idhawkman wrote: My prediction is that the dems and media are going to try and blow up the Stormy Daniels payment as something that was illegal.
idhawkman wrote:I've got two buckets of popcorn ready for today, how about you?
RiverDog wrote:More predictions, huh? What's your batting average? Since you're now resorting to subjective statements for your prognostications, it sure looks to me like you're trying to pad your record.![]()
I don't like watching live testimony. It's too much about individual congressmen from both sides of the aisle looking to get a 10 or 15 second sound byte on national TV. I'll read/watch the results after the dust settles. I'll watch a virtual split screen this afternoon, one side showing MSNBC and one from Fox, later today when I go to the gym, then read my custom news feed tomorrow morning.
One thing I did find despicable was that pompous ass of a Congressman and Trump lap dog Matt Gaetz threatening and intimidating a witness with very personal comments about Cohen and his family. He needs to be reprimanded for those remarks.
Aseahawkfan wrote:I read the testimony. I could have given this testimony from reading the papers. He literally provided absolutely no new information. It's just Cohen grandstanding against Trump trying to garner sympathy and confirming the payments to women we already knew about while just parroting what has been in the papers. Cohen doesn't seem credible at all. He seems like a pathetic and weak man trying to save his own hide and garner sympathy.
RiverDog wrote:I haven't seen the testimony yet, but don't blame Cohen for the act of testifying. It was Congress that called him to testify, Cohen simply agreed.
And I agree that Cohen is not a credible witness, at least not unless he has something to support his testimony. He's going to need corroborating testimony from other witnesses or some sort of tangible evidence to make him believable.
Stream Hawk wrote:I’m sorry but this is pretty damning testimony. He’s under oath; what benefit does he have for lying to Congress? He’s going to prison for lying for Trump. Trump is screwed. And he’s a disgrace to the country.
Stream Hawk wrote:Not sure if these are new, asea, but he was called to testify. It is damning because the world is seeing what a liar, conman and racist that he is.
https://www.cnn.com/2019/02/27/politics ... index.html
Stream Hawk wrote:I’m sorry but this is pretty damning testimony. He’s under oath; what benefit does he have for lying to Congress? He’s going to prison for lying for Trump. Trump is screwed. And he’s a disgrace to the country.
Aseahawkfan wrote:What part of it wasn't already known? As far as lying, what did he say that was an absolute fact? I haven't read anything other than confirming the payments to women with copies of checks and some he may have done this or I think he did this or he is capable of doing this. It would be nice if you post something like this to actually post what part was new and damning more than we already know.
Stream Hawk wrote:Not sure if these are new, asea, but he was called to testify. It is damning because the world is seeing what a liar, conman and racist that he is.
https://www.cnn.com/2019/02/27/politics ... index.html
RiverDog wrote:It's not "damming" testimony, but it is damaging. What I mean by that is that ASF is correct, that there really isn't anything that we didn't already know that was revealed and there's no smoking gun that could be used in impeachment proceedings. But the testimony is damaging to Trump. It can't help not to be. He was just accused of being a racist, a liar, and a cheat on national TV, and it came from a long time associate from his inner circle that once said he'd take a bullet for Trump. That's significant, and it's why the Dems were all too happy to provide him with a stage.
I can't believe Cohen's accusations, but nor can I believe Donald Trump's denials. Both are proven liars.
Every Republican president in my lifetime has been called a racist.
Stream Hawk wrote:Well put, River. I always look to you for insightful opinions. Football and real life! I’m a very left leaning environmental scientist, but am also open-minded.
Stream Hawk wrote:I believe today’s testimony is probably more damaging than damning. This doesn’t help him, that’s for sure. As I said earlier, what does Cohen have to gain from lying. His dignity and credibility, sure, but why lie to Congress when he’s trying to reduce his sentence? All this on the national/global stage is quite damaging to his already tainted reputation.
Aseahawkfan wrote:Be for real. Cohen's testimony was no more damaging than the near constant refrain we've had from the press that Trump is a racist, liar, and a con man. I could have given that testimony from reading the papers.
