to where we are now Bill Clinton was a moderate (R).

The DNC paying Russian spies for outrageous claims that were fed to the secret FISA courts is a threat to our democracy!

I still support the agenda items of Trump and the (R)'s in 2016, I just see that the nation has reached a critical mass of people who will demand more of a Democratic Socialist regime, so America is in the twilight of a once great nation.

 

[Colt]

I can't find anything anywhere on his political affiliation.

You don't have to be a Democrat to think Donald Trump is a human trash and not fit for the office of the Presidency.


Remember James Comey? Republican.
Christopher Wray? Republican.
Neither of whom have allowed politics to cloud their minds in regards to doing their jobs.

The FBI deteriorated under Comey's tenure which led to being fired.

 

[It Aint Necessarily So]

Compared to where we are now Bill Clinton was a moderate (R).

Clinton was and is a liberal. Cheney was and is a moderate Republican. So was Romney.

The DNC paying Russian spies for outrageous claims that were fed to the secret FISA courts is a threat to our democracy!

Really? Would you put it on par with an insurrection.

I don't see any threat to American democracy even were it as you described.

Maybe you're doing what Trump does when he equates himself with America. Whenever he says, "our country," substitute "me," and you'll get a better sense of what he's actually saying. "This is a disgrace to our country" means it harmed him. Look at this Trump quote:

"(Mike Pence) has the absolute right to do it [prevent the certification of the election on Jan6, 2021]. We're supposed to protect our country, support our country, support our Constitution, and protect our constitution." That means that Trump expects Pence to support Trump.

I still support the agenda items of Trump and the (R)'s in 2016

His stated agenda was pretty much limited to repealing Obamacare, maybe attempting to recriminalize abortion, and building a wall that Mexico would pay for. His actual agenda was to acquire power for personal gain, and still is, although now the stakes are higher with prison looming large if he can't seize authoritarian control of the government. Previously, it was only about grifting America, and I'm sure he's like to get back to looting America and being seen as a player again, but now, his head is on the chopping block and he is powerless against the forces that will be taking everything he has from him unless he wins again.

America is in the twilight of a once great nation.

At last, something we agree on, although we disagree on the reason, and probably the prognosis. I think it very likely that the American electorate will return the White House and both branches of Congress to the Republicans within the next 2-3 presidential cycles, and ordinary Americans lives will become progressively worse with no democratic remedy available again, just sham elections like with Putin. As you likely know, we've moved on to greener pastures, no longer wishing to throw in with the American electorate and the apparent death wish of about half of it. Maybe that's something else we agree on.

I liken America to a business with two partners, one who keeps making mistakes and one who has to keep fixing them. One keeps contracting with CEOs with no knowledge of the business and whose only interest is to enrich himself. Would you invest in such a business?

 

[Laniakea]

Even FOX News may think so. A recent poll has Biden beating Trump by 50 to 44 percent. I wonder how Nikki is polling? Oh, she still beats Biden.

Nikki can't even beat "None of these Candidates".

'None of these candidates' defeats Nikki Haley in Nevada Republican primary, NBC News projects

Donald Trump was not on the Nevada primary ballot.

www.cnbc.com

 

[Colt]

Clinton was and is a liberal. Cheney was and is a moderate Republican. So was Romney.

Really? Would you put it on par with an insurrection.

I don't see any threat to American democracy even were it as you described.

Maybe you're doing what Trump does when he equates himself with America. Whenever he says, "our country," substitute "me," and you'll get a better sense of what he's actually saying. "This is a disgrace to our country" means it harmed him. Look at this Trump quote:

"(Mike Pence) has the absolute right to do it [prevent the certification of the election on Jan6, 2021]. We're supposed to protect our country, support our country, support our Constitution, and protect our constitution." That means that Trump expects Pence to support Trump.

His stated agenda was pretty much limited to repealing Obamacare, maybe attempting to recriminalize abortion, and building a wall that Mexico would pay for. His actual agenda was to acquire power for personal gain, and still is, although now the stakes are higher with prison looming large if he can't seize authoritarian control of the government. Previously, it was only about grifting America, and I'm sure he's like to get back to looting America and being seen as a player again, but now, his head is on the chopping block and he is powerless against the forces that will be taking everything he has from him unless he wins again.

