Now that we have a new thread, in order to ensure that this thread continues to meet TL standards and follows the proper guidelines, we will be enforcing the rules in the OP more strictly. Be sure to give them a complete and thorough read before posting!
NOTE: When providing a source, please provide a very brief summary on what it's about and what purpose it adds to the discussion. The supporting statement should clearly explain why the subject is relevant and needs to be discussed. Please follow this rule especially for tweets.
Your supporting statement should always come BEFORE you provide the source.
On April 26 2019 10:49 JimmiC wrote: Arrest him. Get all the corrupt fucks out of office. I don't care what "team" they are on.
There should pretty much be a criminal investigation of the matter. But he was the VP. Tradition says that presidential administrations refrain from investigating the administration that preceded them (glass houses). Nixon was pardoned by the next president; the Iran contra people were pardoned by the next president; Obama didnt investigate the lead up to the Iraq war (though you can be sure Obama's people knew about the tactics used).
On April 26 2019 10:49 JimmiC wrote: Arrest him. Get all the corrupt fucks out of office. I don't care what "team" they are on.
There should pretty much be a criminal investigation of the matter. But he was the VP. Tradition says that presidential administrations refrain from investigating the administration that preceded them (glass houses). Nixon was pardoned by the next president; the Iran contra people were pardoned by the next president; Obama didnt investigate the lead up to the Iraq war (though you can be sure Obama's people knew about the tactics used).
This is a good summary for why Trump leaving office will not result in prosecution.
On April 27 2019 07:56 Wombat_NI wrote: I don’t understand the whole wider conspiracy here anyway.
I mean I think the ‘deep state’ is a rather important political actor if one broadly lumps them together. As to why they’d consider Trump some kind of threat, whose draining of the swamp has been so ineffective that Shrek has asked to move in, I am confused as to how this all ties together.
I could absolutely buy this kind of conspiracy as a defensive measure against some kind of threat to wider status who orthodoxy, how the fuck is that Trump?
A wider conspiracy is hard to pin down. There are more conspiracies than there are Democratic 2020 candidates.There are so many that I could find a handful just on Reddit: They range from "but Hillary" to "Congress is staging a coup" to "the investigation was founded on lies from the dossie" to "there's a pro-Clinton cabal who want to bring Trump down", to "the Democrats are cannibals" to "SETH RICH YO".
It's all fucking crazy. But crazier than finding it on the conspiracy subreddits is finding it in the U.S. politics megathread.
On April 27 2019 10:50 ZerOCoolSC2 wrote: Not from the administration. But there are other lawsuits ongoing.
If the feds don't go after him the NY prosecutors (who knew about his habitual criminality long before he even ran) aren't going to. The worst outcome Trump faces is losing the 2020 election imo. The idea that state attourneys are going to prosecute a former president seems to just be a way to string along people that thought the Mueller investigation would result in Trump being held accountable in some way.
On April 26 2019 10:49 JimmiC wrote: Arrest him. Get all the corrupt fucks out of office. I don't care what "team" they are on.
There should pretty much be a criminal investigation of the matter. But he was the VP. Tradition says that presidential administrations refrain from investigating the administration that preceded them (glass houses). Nixon was pardoned by the next president; the Iran contra people were pardoned by the next president; Obama didnt investigate the lead up to the Iraq war (though you can be sure Obama's people knew about the tactics used).
Maybe one spin off bonus of all the tradition that Trump broke. Perhaps this will be another. And some people will have to pay for their shady dealings.
On April 26 2019 10:49 JimmiC wrote: Arrest him. Get all the corrupt fucks out of office. I don't care what "team" they are on.
There should pretty much be a criminal investigation of the matter. But he was the VP. Tradition says that presidential administrations refrain from investigating the administration that preceded them (glass houses). Nixon was pardoned by the next president; the Iran contra people were pardoned by the next president; Obama didnt investigate the lead up to the Iraq war (though you can be sure Obama's people knew about the tactics used).
This is a good summary for why Trump leaving office will not result in prosecution.
I don't think NY state has the same tradition regarding laws broken before he was president.