Aseahawkfan wrote:If this testimony had come and the press had not already been beating me over the head for the past three years with the same accusations, then I would be "oh, maybe that's something."
Every Republican president in my lifetime has been called a racist.
burrrton wrote:*Candidate*. They called Bush, McCain, and Romney the same and much, much worse.
It's why they've regrettably rendered the charge a punchline- real racists are vanishingly rare, but they do exist. But when the Modern Left is yelling "UR RAYCISS" at every damn crack in the sidewalk, it's impossible for reasonable people to take it seriously anymore, much to the detriment of actual victims of it.
Stream Hawk wrote:I’m sorry but this is pretty damning testimony. He’s under oath; what benefit does he have for lying to Congress? He’s going to prison for lying for Trump. Trump is screwed. And he’s a disgrace to the country.
RiverDog wrote:It's not "damming" testimony, but it is damaging. What I mean by that is that ASF is correct, that there really isn't anything that we didn't already know that was revealed and there's no smoking gun that could be used in impeachment proceedings. But the testimony is damaging to Trump. It can't help not to be. He was just accused of being a racist, a liar, and a cheat on national TV, and it came from a long time associate from his inner circle that once said he'd take a bullet for Trump. That's significant, and it's why the Dems were all too happy to provide him with a stage.
I can't believe Cohen's accusations, but nor can I believe Donald Trump's denials. Both are proven liars.
burrrton wrote:
*Candidate*. They called Bush, McCain, and Romney the same and much, much worse.
It's why they've regrettably rendered the charge a punchline- real racists are vanishingly rare, but they do exist. But when the Modern Left is yelling "UR RAYCISS" at every damn crack in the sidewalk, it's impossible for reasonable people to take it seriously anymore, much to the detriment of actual victims of it.
RiverDog wrote: If nothing else, it was a distraction of Trump's summit with Kim, something that would normally give him a big bump in the polls and make him look presidential.
That's your opinion, and I'm not saying you're wrong. But what you are not recognizing is that there is about 12-15% of the public who's opinion on DJT fluctuates, which is why his poll numbers bounce around. By keeping testimony like this in the public eye, the Dems are keeping the pressure on Trump and the R's as they line up for 2020. In this specific case, they are denying him a victory in the Kim summit.
It doesn't have to be true to have an effect.
I have also noticed something strange lately in that every protest gathering of people claiming racism is mostly being made up now of white people. I find that a bit odd.
I have also noticed something strange lately in that every protest gathering of people claiming racism is mostly being made up now of white people. I find that a bit odd.
burrrton wrote:Virtue Signaling 101. They bought the line that (a) they should feel guilty about the shade of their skin, and (b) people with darker skin are less capable so need the lighter-skinned people to help them.
RiverDog wrote: If nothing else, it was a distraction of Trump's summit with Kim, something that would normally give him a big bump in the polls and make him look presidential.
idhawkman wrote:And that is the real issue that the dems wanted but Trump trumped them again by walking away from a bad deal that didn't include ALL of their nuclear program. Reminds us of what happened in Reykjavik 30 some odd years ago with Reagan and Gorbachev.
RiverDog wrote:That's your opinion, and I'm not saying you're wrong. But what you are not recognizing is that there is about 12-15% of the public who's opinion on DJT fluctuates, which is why his poll numbers bounce around. By keeping testimony like this in the public eye, the Dems are keeping the pressure on Trump and the R's as they line up for 2020. In this specific case, they are denying him a victory in the Kim summit.
idhawkman wrote:This is old news already but the border wall is still front and center so the 12-15% is not going to move on this testimony at all. Especially after Trump did what he did in Hanoi. This may just hurt the dems tremendously as it is seen for what it is.
RiverDog wrote:That's your opinion, and I'm not saying you're wrong. But what you are not recognizing is that there is about 12-15% of the public who's opinion on DJT fluctuates, which is why his poll numbers bounce around. By keeping testimony like this in the public eye, the Dems are keeping the pressure on Trump and the R's as they line up for 2020. In this specific case, they are denying him a victory in the Kim summit.
