Mueller report cover up

[idhawkman]

Well the oversight committee session with Mueller has concluded and I think I hear that sound when pacman got eaten by one of the ghosts coming from the Dems side of the aisle. What a cluster. Too funny. Nadler must be kicking himself in the backside for having this today. The one downside is that Pelosi will be a big winner from today when they finally put impeachment talk behind them.

[Aseahawkfan]

I'm sure both sides will spin this in their favor. If the Senate didn't flip, then it was a waste of time unless it helps flip the Senate next time around. That's a ways off. If the Dems lose the next presidential election, can't flip the Senate, and lose the House, they will look utterly pathetic. We'll see if one of their big plays work.

At the moment I consider Ocasio-Cortez and her "Squad", Elizabeth "Students are too dumb to manage money so forgive it all" Warren, and Bernie "Let Convicts Vote" Sanders more dangerous than these stupid obstruction charges produced by an investigation that found no collusion. Wish the Dems were offering a better vision for this nation so I could support them against The Pushing the Racist Boundary Narcissist, but they offer an awful vision for this nation that will bankrupt us and have the Dems telling us to pay more and more taxes when they find taxing the 1% doesn't work and never has to pay for their nutty programs.

[idhawkman]

Yep, the afternoon session with the House Intel committee is going about as well as the first except worse. Mueller had to include in his opening statement of this second hearing a correction to an answer he gave Rep. Lieu regarding why he didn't charge the president during his first hearing in front of the oversight committee. This is a complete Sh@tshow for the dems and some of their supporters are already condemning these hearings. Maybe this will finally be put to rest and as I've been saying, this issue is dead and buried and has been for quite a few weeks but the dems just don't know it yet.

[Hawktawk]

Yep, the afternoon session with the House Intel committee is going about as well as the first except worse. Mueller had to include in his opening statement of this second hearing a correction to an answer he gave Rep. Lieu regarding why he didn't charge the president during his first hearing in front of the oversight committee. This is a complete Sh@tshow for the dems and some of their supporters are already condemning these hearings. Maybe this will finally be put to rest and as I've been saying, this issue is dead and buried and has been for quite a few weeks but the dems just don't know it yet.

Yeah UMMHMM. "did the report exonerate the president" NO. Can a president be indicted after he leaves office? YES. Was Trump dishonest in his written answers? YES. Did it influence the ability to arrive at the truth?YES. What about his praising of Wikileaks? "ITS BEYOND PROBLEMATIC TO PRAISE AN ILLEGAL ORGANIZATION. Is it unpatriotic to accept help from a foreign power even if it doesn't rise to the level of a criminal conspiracy? YES.Was it a witch hunt? NO

It was a devastating testimony just like the devastating report about 2% of the citizens and probably 5% of the congress have actually read.

But hey, hes 75, he stumbled over his words, he wasn't as sharp He had to ask for questions to be repeated. (maybe going deaf from all the battles in vietnam while Trump was resting his bone spurs but whatever) That's what matters to the Trumptards.Its all about the show. You people make me ill.

Mueller did OK as did the Dems who actually asked questions rather than the nauseating shrill Trumpican sycophants trying to shut down mueller and feed the false narrative they have the last 3 years. There's collusion in plain sight x100. Mueller says he didn't address it because it is "not a legal term".

Obstruction is plain as day. "If we were confident the president did not commit a crime we would have said so". Well If your not confident he didn't we know what that means unless your nose is so far up the Bloatus crazy POTUS arse he needs a windshield wiper on his bellybutton so you can see where hes going.

Its really a sad time in america. Never been worse in my lifetime. Not great. Worst president in our history but hes Vlads hand picked patsy and nobody gives a damn.....

[idhawkman]

Yeah UMMHMM. "did the report exonerate the president" NO.

As pointed out yesterday, prosecutors can not exonerate anyone and never have. It was comical when the one representative put the various law books up and even went to Mueller's law school to get their book and asked him where the section was on exonerating and asked him why the DOJ doesn't have an office of exoneration. Mueller looked dumb after that.

You have stated that "the President is not above the law." My question is to you, "does he still get afforded the same equal protections under the law?" If so, there is no standard for exoneration. You either indict or you decline to charge. You can't find anywhere in the prosecutor's role where they are responsible for exoneration.

Can a president be indicted after he leaves office? YES.

Can he, yes, but in this case, none of the charges in the second part can be charged to this president. Barr has already ruled on that. That case is closed. I don't expect you to realize that though because I know the news you watch and read never mention that fact.

Was Trump dishonest in his written answers? YES.

This is a dishonest comment on its face since the investigators didn't question or ask for clarification on any of his written answers.

Did it influence the ability to arrive at the truth?YES.

Your opinion which is false.

What about his praising of Wikileaks? "ITS BEYOND PROBLEMATIC TO PRAISE AN ILLEGAL ORGANIZATION. Is it unpatriotic to accept help from a foreign power even if it doesn't rise to the level of a criminal conspiracy? YES.

Don't blame this president, blame the rulings and outcome of the Pentagon papers for this standard not being criminal and totally acceptable.

Was it a witch hunt? NO

Yep, it was but it was totally ineffective.

It was a devastating testimony just like the devastating report about 2% of the citizens and probably 5% of the congress have actually read.

You're right about that. It devastated the dems and the entire Mueller investigation. It also wiped out any hope of impeachment.

But hey, hes 75, he stumbled over his words, he wasn't as sharp He had to ask for questions to be repeated. (maybe going deaf from all the battles in vietnam while Trump was resting his bone spurs but whatever) That's what matters to the Trumptards.Its all about the show. You people make me ill.

What should make you ill is that he was specifically picked because of his weakened state and was only a figure head. They (the 13 angry democrats) took advantage of your vaunted American Hero, decorated Marine and public servant. Rep. Gomert asked him who wrote his 9 minute press conference for him which he refused to answer for obvious reasons. They (the 13) worked him like a puppet and everyone now knows it.

Mueller did OK as did the Dems who actually asked questions rather than the nauseating shrill Trumpican sycophants trying to shut down mueller and feed the false narrative they have the last 3 years. There's collusion in plain sight x100. Mueller says he didn't address it because it is "not a legal term".