At last, something we agree on, although we disagree on the reason, and probably the prognosis. I think it very likely that the American electorate will return the White House and both branches of Congress to the Republicans within the next 2-3 presidential cycles, and ordinary Americans lives will become progressively worse with no democratic remedy available again, just sham elections like with Putin. As you likely know, we've moved on to greener pastures, no longer wishing to throw in with the American electorate and the apparent death wish of about half of it. Maybe that's something else we agree on.

I liken America to a business with two partners, one who keeps making mistakes and one who has to keep fixing them. One keeps contracting with CEOs with no knowledge of the business and whose only interest is to enrich himself. Would you invest in such a business?

The claim of insurrection is wishful thinking, it was really a bunch of yahoos rioting!

 

[fantome profane]

The claim of insurrection is wishful thinking, it was really a bunch of yahoos rioting!

How many court cases have there been so far that have declared it to be an insurrection? I can think of three right now, but I think there have been more.

You can call it a tea party if you want, you can even think of it as a tea party. But legally speaking it was an insurrection.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Nikki can't even beat "None of these Candidates".

'None of these candidates' defeats Nikki Haley in Nevada Republican primary, NBC News projects

Donald Trump was not on the Nevada primary ballot.

www.cnbc.com

As usual you either did not read the article or you did not understand it.

 

[It Aint Necessarily So]

The claim of insurrection is wishful thinking, it was really a bunch of yahoos rioting!

As Fantome already noted, it has already been adjudicated an insurrection and likely will again in the DC case Smith is prosecuting. The wishful thinking is all yours. If it weren't an insurrection, you could say specifically what you thought it lacked that an insurrection requires, but you can't. It was a violent uprising against the government. Those two element alone define it as an insurrection.

Yes, it was laughably conceived and executed, but that doesn't make it any less an insurrection that a badly conceived and executed bank robbery or kidnapping aren't criminally prosecutable actions.

But it was only one prong of a failed self-coup, which it seems was close to being successful, one which included many other crimes in addition to a failed insurrection such as election tampering through fake electors, illegal telephone calls to secretaries of state, intimidation of the governor of Michigan, tampering with voting machines, defamation of the manufacturers of voting machines, intimidating election workers, and a violation of oath of office.

 

[Subduction Zone]

The claim of insurrection is wishful thinking, it was really a bunch of yahoos rioting!

I would say that the judges that claimed otherwise probably understand the law far better than you or I do. How many years of law school have you had?

 

[Evangelicalhumanist]

The claim of insurrection is wishful thinking, it was really a bunch of yahoos rioting!

They achieved the objective of stopping (for a time) the Constitutional duty of counting and confirming the electoral votes and declaring a President on January 6. Both houses in Congress were cleared, the members finding shelter where they could, and the vote was not affirmed until January 7.

 

[Evangelicalhumanist]

As Fantome already noted, it has already been adjudicated an insurrection and likely will again in the DC case Smith is prosecuting. The wishful thinking is all yours. If it weren't an insurrection, you could say specifically what you thought it lacked that an insurrection requires, but you can't. It was a violent uprising against the government. Those two element alone define it as an insurrection.

Yes, it was laughably conceived and executed, but that doesn't make it any less an insurrection that a badly conceived and executed bank robbery or kidnapping aren't criminally prosecutable actions.

But it was only one prong of a failed self-coup, which it seems was close to being successful, one which included many other crimes in addition to a failed insurrection such as election tampering through fake electors, illegal telephone calls to secretaries of state, intimidation of the governor of Michigan, tampering with voting machines, defamation of the manufacturers of voting machines, intimidating election workers, and a violation of oath of office.

Exactly right! A failed attempt at a coup is nonetheless an attempt at a coup. And if that is illegal, then the attempt, though it didn't succeed, is just as illegal as it would have been had it succeeded beyond anyone's expectation.

 

[fantome profane]

Exactly right! A failed attempt at a coup is nonetheless an attempt at a coup. And if that is illegal, then the attempt, though it didn't succeed, is just as illegal as it would have been had it succeeded beyond anyone's expectation.