RiverDog wrote:Agree 1000%!
And I have some very good examples: There is a higher percentage of white people that are offended by the black face scandal than there are blacks. Blacks are more likely to forgive them than are whites. All the polls regarding the nickname "Redskins" that have been taken for decades consistently show that 70-80% of those that identify themselves as a Native Americans do not feel the nickname is offensive. Whites are much more likely to be offended by it than are NA's.
It's the politically correct left that insists that we adapt some sort of shame for our heritage.
idhawkman wrote:The wall is still front and center. As you mentioned, they tore down the wall to put up the permanent one since they no longer need the temps/prototypes. Also, you may not recognize it, but every story about Venezuela is about the wall. I know that Washington State is now more left than California or Oregon per the recent polls, which might be camouflaging the issue from you but the majority of fly over country recognizes that the caravans are coming from Venezuela along with Honduras, etc.
On a separate note, it is pretty funny that Cohen got two more criminal referrals from Congress this morning for perjury.
1. When they showed a CNN interview right after the election where he stated that he 100% would follow Trump to Washington DC and would accept a role in the administration.
2. Where he didn't disclose his foreign contracts on the paper that was brought up.
I can't believe Lanny Davis put him up to this and re-jeopardized his client to the full extent of the 70 years he already is subject to. He should have taken the 3 years and shut up and did his time. He had much much more to lose by going to Congress the last 3 days when he knew he was being used as a puppet and it would not just ruffle the repubs because Trump was in Hanoi but it would raise their full IRE. Lanny did him no favors. I can't really lay blame on Cohen as I don't think much of him as a lawyer anyways and doubt he even thought about it being a bad idea. SMDH in amazement.
Aseahawkfan wrote:One of the bigger things of note with this so called close "confidante" of Trump is even he couldn't confirm Trump uses racial epithets. How you going to call this guy a racist and not even confirm he uses racial epithets? Just dumb. Cohen has to be one of the most pathetic men I've seen.
RiverDog wrote:Is it a requirement of being a racist that one must use racial epithets?
RiverDog wrote:Is it a requirement of being a racist that one must use racial epithets?
Aseahawkfan wrote:No, not an absolute requirement. But given Trump's bombastic, outspoken, rude nature, you'd think if he were actually a racist people would be coming out of the woodwork talking about his use of racial epithets.
Aseahawkfan wrote:I can pull out many times Trump's helped folk of African descent. I can point to many friends of his and folks he's helped succeed. I can point to people on his show that have promoted his name. In essence, for a guy termed a racist, he sure seems to have done a lot more to prove he's not a racist than his enemies have produced proof that he is a racist.
Aseahawkfan wrote:And I just read Cohen already has a book at a publisher ready to sell. Man, this guy Cohen is ridiculous. Talk about miking the spotlight for all its worth.
Aseahawkfan wrote:Most of the folks calling him racist do so for the actions for people other than Trump that he barely knows because they media associated those people with Trump or took his comments out of context to paint him as a racist. Trump's actions in regards to folk of varying descents indicate otherwise. I've always believed actions speak louder than words. Words can be manipulated or twisted, actions are what they are.
RiverDog wrote:Sorry, I still believe he's a racist. His own lawyer, Rudy G., said that Trump asked him how he could institute a Muslim ban. His immigration policy IMO is extremely racist. The whole birther movement he started against Obama.
Once again, the fact that he might have helped blacks out or even if he has blacks in his inner circle does not mean he's not a racist.
His own lawyer, Rudy G., said that Trump asked him how he could institute a Muslim ban. His immigration policy IMO is extremely racist. The whole birther movement he started against Obama.
burrrton wrote:"Racist" is a serious charge with tangible, observable traits unless you fancy yourself a mind-reader. That you think it's as nebulous as "obscene" merely confirms what I said.
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 4 guests