First, The republicans got him to admit that in his own report that he states collusion is synonymous with conspiracy so the "not legal term" crap doesn't work here. Secont, Every question the dems asked about obstruction Mueller responded that he wouldn't subscribe to their position. So they may have asked him a question but he didn't agree with their assertion by the question. Finally, you know the dems have lost big time when they went from "he committed treason" and that they had concrete proof that Mueller will bring out in his report, to he "obstructed justice" and that is provable to their final stance yesterday and that you tried to use above that "he's unethical". The American people are tired of their constant back pedaling and retracting and just plain don't believe the dems anymore on any of this. That's why this is over.

Obstruction is plain as day. "If we were confident the president did not commit a crime we would have said so". Well If your not confident he didn't we know what that means unless your nose is so far up the Bloatus crazy POTUS arse he needs a windshield wiper on his bellybutton so you can see where hes going.

Again, Mueller didn't subscribe to this characterization and even retracted his comments on this at the opening of his second hearing yesterday. But hey, it shows that your ad hominem attack here also shows you know the obstruction charges are all debunked.

Its really a sad time in america. Never been worse in my lifetime. Not great. Worst president in our history but hes Vlads hand picked patsy and nobody gives a damn.....

I know you are down in the dumps and licking your wounds from yesterday but if he was Vlads hand picked patsy why were the Russians trying to find anyone who know anyone in the Trump campaign after he won?

What you should be focused on is the big picture of everything that went on under Obama.

1. The Obama administration knew the Russians were trying to hack the election but instead of doing anything to stop it, they sat back, did nothing and then tried to frame Trump by not giving him the defensive briefing his campaign deserved.

2. They used foriegn diplomats, spies and honey pots to frame people in the Trump campaign and then used that planted evidence to justify wire tapping the Trump campaign.

3. When those efforts didn't work and the President still won, they turned loose the national intelligence apparatus on him to try and overthrow a duly elected president.

Jim Jordan had a great question yesterday for Mueller where he asked Mueller why he "charged, Flynn, Manafort, Cohen, Papadopolous, and other with lying to congress but noted that Mifsud lied 3 times to congress but he never charged him. Why not?" Of course Mueller deflected that answer, too. Again, this whole thing yesterday was a true Sh@tshow for the dems and even CNN and MSNBC have been commenting on it.

This is the most dangerous point in our history to our way of life. Many anti-Trumpers and democrats want to overlook this fact because they don't like the guy. Boohoo, go cry in a corner. There's a much bigger picture here that is threatening our way of life for our kids to inherit.

[Aseahawkfan]

Yeah UMMHMM. "did the report exonerate the president" NO. Can a president be indicted after he leaves office? YES. Was Trump dishonest in his written answers? YES. Did it influence the ability to arrive at the truth?YES. What about his praising of Wikileaks? "ITS BEYOND PROBLEMATIC TO PRAISE AN ILLEGAL ORGANIZATION. Is it unpatriotic to accept help from a foreign power even if it doesn't rise to the level of a criminal conspiracy? YES.Was it a witch hunt? NO

It was a devastating testimony just like the devastating report about 2% of the citizens and probably 5% of the congress have actually read.

But hey, hes 75, he stumbled over his words, he wasn't as sharp He had to ask for questions to be repeated. (maybe going deaf from all the battles in vietnam while Trump was resting his bone spurs but whatever) That's what matters to the Trumptards.Its all about the show. You people make me ill.

Mueller did OK as did the Dems who actually asked questions rather than the nauseating shrill Trumpican sycophants trying to shut down mueller and feed the false narrative they have the last 3 years. There's collusion in plain sight x100. Mueller says he didn't address it because it is "not a legal term".

Obstruction is plain as day. "If we were confident the president did not commit a crime we would have said so". Well If your not confident he didn't we know what that means unless your nose is so far up the Bloatus crazy POTUS arse he needs a windshield wiper on his bellybutton so you can see where hes going.

Its really a sad time in america. Never been worse in my lifetime. Not great. Worst president in our history but hes Vlads hand picked patsy and nobody gives a damn.....

We'll see if it was devastating come election time and when Senate and House elections occur. All that matters is who wins the election and if the Senate or House get flipped. The rest is just window dressing as the testimony changed nothing for the Trump Haters like you or the Trump Lovers like Idhawkmen. Both parties spun things in their favor. The usual voices on each side played it up. No one will know if it had an effect until the next election cycle.

What do you think of the Republicans playing Omar's video saying the United States should be more afraid of white men? How do you think that is going to play during the next election cycle for the Dems? You think the testimony and Russian Collusion/Obstruction they've been hearing from the Dems for going on 3 years will affect the election more or Omar saying what she said as a face of the Dems? As far as I'm concerned, I put absolutely no credence in Russian Collusion or Obstruction of Justice for a crime that did not happen. I've watched plenty of presidents including your favorite Reagan lie about stuff in office like the Iran-Contra Scandal during their administration. Happens nearly every administration. Most Americans watched testimony that did not change anything they have already heard.

While Omar and Ocasio-Cortez are continuing to make it seem like they run the Democratic Party and continue to make stupid, incendiary comments.

If you really didn't want Trump in office, you would hope the Dems would choose a different strategy other than one that keeps on failing again and again and again. I hope a Republican challenger tries to run against Trump, but he seems to be the only option because no other Republican wants to touch the toxic environment he has created. They'd rather let him live or die in his own poisonous pool and let the Dems look weak and dumb fighting him.

[idhawkman]

I wonder how the Pelosi -> AOC meeting went today. Anyone hear a peep?

[Hawktawk]

[quote="Aseahawkfan]

We'll see if it was devastating come election time and when Senate and House elections occur. All that matters is who wins the election and if the Senate or House get flipped. The rest is just window dressing as the testimony changed nothing for the Trump Haters like you or the Trump Lovers like Idhawkmen. Both parties spun things in their favor. The usual voices on each side played it up. No one will know if it had an effect until the next election cycle.