A failed attempt at a coup is a dress rehearsal.

 

[JIMMY12345]

Even FOX News may think so. A recent poll has Biden beating Trump by 50 to 44 percent. I wonder how Nikki is polling? Oh, she still beats Biden.

No the end is not nigh for Trump.

He has the Republican nomination.

He is seen as Putin's poodle in Europe.He will stop the next Ukraine arms delivery by USA .He will pressure a few Republicans to block the coming vote.Even if it can be passed as a SEPARATE motion.

This means the compromise deal on immigration Biden agreed to will also be blocked.The immigration delay will win him both votes from Democrats and Republicans.Note they are sympathetic to immigrants but over a certain number will mean issues for housing and education.

This will win him POTUS 2024!

 

[SkepticThinker]

The FBI deteriorated under Comey's tenure which led to being fired.

Nah ...

"Rudy Giuliani on Wednesday night said President Donald Trump fired James Comey because the former FBI director wouldn’t offer public assurances that Trump wasn’t a target of an investigation.

“He fired Comey because Comey would not, among other things, say that he wasn’t a target of the investigation,” the former New York mayor, who recently joined Trump’s legal team, told Fox News’ Sean Hannity. “He’s entitled to that. Hillary Clinton got that and he couldn’t get that. So he fired him and he said, ‘I’m free of this guy.’”

Comey had previously said that he told Trump he wasn’t the focus of an investigation but that the president pressed him to make a public statement. The former FBI director said he never made a public statement for several reasons, including the possibility that Trump’s actions would eventually come under review by the FBI.


The president has changed his reason for firing Comey since he dismissed the former FBI director in May 2017. The White House initially said Trump fired Comey at the recommendation of Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein, who penned a memo suggesting firing Comey over his handling of the investigation into Clinton’s use of a private email server.
However, several days later, the president told NBC’s Lester Holt that he fired Comey over the investigation into Russian collusion.
“When I decided to just do it, I said to myself, I said, you know, this Russia thing with Trump and Russia is a made-up story,” Trump said at the time of the decision to dismiss Comey.
More recently, Trump tweeted in April that Comey “was not fired because of the phony Russia investigation.”

Giuliani: Trump fired Comey because former FBI director wouldn't say he wasn't a target in investigation

The president has changed his reason for Comey.

www.politico.com

The Comey firing, as retold by the Mueller report

Special counsel Robert Mueller's report provides a blow-by-blow chronology of the May 2017 firing of FBI Director James Comey.

apnews.com

 

[metis]

Trump was able to fill the front row of a debate with women Bill Clinton had assaulted over the years, but Clinton was still elected twice!

There some of us who felt he should resign.

So, me thinks the (D)'s fain outrage about such things as morality, integrity or honesty. Oddly, politically speaking, today I would be more likely to vote for either of the Clintons than Trump.

So, this excuses what Trump did to allegedly 26 women, one he he's been convicted of?

 

[metis]

The DNC paying Russian spies for outrageous claims that were fed to the secret FISA courts is a threat to our democracy!

The Pubs did it first until Trump got the nomination, plus Steele said these were allegtions against Trump that he couldn';t confirm. Obamas also refused to make them public. Two of the FISA warrants were corrupted by two FBI agents who later left, but other than them leaving it really doesn't amount to a hill of beans one way or the other.

IOW, you're "making a mountain out of a molehill".

 

[Evangelicalhumanist]

No the end is not nigh for Trump.

He has the Republican nomination.

He is seen as Putin's poodle in Europe.He will stop the next Ukraine arms delivery by USA .He will pressure a few Republicans to block the coming vote.Even if it can be passed as a SEPARATE motion.

This means the compromise deal on immigration Biden agreed to will also be blocked.The immigration delay will win him both votes from Democrats and Republicans.Note they are sympathetic to immigrants but over a certain number will mean issues for housing and education.

This will win him POTUS 2024!

A most odd bit of "reasoning."

 

[Colt]

I would say that the judges that claimed otherwise probably understand the law far better than you or I do. How many years of law school have you had?

Nah ...

"Rudy Giuliani on Wednesday night said President Donald Trump fired James Comey because the former FBI director wouldn’t offer public assurances that Trump wasn’t a target of an investigation.