They certainly seem to, otherwise he wouldn't be wealthy and live in NY while being a notorious liar and criminal/conman (granted the tradition is unrelated to presidents), being a former president just makes it even more ridiculous wishful thinking imo.
On April 27 2019 06:49 Plansix wrote: I'm still pretty unclear why the special counsel didn't say "I didn't find probable cause of obstruction" if that is what he found. That would be pretty clear.
Because he and his team were a bunch of political hacks that were only interested in covering up prior malfeasance while inflicting as much political damage as possible on Trump. The entire report was written with these goals in mind, which is why we see ridiculous sentences such as "while this report does not conclude that the president committed a crime, it also does not exonerate him." Anyone with even a cursory understanding of criminal law knows that this an absurd standard for a prosecutor to be using.
Glad we got to you having your cake and eating it too at the end of all of this. The report clearly shows Trump didn't do anything, but also was created by political hacks out to get Trump. You have created frame work where you get to lean on your law degree to invalidate people's views of the report right up until you get back into a corner, and then you can call the investigators political hacks.
Do you know who Mueller is?
He's the same puppet who straight up lied about WMDs in Iraq when he was the head of the FBI
And now he is the head of a completely unwarranted investigation, giving a report that is so disgustingly charged and agenda ridden that it's ludicrous
To me, Mueller has shown himself to be nothing other than an agent for whatever outfit pulls the strings
The one thing worth noting here is that the Mueller report was probably written predominantly by Andrew Weissman. The tortured reasoning in it bears all of the hallmarks of his work.
wouldn't expect anything different from a member of the Clinton cartel. he's a nyc classic
Catch me up. Why is the Clinton Cartel working for the Bush's to get Bush the war he wants. Wasn't this a Republican thing?
Also WTF is the Clinton Cartel? I'm not up on the deep state beliefs
I wasnt referring to Bush sending America into Iraq, but in any case the Bushs and the Clintons are the same thing. Establishment democrats and republicans are two sides of the same coin.
Anyway, the Clintons (and Schumer) "run" NYC. as in this is their racket
How do you think HIllary Clinton miraculously won the race for NY senator despite having lived there only for a few months before?
the biggest unions in NYC run by the mafia, and who were in bed with Bill Clinton during his presidency. Schumer was also under their fold. Some of this info you can probably find on google (search for LIUNA and clinton, Fino, Coia)
anyway, the big labor unions pump millions into clintons and schumer to this day
I've lived in nyc literally my entire life so I know other things as well, but I would never discuss it on an internet forum
Edit: i googled the stuff i mentioned before myself, and it's difficult to find stuff from 20+ years ago. Here are a couple of old articles
On April 27 2019 07:56 Wombat_NI wrote: I don’t understand the whole wider conspiracy here anyway.
I mean I think the ‘deep state’ is a rather important political actor if one broadly lumps them together. As to why they’d consider Trump some kind of threat, whose draining of the swamp has been so ineffective that Shrek has asked to move in, I am confused as to how this all ties together.
I could absolutely buy this kind of conspiracy as a defensive measure against some kind of threat to wider status who orthodoxy, how the fuck is that Trump?
Just read around these parts and ask yourself how many people think Trump is doing/would do serious damage to the country domestically and in foreign affairs. Well, they had a second chance to hurt the Trump's administration capacity to make those changes. Embroil his top staff handling the investigation giving interviews. It hurts his ability to get legislation through by making it look like he was close to being impeached (insert the thousands of articles on how the "walls are closing in on the Trump administration" and "latest leaks show collusion". The air of suspicion for the ongoing investigation hurt his party's chances in the 2018 midterms.
You also have to take that with a second fact.The federal bureaucracy's personnel is very tilted towards the left end of the spectrum. They can take these actions to lock down an opposing administration with very little chance that the same tools will be used against their interests in the future. Will Trump send a foreign spy to China or Iran to wrap up a future Kamala Harris or Bernie Sanders administration with allegations of collusion for two years? Get some FISA warrants and run some spies/infiltrate spies against their campaigns? Very unlikely.
But I mean, is it? They have a rather odd way of showing it.
Confirmed by measuring political donations and surveys. Is it really so hard to believe the party principally associated with an expanded role for the federal government is staffed by people that want to grow their role and influence?