What do you think of the Republicans playing Omar's video saying the United States should be more afraid of white men? How do you think that is going to play during the next election cycle for the Dems? You think the testimony and Russian Collusion/Obstruction they've been hearing from the Dems for going on 3 years will affect the election more or Omar saying what she said as a face of the Dems? As far as I'm concerned, I put absolutely no credence in Russian Collusion or Obstruction of Justice for a crime that did not happen. I've watched plenty of presidents including your favorite Reagan lie about stuff in office like the Iran-Contra Scandal during their administration. Happens nearly every administration. Most Americans watched testimony that did not change anything they have already heard.

While Omar and Ocasio-Cortez are continuing to make it seem like they run the Democratic Party and continue to make stupid, incendiary comments.

If you really didn't want Trump in office, you would hope the Dems would choose a different strategy other than one that keeps on failing again and again and again. I hope a Republican challenger tries to run against Trump, but he seems to be the only option because no other Republican wants to touch the toxic environment he has created. They'd rather let him live or die in his own poisonous pool and let the Dems look weak and dumb fighting him.[/quote]


I don’t disagree with a lot of what you just said ASea other than collusion and crime regarding russia. Thats plain as day not that its the first scandal or first time a president has lied through their teeth. But there's just no heroes here. My lifelong party does not exist and my only connection to the democrats is we both hate trump. Truly hoping for Weld to gain some traction but not likely. I would love to see Justin Amash run as a libertarian.On the dem side hoping for Biden as he is against most of the liberal far left platform and it ought to tell people in the dem party something that hes leading overwhelmingly in the primary polls as well as crushing Trump.

Warren, Sanders etc are a possible recipe for 4 more years on the crazy train.

[RiverDog]

I don’t disagree with a lot of what you just said ASea other than collusion and crime regarding russia. Thats plain as day not that its the first scandal or first time a president has lied through their teeth. But there's just no heroes here. My lifelong party does not exist and my only connection to the democrats is we both hate trump. Truly hoping for Weld to gain some traction but not likely. I would love to see Justin Amash run as a libertarian.On the dem side hoping for Biden as he is against most of the liberal far left platform and it ought to tell people in the dem party something that hes leading overwhelmingly in the primary polls as well as crushing Trump.

Warren, Sanders etc are a possible recipe for 4 more years on the crazy train.

Absolutely agree about Warren and Sanders. Anyone who's out there advocating the evolving leftists agenda of the Democratic party will do nothing but assure us of 4 more years of that stupid buffoon. It amazes me as to why the Dem's can't see that the winning formula is to find a moderate candidate instead of these raging lunatics like Sanders and Warren.

But the Libertarians, even though they may win my vote, constitute nothing more than a protest vote. I couldn't give two squirts who their candidate is, if I don't like the Dem option, I'll be voting for their guy/gal.

[Aseahawkfan]

I have never hated the American government as much as I do right now. Trump truly is bringing out all the hypocrisy, corruption, and animosity of these two clown parties. We're seeing the worst of both parties that has been building for years culminating in this trashfire of a government. I hope something good comes out of this, but I doubt it. These parties are going to keep this truck heading in the wrong direction until it crashes while these two idiot parties argue over which way to go while driving towards the same dive off the canyon cliff.

If I was a Democrat or Republican politician right now, I'd be embarrassed to be a part of any of this fraud.

[RiverDog]

I have never hated the American government as much as I do right now. Trump truly is bringing out all the hypocrisy, corruption, and animosity of these two clown parties. We're seeing the worst of both parties that has been building for years culminating in this trashfire of a government. I hope something good comes out of this, but I doubt it. These parties are going to keep this truck heading in the wrong direction until it crashes while these two idiot parties argue over who which way to go while driving towards the same dive off the canyon cliff.

If I was a Democrat or Republican politician right now, I'd be embarrassed to be a part of any of this fraud.

Can't say as I disagree with that with my only difference being that I can't say that I don't "hate" the government. What has bothered me more is how Trump has managed to get so many otherwise rational folks to ignore his blatant racism and utter dishonesty and drool over every word of his. In the 50 years since the height of the civil rights era, I was shocked to see as many whites that still harbor racist attitudes. As a white person, the last individual on the Earth I'd ever want to be associated with is someone that inspires pigs like those in the KKK and neo Nazis. It saddens me to see so many people set aside their tolerance of those that don't look/speak/act like them and embrace that POS. DJT makes people feel comfortable with their insecurities.

[idhawkman]

Can't say as I disagree with that with my only difference being that I can't say that I don't "hate" the government. What has bothered me more is how Trump has managed to get so many otherwise rational folks to ignore his blatant racism and utter dishonesty and drool over every word of his. In the 50 years since the height of the civil rights era, I was shocked to see as many whites that still harbor racist attitudes. As a white person, the last individual on the Earth I'd ever want to be associated with is someone that inspires pigs like those in the KKK and neo Nazis. It saddens me to see so many people set aside their tolerance of those that don't look/speak/act like them and embrace that POS. DJT makes people feel comfortable with their insecurities.

That's your opinion. I see more racism coming from the democrats than I do Trump and that is provable.

[Aseahawkfan]

Can't say as I disagree with that with my only difference being that I can't say that I don't "hate" the government. What has bothered me more is how Trump has managed to get so many otherwise rational folks to ignore his blatant racism and utter dishonesty and drool over every word of his. In the 50 years since the height of the civil rights era, I was shocked to see as many whites that still harbor racist attitudes. As a white person, the last individual on the Earth I'd ever want to be associated with is someone that inspires pigs like those in the KKK and neo Nazis. It saddens me to see so many people set aside their tolerance of those that don't look/speak/act like them and embrace that POS. DJT makes people feel comfortable with their insecurities.

That part doesn't surprise me. I think the PC movement has really increased the racism among all groups, thus another reason why the race paradigm needs to go as it has been weaponized into more divisive platforms. The "white" man has been under attack for a while now. Have you read books like Michael Moore's Stupid White Men or a A People's History of the United States? It has been extremely popular among academics to demonize the "white" man. It's as though the race construct created by the jackoffs of the past has been turned around on the "white" man. It's sort of amusing and ironic, but at the same time alarming and unproductive.