“He fired Comey because Comey would not, among other things, say that he wasn’t a target of the investigation,” the former New York mayor, who recently joined Trump’s legal team, told Fox News’ Sean Hannity. “He’s entitled to that. Hillary Clinton got that and he couldn’t get that. So he fired him and he said, ‘I’m free of this guy.’”

Comey had previously said that he told Trump he wasn’t the focus of an investigation but that the president pressed him to make a public statement. The former FBI director said he never made a public statement for several reasons, including the possibility that Trump’s actions would eventually come under review by the FBI.


The president has changed his reason for firing Comey since he dismissed the former FBI director in May 2017. The White House initially said Trump fired Comey at the recommendation of Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein, who penned a memo suggesting firing Comey over his handling of the investigation into Clinton’s use of a private email server.
However, several days later, the president told NBC’s Lester Holt that he fired Comey over the investigation into Russian collusion.
“When I decided to just do it, I said to myself, I said, you know, this Russia thing with Trump and Russia is a made-up story,” Trump said at the time of the decision to dismiss Comey.
More recently, Trump tweeted in April that Comey “was not fired because of the phony Russia investigation.”

Giuliani: Trump fired Comey because former FBI director wouldn't say he wasn't a target in investigation

The president has changed his reason for Comey.

www.politico.com

The Comey firing, as retold by the Mueller report

Special counsel Robert Mueller's report provides a blow-by-blow chronology of the May 2017 firing of FBI Director James Comey.

apnews.com

Nah,
Wiki

Dismissal​

On May 8, 2017, Trump directed Attorney General Sessions and Deputy Attorney General Rosenstein to provide advice and input in writing.[47] On Trump's direction, on May 9, Rosenstein prepared and delivered a memorandum to Sessions relating to Comey (Sessions and Rosenstein had already begun considering whether to dismiss Comey months earlier).[47] Rosenstein's memorandum said that the "reputation and credibility" of the FBI had been damaged under Comey's tenure, and the memo presented critical quotes from several former attorneys general in previously published op-eds; Rosenstein concluded that their "nearly unanimous opinions" were that Comey's handling of the Hillary Clinton email investigation was "wrong."[5] In his memo, Rosenstein asserted that the FBI must have "a Director who understands the gravity of the mistakes and pledges never to repeat them." He ended with an argument against keeping Comey as FBI director, on the grounds that he was given an opportunity to "admit his errors" but that there is no hope that he will "implement the necessary corrective actions."[48] Rosenstein also criticized Comey on two other grounds: for usurping the prerogative of the Justice Department and the Attorney General in his July 2016 public statements announcing the closure of the investigation into Clinton's emails, and for making derogatory comments about Clinton in that same meeting.[49] Both of these actions, he argued, were in conflict with longstanding FBI practice. To Comey's previous defense that Attorney General Loretta Lynch had a conflict of interest, Rosenstein argued that in such a case, it is the duty of the Attorney General to recuse herself, and that there is a process for another Justice Department official to take over her duties.[50]

 

[Colt]

The Pubs did it first until Trump got the nomination, plus Steele said these were allegtions against Trump that he couldn';t confirm. Obamas also refused to make them public. Two of the FISA warrants were corrupted by two FBI agents who later left, but other than them leaving it really doesn't amount to a hill of beans one way or the other.

IOW, you're "making a mountain out of a molehill".

IMOP


No, the Pubs didn't "do it" first, it being Russian intelligence agents spoon-feeding salacious claims into a dossier funded by the DNC!

Two research operations and confusion between them​

The opposition research conducted by Fusion GPS on Donald Trump was in two distinct operations, each with a different client. First were the Republicans, funded by The Washington Free Beacon. Then came the Democrats, funded by the DNC and the Clinton campaign.