On April 27 2019 06:49 Plansix wrote: I'm still pretty unclear why the special counsel didn't say "I didn't find probable cause of obstruction" if that is what he found. That would be pretty clear.
Because he and his team were a bunch of political hacks that were only interested in covering up prior malfeasance while inflicting as much political damage as possible on Trump. The entire report was written with these goals in mind, which is why we see ridiculous sentences such as "while this report does not conclude that the president committed a crime, it also does not exonerate him." Anyone with even a cursory understanding of criminal law knows that this an absurd standard for a prosecutor to be using.
Glad we got to you having your cake and eating it too at the end of all of this. The report clearly shows Trump didn't do anything, but also was created by political hacks out to get Trump. You have created frame work where you get to lean on your law degree to invalidate people's views of the report right up until you get back into a corner, and then you can call the investigators political hacks.
Do you know who Mueller is?
He's the same puppet who straight up lied about WMDs in Iraq when he was the head of the FBI
And now he is the head of a completely unwarranted investigation, giving a report that is so disgustingly charged and agenda ridden that it's ludicrous
To me, Mueller has shown himself to be nothing other than an agent for whatever outfit pulls the strings
The one thing worth noting here is that the Mueller report was probably written predominantly by Andrew Weissman. The tortured reasoning in it bears all of the hallmarks of his work.
wouldn't expect anything different from a member of the Clinton cartel. he's a nyc classic
Catch me up. Why is the Clinton Cartel working for the Bush's to get Bush the war he wants. Wasn't this a Republican thing?
Also WTF is the Clinton Cartel? I'm not up on the deep state beliefs
I wasnt referring to Bush sending America into Iraq, but in any case the Bushs and the Clintons are the same thing. Establishment democrats and republicans are two sides of the same coin.
Anyway, the Clintons (and Schumer) "run" NYC. as in this is their racket
How do you think HIllary Clinton miraculously won the race for NY senator despite having lived there only for a few months before?
the biggest unions in NYC run by the mafia, and who were in bed with Bill Clinton during his presidency. Schumer was also under their fold. Some of this info you can probably find on google (search for LIUNA and clinton, Fino, Coia)
anyway, the big labor unions pump millions into clintons and schumer to this day
I've lived in nyc literally my entire life so I know other things as well, but I would never discuss it on an internet forum
Edit: i googled the stuff i mentioned before myself, and it's difficult to find stuff from 20+ years ago. Here are a couple of old articles
On April 27 2019 06:49 Plansix wrote: I'm still pretty unclear why the special counsel didn't say "I didn't find probable cause of obstruction" if that is what he found. That would be pretty clear.
Because he and his team were a bunch of political hacks that were only interested in covering up prior malfeasance while inflicting as much political damage as possible on Trump. The entire report was written with these goals in mind, which is why we see ridiculous sentences such as "while this report does not conclude that the president committed a crime, it also does not exonerate him." Anyone with even a cursory understanding of criminal law knows that this an absurd standard for a prosecutor to be using.
Glad we got to you having your cake and eating it too at the end of all of this. The report clearly shows Trump didn't do anything, but also was created by political hacks out to get Trump. You have created frame work where you get to lean on your law degree to invalidate people's views of the report right up until you get back into a corner, and then you can call the investigators political hacks.
Do you know who Mueller is?
He's the same puppet who straight up lied about WMDs in Iraq when he was the head of the FBI
And now he is the head of a completely unwarranted investigation, giving a report that is so disgustingly charged and agenda ridden that it's ludicrous
To me, Mueller has shown himself to be nothing other than an agent for whatever outfit pulls the strings
The one thing worth noting here is that the Mueller report was probably written predominantly by Andrew Weissman. The tortured reasoning in it bears all of the hallmarks of his work.
wouldn't expect anything different from a member of the Clinton cartel. he's a nyc classic
Catch me up. Why is the Clinton Cartel working for the Bush's to get Bush the war he wants. Wasn't this a Republican thing?
Also WTF is the Clinton Cartel? I'm not up on the deep state beliefs
I wasnt referring to Bush sending America into Iraq, but in any case the Bushs and the Clintons are the same thing. Establishment democrats and republicans are two sides of the same coin.