It never dawns on the folks involved in this that the "white" man was never a unified or real thing. "White" men were never patting each other on the back and giving out cards to the "white" man club with a million bucks each once you hit the age of 18. Having a certain skin color made life a little easier because you didn't have to deal with racism from a majority, but at the same time a little bit easier is still not easy. Life just isn't easy and never has been for anyone regardless of skin color other than a small handful of folks raised with wealth, often regardless of skin color.

Suffice it to say the racism problem doesn't surprise me at all. I saw this coming for a while as each group has built up their racial ideas against each other. There are even "black" supremacy philosophies and "Latin" supremacy philosophies. There are superior racist notions from Asian groups. Nearly every liberal group in America has been attacking and demonizing the "white" man for all his past "crimes." I expected this backlash from "white" America for a while now. You can only listen to groups of people blaming you for all the worlds ills for so long before you start pushing back. Trump is that push back.

That's why I think we need to move beyond the racial paradigm. It was created to divide and subjugate and it's continuing to serve that purpose. The race paradigm was never made to unify people. It's entire basis was created as a means to divide and justify heinous behavior towards one another on the basis of a false assumption that skin color somehow means anything. Never in history did "white" men seen themselves as one group other than when European leadership were attempting to justify slavery and the subjugation of non-Europeans after they finished subjugating other European groups.

Remember that though. Race when applied to humans was not a scientific concept. It was always pseudo-science to justify awful behavior with no good benefit for humans. I have yet to have anyone tell me where the "black" and "white" countries as in nations named "black" and "white." That's why I got rid of that BS thinking. It's not true and it's an idea created for an evil purpose.

[idhawkman]

This is what the democrats are trying to charge Trump with now since the collusion, conspiracy thing didn't work out for them.

"While we recognize that the suspect did not actually steal any horses, he is obviously guilty of resisting being hung for it."

Let that sink in for a while.

[RiverDog]

This is what the democrats are trying to charge Trump with now since the collusion, conspiracy thing didn't work out for them.

"While we recognize that the suspect did not actually steal any horses, he is obviously guilty of resisting being hung for it."

Let that sink in for a while.

So long as we're lecturing each other on what they need to let "sink in", what you need to reflect on is the extremely narrow margin between hard core, Trump-can-do-no-wrong supporters like yourself and the white supremist groups that have adapted him as their own.

[idhawkman]

So long as we're lecturing each other on what they need to let "sink in", what you need to reflect on is the extremely narrow margin between hard core, Trump-can-do-no-wrong supporters like yourself and the white supremist groups that have adapted him as their own.

Wow, so now you think I'm a whisker away from being a white supremacist. You're going to have to go a long way to prove anything like that given my background in Special Ops where our motto is "De Opresso Libre".

[RiverDog]

So long as we're lecturing each other on what they need to let "sink in", what you need to reflect on is the extremely narrow margin between hard core, Trump-can-do-no-wrong supporters like yourself and the white supremist groups that have adapted him as their own.

Wow, so now you think I'm a whisker away from being a white supremacist. You're going to have to go a long way to prove anything like that given my background in Special Ops where our motto is "De Opresso Libre".

That's not what I said or intended to suggest. I am not calling you a racist and I am not trying to 'prove' anything, nor will I make any attempt to do so. I know very little about you other than you are a dedicated Seahawk fan and have represented yourself to me as being a great guy.

What I said, or meant to say, is that the views you have expressed in this forum along with your absolute and unqualified support for DJT places you within the company of white supremacists groups to which you have shown no interest in distancing yourself from. If you're comfortable with that close of an association with those folks, then fine, I have no problem with that. But if it were me, it would give me pause for concern that I might be linked to those groups via guilt by association by people that do not know my persona, or as my old man would say, if you're going to sleep with the dogs, don't be surprised when you wake up with fleas.

Let that sink in for awhile.

[Aseahawkfan]

That's not what I said or intended to suggest. I am not calling you a racist and I am not trying to 'prove' anything, nor will I make any attempt to do so. I know very little about you other than you are a dedicated Seahawk fan and have represented yourself to me as being a great guy.

What I said, or meant to say, is that the views you have expressed in this forum along with your absolute and unqualified support for DJT places you within the company of white supremacists groups to which you have shown no interest in distancing yourself from. If you're comfortable with that close of an association with those folks, then fine, I have no problem with that. But if it were me, it would give me pause for concern that I might be linked to those groups via guilt by association by people that do not know my persona.

Let that sink in for awhile.

Democrats have successfully made the Republican Party the "racists" associated with white supremacy long before Trump. I'm not sure how much you follow black culture, but popular culture among black folk is to refer to the Republican Party as the RepubliKKKan Party. Kind of hard to go any deeper into the Republicans are racist than has already been done. The race card has been played so much that Donald Trump doesn't seem any worse than past Republicans. And that is pretty sad.

Basically, the left already associates white supremacy with Republicans. You're the new one to the party. Democrats and left been all aboard the Republican Party is the party of white supremacy since Nixon.

It's like the little boy that cried wolf. Democrats and left been crying wolf so long, now no one listening when real wolf in the White House.

[RiverDog]

Democrats have successfully made the Republican Party the "racists" associated with white supremacy long before Trump. I'm not sure how much you follow black culture, but popular culture among black folk is to refer to the Republican Party as the RepubliKKKan Party. Kind of hard to go any deeper into the Republicans are racist than has already been done. The race card has been played so much that Donald Trump doesn't seem any worse than past Republicans. And that is pretty sad.

Basically, the left already associates white supremacy with Republicans. You're the new one to the party. Democrats and left been all aboard the Republican Party is the party of white supremacy since Nixon.

It's like the little boy that cried wolf. Democrats and left been crying wolf so long, now no one listening when real wolf in the White House.

Eleanor Roosevelt can be credited with helping to convert the black vote into a solid Democratic constituency. Her husband was no more progressive than any of his predecessors but she was the first advocate that they had with direct contacts to people in power. Later, as Sen. Richard Russell had warned LBJ, the 1964 Civil Rights Bill drove the last of the conservative white voters, the Dixiecrats, out of the Democratic Party and into the Republican camp. That was more responsible for the perception of R's being associated with white supremacy than Richard Nixon, who was actually supported by many blacks, including Jackie Robinson, in his 1960 POTUS campaign.