• The Republican operation, from October 2015 to May 2016, focused on Trump's domestic business and entertainment activities; was performed by Fusion GPS; and used Wayne Barrett's files and public sources. Immediately after the publication of the dossier, the media sometimes falsely assumed that the dossier started as a product of this research, so the Free Beacon released this statement: "none of the work product that the Free Beacon received appears in the Steele dossier".[39][40]
  
  
• The Democratic operation, from April 2016 to December 2016, was focused on Trump's Russian connections; was subcontracted to Steele/Orbis; and used Steele's own source network and public sources. Only this second operation produced the dossier.[41][42]
  
  
  On June 2016, Fusion GPS subcontracted Steele's firm, Orbis Business Intelligence, to compile the dossier. After the election, DNC officials denied knowing their attorney had contracted with Fusion GPS, and Steele asserted he was not aware the Clinton campaign was the recipient of his research until months after he contracted with Fusion GPS.[27][28] While compiling the dossier, Steele passed his findings to both British and American intelligence services.[10][29]
  
  
  
  

• FEC fines Hillary Clinton campaign and DNC over Trump-Russia dossier research​

  By Marshall Cohen
  2 minute read
  Published 5:29 PM EDT, Wed March 30, 2022
  

  
  ​

  Federal election regulators fined Hillary Clinton’s 2016 presidential campaign and the Democratic National Committee earlier this month for not properly disclosing the money they spent on controversial opposition research that led to the infamous Trump-Russia dossier.
  
  The DNC was fined $105,000 and the Clinton campaign was fined $8,000, according to a letter sent by the Federal Election Commission to a conservative group that requested an inquiry.
  
  
  
  Trump brazenly asks Putin to release dirt about Biden's family
  Political candidates and groups are required to publicly disclose their spending to the FEC, and they must explain the purpose of any specific expenditure more than $200. The FEC concluded that the Clinton campaign and DNC misreported the money that funded the dossier, masking it as “legal services” and “legal and compliance consulting” instead of opposition research.
  
  
  The dossier was compiled by retired British spy Christopher Steele. It contained unverified and salacious allegations about Donald Trump, including claims that his campaign colluded with the Kremlin to win the 2016 election. Trump’s campaign had numerous contacts with Russian agents, and embraced Russian help, but no one was ever formally accused of conspiring with Russia.
  
  The money trail behind the Steele dossier has been a subject of intense political scrutiny for years. More than $1 million flowed from the Clinton campaign and DNC to the law firm Perkins Coie, which then hired the opposition research company Fusion GPS. That company later hired Steele and asked him to use his overseas contacts to dig up dirt about Trump’s ties to Russia.
  
  
  

 

[SkepticThinker]

Nah,
Wiki

Dismissal​

On May 8, 2017, Trump directed Attorney General Sessions and Deputy Attorney General Rosenstein to provide advice and input in writing.[47] On Trump's direction, on May 9, Rosenstein prepared and delivered a memorandum to Sessions relating to Comey (Sessions and Rosenstein had already begun considering whether to dismiss Comey months earlier).[47] Rosenstein's memorandum said that the "reputation and credibility" of the FBI had been damaged under Comey's tenure, and the memo presented critical quotes from several former attorneys general in previously published op-eds; Rosenstein concluded that their "nearly unanimous opinions" were that Comey's handling of the Hillary Clinton email investigation was "wrong."[5] In his memo, Rosenstein asserted that the FBI must have "a Director who understands the gravity of the mistakes and pledges never to repeat them." He ended with an argument against keeping Comey as FBI director, on the grounds that he was given an opportunity to "admit his errors" but that there is no hope that he will "implement the necessary corrective actions."[48] Rosenstein also criticized Comey on two other grounds: for usurping the prerogative of the Justice Department and the Attorney General in his July 2016 public statements announcing the closure of the investigation into Clinton's emails, and for making derogatory comments about Clinton in that same meeting.[49] Both of these actions, he argued, were in conflict with longstanding FBI practice. To Comey's previous defense that Attorney General Loretta Lynch had a conflict of interest, Rosenstein argued that in such a case, it is the duty of the Attorney General to recuse herself, and that there is a process for another Justice Department official to take over her duties.[50]

"On Trump's direction." See my post for these reasons given by Trump himself, and by Giuliani.


If you want to believe Trump fired the guy because he mishandled the Hillary Clinton investigation (LOL!), go right ahead, but I have no idea how that makes sense to you. I mean, do you really, truly believe that Trump was upset when Comey announced on television, right before the election that Hillary was under investigation? Really?