Anyway, the Clintons (and Schumer) "run" NYC. as in this is their racket
How do you think HIllary Clinton miraculously won the race for NY senator despite having lived there only for a few months before?
the biggest unions in NYC run by the mafia, and who were in bed with Bill Clinton during his presidency. Schumer was also under their fold. Some of this info you can probably find on google (search for LIUNA and clinton, Fino, Coia)
anyway, the big labor unions pump millions into clintons and schumer to this day
I've lived in nyc literally my entire life so I know other things as well, but I would never discuss it on an internet forum
Edit: i googled the stuff i mentioned before myself, and it's difficult to find stuff from 20+ years ago. Here are a couple of old articles
If you want to talk about mob connections you're gonna have to address Donald Trump, who by the way was right there with you in NYC lol.
Trump is a NYC building developer in the 80s and 90s....fo course he has connections...it's honestly no secret, at least in NYC. Anyone who wants to build anything has to deal with the mob. If the construction contract was a above a certain value, it went to the mob company. Trump himself admitted during his campaign that he had to "play that game" to find success in that environment. His involvement also included campaign contributions to the officials (mainly democrats) who held power over his projects. Which is why he used to be so buddy-buddy with the clintons.
It's not the same thing as Hillary, Schumer, even the Cuomos though. In Trump's case it was something that came with the territory of his business - the result of corruption.
some say trump was an informant, which is why he never got into trouble when italian and russian mobsters got put away, even when parts of his properties were involved in mafia activities. it makes the whole Giuliani being Trump's legal counsel make more sense
In any case the organized crime outfits in NYC have been used to support the Democratic Party since Tammany Hall
There is a bizarre dissonance from how you treat crime, totally excusing it as, “came with the territory of his business.” Is that not the same shitty excuse that the (corrupt) actions of politicians are justified with?
It seems like you only have an issue with crime when it’s the Democrats benefitting, and not when a Republican, aka the President, is involved.
Surely criminal behavior in private business is as criminal as criminal behavior in politics? If a person embezzles a million dollars from a private business it’s fine, because embezzlement is known to happen at private companies?
Criminal actions are all about the people you know. Breaking the law and you can surround yourself with get out of jail cards is the way to go. Ergo, politics.
On April 27 2019 07:56 Wombat_NI wrote: I don’t understand the whole wider conspiracy here anyway.
I mean I think the ‘deep state’ is a rather important political actor if one broadly lumps them together. As to why they’d consider Trump some kind of threat, whose draining of the swamp has been so ineffective that Shrek has asked to move in, I am confused as to how this all ties together.
I could absolutely buy this kind of conspiracy as a defensive measure against some kind of threat to wider status who orthodoxy, how the fuck is that Trump?
Just read around these parts and ask yourself how many people think Trump is doing/would do serious damage to the country domestically and in foreign affairs. Well, they had a second chance to hurt the Trump's administration capacity to make those changes. Embroil his top staff handling the investigation giving interviews. It hurts his ability to get legislation through by making it look like he was close to being impeached (insert the thousands of articles on how the "walls are closing in on the Trump administration" and "latest leaks show collusion". The air of suspicion for the ongoing investigation hurt his party's chances in the 2018 midterms.
You also have to take that with a second fact.The federal bureaucracy's personnel is very tilted towards the left end of the spectrum. They can take these actions to lock down an opposing administration with very little chance that the same tools will be used against their interests in the future. Will Trump send a foreign spy to China or Iran to wrap up a future Kamala Harris or Bernie Sanders administration with allegations of collusion for two years? Get some FISA warrants and run some spies/infiltrate spies against their campaigns? Very unlikely.
But I mean, is it? They have a rather odd way of showing it.
Confirmed by measuring political donations and surveys. Is it really so hard to believe the party principally associated with an expanded role for the federal government is staffed by people that want to grow their role and influence?
Depends who, do the intelligence community and military community lean that direction as well?
For some of these conspiracies to make sense Trump has to actually be some threat to wider things in these areas, which he hasn’t really been.