What has a lot of Republicans whispering about is the effect Donald Trump is having on younger voters who are increasingly identifying the party with white racism. If Trump is defeated in 2020, you can look for the R's to embark on a major face lift in an effort to change their perception in the eyes of what will be an increasingly important constituency group as us baby boomers begin to die off.

I don't want to see Trump lose so badly in 2020 that he drags the Republican Senate down to defeat with him as that could very well enable the ever expanding liberal wing of the Democratic Party to foist their vision on the country, and I'm not talking just about their health care ideas, but also their proposals for free college, reparations for slavery, the Green New Deal, and their war on Wall Street.

[idhawkman]

That's not what I said or intended to suggest. I am not calling you a racist and I am not trying to 'prove' anything, nor will I make any attempt to do so. I know very little about you other than you are a dedicated Seahawk fan and have represented yourself to me as being a great guy.

What I said, or meant to say, is that the views you have expressed in this forum along with your absolute and unqualified support for DJT places you within the company of white supremacists groups to which you have shown no interest in distancing yourself from. If you're comfortable with that close of an association with those folks, then fine, I have no problem with that. But if it were me, it would give me pause for concern that I might be linked to those groups via guilt by association by people that do not know my persona, or as my old man would say, if you're going to sleep with the dogs, don't be surprised when you wake up with fleas.

Let that sink in for awhile.

So by saying let that sink in for awhile, it appears that you are saying that association is enough to classify someone. Interesting.

Regarding para 2 above, I don't bow down to shaming which is what you are clearly trying to do because your arguments can not persuade me to think like you. The democrats use this tactic a lot when they can't win the argument on a topic. I have my own opinion as do you. We both know where each other stand in that regard. I won't play the politically correct game and concede just because someone thinks there way is more moral.

[idhawkman]

Democrats have successfully made the Republican Party the "racists" associated with white supremacy long before Trump. I'm not sure how much you follow black culture, but popular culture among black folk is to refer to the Republican Party as the RepubliKKKan Party. Kind of hard to go any deeper into the Republicans are racist than has already been done. The race card has been played so much that Donald Trump doesn't seem any worse than past Republicans. And that is pretty sad.

Basically, the left already associates white supremacy with Republicans. You're the new one to the party. Democrats and left been all aboard the Republican Party is the party of white supremacy since Nixon.

It's like the little boy that cried wolf. Democrats and left been crying wolf so long, now no one listening when real wolf in the White House.

Elizabeth Warren stepped up the game last night calling Trump an "economic racist", "environment racists" and one other I can't recall. Frankly, I don't think the left knows what the word means anymore.

[idhawkman]

What has a lot of Republicans whispering about is the effect Donald Trump is having on younger voters who are increasingly identifying the party with white racism. If Trump is defeated in 2020, you can look for the R's to embark on a major face lift in an effort to change their perception in the eyes of what will be an increasingly important constituency group as us baby boomers begin to die off.

I think you are reading too much never-Trumper stuff. Trump is not what is changing those kids minds, it has been the progressives in academia that has already done it.

I don't want to see Trump lose so badly in 2020 that he drags the Republican Senate down to defeat with him as that could very well enable the ever expanding liberal wing of the Democratic Party to foist their vision on the country, and I'm not talking just about their health care ideas, but also their proposals for free college, reparations for slavery, the Green New Deal, and their war on Wall Street.

So would it be better to endure another 4 years of Trump than to change the face of this country forever? You know once an entitlement is passed and enacted, it never goes away. Look at the ACA for a recent example.

This is the seminal question that never-Trump republicans have to be asking themselves going into 2020. Give a mandate to the socialist and see how fast the country changes. In that scenario, all bets are off on the civil war because it will happen.

[Aseahawkfan]

Eleanor Roosevelt can be credited with helping to convert the black vote into a solid Democratic constituency. Her husband was no more progressive than any of his predecessors but she was the first advocate that they had with direct contacts to people in power. Later, as Sen. Richard Russell had warned LBJ, the 1964 Civil Rights Bill drove the last of the conservative white voters, the Dixiecrats, out of the Democratic Party and into the Republican camp. That was more responsible for the perception of R's being associated with white supremacy than Richard Nixon, who was actually supported by many blacks, including Jackie Robinson, in his 1960 POTUS campaign.

What has a lot of Republicans whispering about is the effect Donald Trump is having on younger voters who are increasingly identifying the party with white racism. If Trump is defeated in 2020, you can look for the R's to embark on a major face lift in an effort to change their perception in the eyes of what will be an increasingly important constituency group as us baby boomers begin to die off.

I don't want to see Trump lose so badly in 2020 that he drags the Republican Senate down to defeat with him as that could very well enable the ever expanding liberal wing of the Democratic Party to foist their vision on the country, and I'm not talking just about their health care ideas, but also their proposals for free college, reparations for slavery, the Green New Deal, and their war on Wall Street.

I don't think that has much to do with Trump. I haven't personally met a black person that thought of Republicans as other than racist, even back when Bush was president (both of them). Just this morning they released more ammo for that with a voicemail from Reagan calling some African folk from Tanzania "monkeys." The left is full on attacking Republicans as racist and been doing so for years to keep minorities and women firmly in their camp supporting many values they don't believe in out of fear. I find it surprising you haven't seen this happening. It's one of the reasons why no one cares about Trump making racially charged comments.

As far as young voter, how do you think young white male voters feel every time they are blamed for every minority problem? Sure, some liberals will "accept the blame" apologizing for the bad white people doing awful things to the poor minority folk. But I would bet money the majority of young white male voters are buying their MAGA hats and their guns and voting Republican just to make sure they have representation in this nation.

White males and Democrats don't have such a good history. The only thing keeping working unions with the Democrats is union support. If Republicans supported unions, I'd bet money you would see a huge hiatus from the Democratic Party from white male dominated working unions.

White male is very, very tired of being the bad guy in every tale. If you haven't noticed, the face of the Democratic Party is very much immigrant, minority, and female. The white male is the bad guy in their narrative.

So don't worry, the Republican Party has the same fear working for them for white male voters that the Democrats have going for female and minority voters. That is unlikely to change with the political dumbassery in America. Please don't get me wrong that I see any of the above as right. I think both sides are pretty dumb for fear-mongering myself. That seems to be one of the major ways to get votes. Make the voter fear the other guy to have them vote for you.

[Hawktawk]

https://news.yahoo.com/roger-stone-guil ... on-brknews

Now Roger Stone becomes the 6th campaign operative from Trump 2016 to go to the big house. I'll never buy that Barr didn't tell Mueller to wrap it up prematurely with the sentencing of Gates and Flynn still pending and the Stone trial not even underway at the time the investigation was closed.

The evidence that convicted Stone proved he had a direct conduit to Wikileaks, was aware in real time of Russian hacks being delivered to Wikileaks and also had a direct line to Trump who was well aware and curious, eagerly awaiting the stolen Emails. In his written answers to Mueller Trump had claimed to have had no conversations with Roger Stone regarding E mails, wikileaks etc.

That's perjury in writing. As I've said Mueller went way easier on Trump than he could have, for whatever reason.

[RiverDog]

https://news.yahoo.com/roger-stone-guilty-lying-congress-164937961.html?.tsrc=notification-brknews

Now Roger Stone becomes the 6th campaign operative from Trump 2016 to go to the big house. I'll never buy that Barr didn't tell Mueller to wrap it up prematurely with the sentencing of Gates and Flynn still pending and the Stone trial not even underway at the time the investigation was closed.

The evidence that convicted Stone proved he had a direct conduit to Wikileaks, was aware in real time of Russian hacks being delivered to Wikileaks and also had a direct line to Trump who was well aware and curious, eagerly awaiting the stolen Emails. In his written answers to Mueller Trump had claimed to have had no conversations with Roger Stone regarding E mails, wikileaks etc.

That's perjury in writing. As I've said Mueller went way easier on Trump than he could have, for whatever reason.

I have no sympathy for Stone. He's a sleazebag, has been for years, and expressed no remorse for what he did. I hope they throw the book at him, although he'll no doubt get a reduced sentence.

It will be interesting to see if Trump pardons him.

[Aseahawkfan]

Stone thought he was bulletproof. Learned that wasn't the case. Trump can feel footsteps at this point.

[RiverDog]

Stone thought he was bulletproof. Learned that wasn't the case. Trump can feel footsteps at this point.

That's the other thing I didn't like about Stone. He was frigging arrogant, shows no sense of humility.

Trump doesn't have anything to worry about. This impeachment thing, although likely to be tossed to the Senate for a trial, doesn't stand a snowball's chance in hell of booting him from office, to the contrary, a failed impeachment bid could help Trump win re-election. Despite the live hearings, the polls actually showed a tiny drop of those wanting to remove Trump from office, from 48.7 to 48.5. It's been very flat, between 47% and 50% over the past 6 weeks.

[Hawktawk]

That's the other thing I didn't like about Stone. He was frigging arrogant, shows no sense of humility.

Trump doesn't have anything to worry about. This impeachment thing, although likely to be tossed to the Senate for a trial, doesn't stand a snowball's chance in hell of booting him from office, to the contrary, a failed impeachment bid could help Trump win re-election. Despite the live hearings, the polls actually showed a tiny drop of those wanting to remove Trump from office, from 48.7 to 48.5. It's been very flat, between 47% and 50% over the past 6 weeks.

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics ... ar-AADKLI1
as far as I know MSN is the only poll thats conducted daily. While it shows the battle lines hardening it still shows this president upside down by 9 or 10 points regarding impeachment and removal and also overall job approval. Having browsed some polls this morning only low 30% beleive Trumps actions were justified or in the scope of his authority. That cuts into his base around 10 points%. There is no way this helps Trump in any way other than fund raising . And a majority of americans have seen enough of the baboon. Plastering him on the tV wont help much.

Now I agree with you RD that this senate is almost certain to acquit him no matter what is revealed which has been plenty .Repubs crying about second hand information have now heard from some people who were on the call who almost universally support the facts, demands for investigations, one witness being ordered by his OMB supervisor to sign a document suspending the aid on THE SAME DAY OF THE JULY 25 phone call . And the WH is blocking testimony from people who were at ground zero.Lindsay Graham most despicable man in the senate that knows better has said as he won't watch these hearings, called the hearings a sham when the open hearings are a week in and he's the chairman of the judiciary committee!!!!!!

So its come to this. We as americans and Republicans in congress need to decide if its OK for a president to clumsily order a shakedown which has been verified by 2 of Ambassador Sonneland's aides who heard him on the phone in a Kiev restaurant on July 26 with Trump who was shouting into the phone so loudly Sonneland had to hold it away from his ear allowing those at the table to clearly hear Trump say "so hes going to do the investigations"? Sonneland told him. "he loves your @$$ he will do whatever you want". The ambassador later told these 2 witnesses that Trump doesn't give a F#(K about Ukraine, just the " big stuff" like investigations....I've heard this referred to as Watergate with idiots Sonnelands testimony next week will be riveting to see how much he wants to thread the needle without putting himself in legal jeopardy.

But we have to decide, is it OK to leave a loose cannon like this in office? A guy who picked up the phone the day after Mueller testified to the congress to make a call shaking down Ukraine? It's really about us. If Trump was in the 20s he would be packing his stuff and fitted for a pinstripe suit although they would probably have to taze his fat @$$ to get him out of the white house. yes he will survive this and the constitution will take the biggest hit in my lifetime, the separation of powers so carefully crafted by our founders will be in the toilet as the executive branch becomes powerful enough not even criminal behavior will remove a president. The mistake made by the founders was that a significant majority of member of the legislators would put integrity over party.

Get used to the new normal. We're circling the porcelain queen.

[RiverDog]

as far as I know MSN is the only poll thats conducted daily. While it shows the battle lines hardening it still shows this president upside down by 9 or 10 points regarding impeachment and removal and also overall job approval. Having browsed some polls this morning only low 30% beleive Trumps actions were justified or in the scope of his authority. That cuts into his base around 10 points%. There is no way this helps Trump in any way other than fund raising . And a majority of americans have seen enough of the baboon. Plastering him on the tV wont help much.

The MSN poll shows pretty much the same trend as all the other polls, that despite in my opinion some really convincing testimony, support for impeachment has remained flat for 6 weeks and even dipped slightly last week.

Get used to the new normal. We're circling the porcelain queen.

So long as Trump is defeated in 2020, which is by no means a foregone conclusion, it's not going to be the "new normal." Trump is an anomaly. There's no one on the horizon that is as stupid, has as much money, and is as much of an A-hole as DJT.

[Hawktawk]

So long as Trump is defeated in 2020, which is by no means a foregone conclusion, it's not going to be the "new normal." Trump is an anomaly. There's no one on the horizon that is as stupid, has as much money, and is as much of an A-hole as DJT.

While I completely concur with your assessment of the man character wise I must digress to point out that while his prospects are slim and none Michael Bloomberg has about 51 Billion as opposed to Trump who has about 3 billion.

Im talking about legal and I guess Impeachable precedent when I say "new normal". This isn't getting fixed overnight whenever this abomination is over. As I've said Clinton and the Democrats circling the wagons around him in the face of impeachable behavior set the table for Trump.

But this is far worse misconduct on multiple occasions, far more permanently damaging to the institution of the presidency, the congress by their abdication of their constitutional duty and the constitutional framework of our nation, our relationships with foreign *allies* military alliances etc. And anyone who thinks there won't be a similarly morally bankrupt corrupt person rise to power in the future is being overly optimistic IMO. Cant put this tribalistic genie back in the bottle.

And just imagine if he should win another term and almost certainly preside over a recession or worse, a major military crisis, etc. I shudder at the thought....

[RiverDog]

So long as Trump is defeated in 2020, which is by no means a foregone conclusion, it's not going to be the "new normal." Trump is an anomaly. There's no one on the horizon that is as stupid, has as much money, and is as much of an A-hole as DJT.

While I completely concur with your assessment of the man character wise I must digress to point out that while his prospects are slim and none Michael Bloomberg has about 51 Billion as opposed to Trump who has about 3 billion.[/quote]

While Bloomberg meets my 2nd criteria, he doesn't meet #1 and #3.

Im talking about legal and I guess Impeachable precedent when I say "new normal". This isn't getting fixed overnight whenever this abomination is over. As I've said Clinton and the Democrats circling the wagons around him in the face of impeachable behavior set the table for Trump.

Maybe we're saying the same thing, but the "new normal" was set when the Dems claimed that perjury wasn't an impeachable offense. Personally, I think it's a clear abuse of power issue, that he's using the office to further his re-election campaign.

But this is far worse misconduct on multiple occasions, far more permanently damaging to the institution of the presidency, the congress by their abdication of their constitutional duty and the constitutional framework of our nation, our relationships with foreign *allies* military alliances etc. And anyone who thinks there won't be a similarly morally bankrupt corrupt person rise to power in the future is being overly optimistic IMO. Cant put this tribalistic genie back in the bottle.

This is where we part company. While I agree that Trump is the worst POTUS in my memory and that what he is doing is despicable, I do not think that anything he is doing is permanently damaging any institution anymore than Nixon or Clinton did.

And just imagine if he should win another term and almost certainly preside over a recession or worse, a major military crisis, etc. I shudder at the thought....

If you're going to worry about such things, be my guest. But I'm not going to get worried over things that I have no control over.

[I-5]

Riv, if Trump were to get re-elected (a distinct possibility in my view), you don't think that would set a number of precedents that would be damaging to our political system? It would give him a mandate that all his abuses are ok. And every future president or presidential candidate will feel free to do the same...or more.

[Hawktawk]

Riv, if Trump were to get re-elected (a distinct possibility in my view), you don't think that would set a number of precedents that would be damaging to our political system? It would give him a mandate that all his abuses are ok. And every future president or presidential candidate will feel free to do the same...or more.

This right here.^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
You cannot denormalize what has been made normal. You can’t make things that have been made legal illegal again.

At least not going up against an all powerful chief executive who has established legal precedent to be able to stay in power despite multiple impeachable offenses. No president in either party will ever surrender this power willingly. And if it’s this one with this power for 5 more years this Ukraine thing, Russian meddling in 20-20, political vendettas, utter incompetence ...it will seem like child’s play....sorry but I’m worried.

[RiverDog]

Riv, if Trump were to get re-elected (a distinct possibility in my view), you don't think that would set a number of precedents that would be damaging to our political system? It would give him a mandate that all his abuses are ok. And every future president or presidential candidate will feel free to do the same...or more.

No more than Clinton's getting away with lying under oath set a precedent for others to commit perjury.

Didn't Roger Stone do essentially the same thing Clinton did when he lied to Congress?

[I-5]

Riv, Clinton was impeached, right? It was his second term, of course. But if had been impeached during his first term and re-elected, then yes, it’s similar to what I’m talking about. Trump has a much longer list of vices, that goes without saying.

[RiverDog]

Riv, Clinton was impeached, right? It was his second term, of course. But if had been impeached during his first term and re-elected, then yes, it’s similar to what I’m talking about. Trump has a much longer list of vices, that goes without saying.

Clinton was impeached yet he left office with an approval rating in the mid 60's, so it's fair to assume that it probably wouldn't have affected a re-election bid had he not been a lame duck. Indeed, in the next election, Republicans got hammered, a clear vindication of Clinton's behavior and rejection of the attempt to remove him from office.

And keep in mind that Monicagate wasn't the only Clinton scandal. There was Filegate, where one of Clinton's aides obtained access to FBI files on political opponents and that those files were (supposedly) reviewed by the First Lady. There was also the controversy of the Clintons allowing political donors to stay overnight in the Lincoln bedroom, Chinagate, the sleazy pardons of donors to the Clinton library, and so on. It was a corrupt Administration, and one of the main reasons why I didn't vote for HRC in 2016 (I didn't vote for Trump, either). None of that seems to have had any long term effect on our government or the behavior of subsequent Administrations.

While I do agree with you that Trump's transgressions outweigh Clinton's, I believe that they will have a similar effect. As a matter of fact, one could argue the opposite, that the mere exposure of this type of behavior from POTUS's, even if they're not punished, will discourage others from attempting a similar thing. If someone came to Bush 43 or Obama and asked if they can let some political donor stay overnight in the White House, I'm pretty sure that the first thing to cross their minds would have been Clinton's scandal and they would have thrown them out of the Oval Office. No future POTUS, Republican or Democrat, is going to want to do anything that would draw a comparison to Trump. He's a negative role model.

[c_hawkbob]

While I do agree with you that Trump's transgressions outweigh Clinton's, I believe that they will have a similar effect. As a matter of fact, one could argue the opposite, that the mere exposure of this type of behavior from POTUS's, even if they're not punished, will discourage others from attempting a similar thing

That's a whole lot of assumption, with which I do not agree. I'm weary of the false equivalency of Trump = Clinton and frankly don't understand why you keep evoking it as you profess to understand the inequity.

[RiverDog]

That's a whole lot of assumption, with which I do not agree. I'm weary of the false equivalency of Trump = Clinton and frankly don't understand why you keep evoking it as you profess to understand the inequity.

The "false equivalency" applies to the scale of the transgressions committed by the two scandalous Administrations, and IMO those effects are scale independent in the same way as the lasting effects of a .5" rainstorm is about the same as that of a 2" rainstorm.

That doesn't preclude me in feeling that Trump's behavior in the Ukrainian scandal is impeachable whereas the Clinton's use of the Lincoln bedroom as a perk for political donors was not.

[Hawktawk]

The "false equivalency" applies to the scale of the transgressions committed by the two scandalous Administrations, and IMO those effects are scale independent in the same way as the lasting effects of a .5" rainstorm is about the same as that of a 2" rainstorm.

That doesn't preclude me in feeling that Trump's behavior in the Ukrainian scandal is impeachable whereas the Clinton's use of the Lincoln bedroom as a perk for political donors was not.

Both were impeachable but there is no comparison in scale. The original impetus for the Clinton prosecution was Whitewater as I'm sure you know. Much as Mueller and Russia/Trump collusion Starr was unable to really untangle it despite far more independent authority than Mueller to investigate , subpoena and indict.Although people pled the 5th, went to jail etc over lying about it or refusing to obey subpoenas.And of course perjuring himself about sex sunk Clinton in the congress which was fine by me, Lindsey Graham, Mitch McConnell Rush Limbaugh etc. IMO you shouldn't be able to be president if you perjure yourself about anything.

The Dems circling the wagons and preserving a man who had been caught red handed with a 23 year old intern, an act that would get any CEO in America fired on the spot set the table for today.

Now we have a guy who clearly colluded with Russia and Wikileaks to win in 2016, publicly imploring Russia" If you're listening I hope you can find the missing Emails" and "I love wikileaks" literally dozens of times from the stump. Following the release of testimony from Stones trial the Congress has opened an investigation into Trump having lied under oath in his take home test from Mueller when he said he couldn't recall any discussion of hacked Emails or Wikileaks dumps with Roger Stone or Paul manafort.The evidence that convicted Stone shows clearly that Trump was well informed, had personal and telephone conversations with Stone on many occasions and was eager for the information.

And the day after!!!!!! the Mueller testimony to the congress hes on the phone suggesting Ukraine do him a "favor" and investigate the guy who still has the biggest lead over him in national polls, actually testimony reveals he had wanted to have Zelinski "go to a microphone and announce an investigation" to "put him in a box" on the record so to speak. Obviously the news networks pick up the word investigation and the damage is done, never mind it's already been looked at and no actual wrongdoing has been found.

So let's keep score
Watergate. Damage to constitution ZERO. The process worked exactly as the founders crafted it other that as opposed to being removed the President resigned, a class act IMO. Ford pardoned him, also a class act and the right thing to do even though his chance of reelection was shot at that point.

Whitewater. Definitely damaged the constitution and the oversight responsibility of the congress to allow a president to lie under oath about sex. Although it was the general opinion of the public that a married man lying about an affair no matter to whom the lie was told was understandable on many levels and not impeachable. In hindsight the Rs decision to move forward with this in the first place was in reality a congressional overreach that exposed the constitution and separation of powers balance to harm so it was kind of a bipartisan assault on the separation of powers and constitutional limits of authority.

Russian collusion/Ukraine shakedown/Obstruction of justice and Congress/Perjury/Bribery/Campaign finance/Abuse of a private charity/Possible tax fraud/Violations of the emoluments clause 1000 times over/ insurance fraud etc etc etc etc....

The guy will likely skate despite having clearly committed crimes that would land anyone else in the country in jail for the rest of their lives.

And to a man these Senators know it which is what is the most nauseating thing about it.

There is no comparison whatsoever between what's going on right now and any previous investigation in terms of what's at stake and it's looking like the wheels are off then the chassis is going over a cliff in flames

[RiverDog]

Watergate. Damage to constitution ZERO. The process worked exactly as the founders crafted it other that as opposed to being removed the President resigned, a class act IMO. Ford pardoned him, also a class act and the right thing to do even though his chance of reelection was shot at that point.

I agree with you, but that's not what we were being told in real time. I distinctly remember John Chancellor of NBC, on the eve of the Saturday Night Massacre, saying that we were in the midst of the gravest Constitutional crisis in our country's history. That type of rhetoric is eerily similar to what's being used to describe the current predicament we have in Trump's Ukrainian scandal.

Whitewater. Definitely damaged the constitution and the oversight responsibility of the congress to allow a president to lie under oath about sex. Although it was the general opinion of the public that a married man lying about an affair no matter to whom the lie was told was understandable on many levels and not impeachable. In hindsight the Rs decision to move forward with this in the first place was in reality a congressional overreach that exposed the constitution and separation of powers balance to harm so it was kind of a bipartisan assault on the separation of powers and constitutional limits of authority.

Specifically what section of the Constitution is compromised due to anything in the Clinton years? Even though Clinton wasn't held accountable for his lying under oath, we still prosecute and imprison people for committing perjury, don't we? As much as I disliked Clinton, there was nothing that he did while he was in office that permanently affected our democratic form of government.

We're just going to have to agree to disagree on this issue. We're engaging in a circular argument.