Sure I think some of these things are individual conspiracies that make sense, or even actually happened, but tied together into a wider one they don’t really make much sense at all.
I don't think it's very convincing that establishment figures were motivated by any sort of leftist ideology to push the Trump investigation. Rather, I guess it was CIA/establishment-hawks and that it was primarily to do with foreign policy. Trump alarmed them with talk of rapprochement with Russia, including cooperation in Syria, enough for them to feel like they had to take measures to reign him in. It was no secret that Hilary was extremely hawkish on Syria and would have been their preferred candidate for those reasons. Obama did what the hawks wanted in Libya but balked at going to total war in Syria thus messing up the playbook. Hilary (or a republican like Rubio) would have given them exactly what they wanted in this regard and Trump's election ruined this particular goal.
The investigation was an insurance policy that Trump would be under too much pressure to make any other radical foreign policy changes and it has worked like a charm. The Russia-friendly members of Trump's team like Flynn were forced out and the hawks now have their man Bolton installed to push more typical establishment-hawk policy.
Now a counterargument to this would be Trump's Iran policy which is in line with Neocon goals and was stated even before the election. Why wouldn't they support him as a candidate if he was willing to be hawkish on Iran? I think it came down to their priorities. They know things have to be done in a certain order and way. Hilary as president would have sold total war in Syria to the public on humanitarian grounds and would have likely got a broad bipartisan consensus. Syria was a bigger priority for them at this point than Iran as there was more potential for actual regime change to something more US/Israel-friendly and in the process denying Russia an important naval facility (Tartus).
I think those cheering for the Mueller investigation on the left are probably being shortsighted in that such tactics can also be used against non-establishment candidates on their side (i.e. Bernie) who will also be seen as a threat to establishment-hawk goals. If Bernie stays on track as a leading contender I predict we'll see increasing (overblown) accusations that Russia is supporting his candidacy through social media interference and in the current hysterical climate this could be significantly damaging to his prospects.
On April 27 2019 06:49 Plansix wrote: I'm still pretty unclear why the special counsel didn't say "I didn't find probable cause of obstruction" if that is what he found. That would be pretty clear.
Because he and his team were a bunch of political hacks that were only interested in covering up prior malfeasance while inflicting as much political damage as possible on Trump. The entire report was written with these goals in mind, which is why we see ridiculous sentences such as "while this report does not conclude that the president committed a crime, it also does not exonerate him." Anyone with even a cursory understanding of criminal law knows that this an absurd standard for a prosecutor to be using.
Glad we got to you having your cake and eating it too at the end of all of this. The report clearly shows Trump didn't do anything, but also was created by political hacks out to get Trump. You have created frame work where you get to lean on your law degree to invalidate people's views of the report right up until you get back into a corner, and then you can call the investigators political hacks.
Do you know who Mueller is?
He's the same puppet who straight up lied about WMDs in Iraq when he was the head of the FBI
And now he is the head of a completely unwarranted investigation, giving a report that is so disgustingly charged and agenda ridden that it's ludicrous
To me, Mueller has shown himself to be nothing other than an agent for whatever outfit pulls the strings
The one thing worth noting here is that the Mueller report was probably written predominantly by Andrew Weissman. The tortured reasoning in it bears all of the hallmarks of his work.
wouldn't expect anything different from a member of the Clinton cartel. he's a nyc classic
Catch me up. Why is the Clinton Cartel working for the Bush's to get Bush the war he wants. Wasn't this a Republican thing?
Also WTF is the Clinton Cartel? I'm not up on the deep state beliefs
I wasnt referring to Bush sending America into Iraq, but in any case the Bushs and the Clintons are the same thing. Establishment democrats and republicans are two sides of the same coin.
Anyway, the Clintons (and Schumer) "run" NYC. as in this is their racket
How do you think HIllary Clinton miraculously won the race for NY senator despite having lived there only for a few months before?
the biggest unions in NYC run by the mafia, and who were in bed with Bill Clinton during his presidency. Schumer was also under their fold. Some of this info you can probably find on google (search for LIUNA and clinton, Fino, Coia)
anyway, the big labor unions pump millions into clintons and schumer to this day
I've lived in nyc literally my entire life so I know other things as well, but I would never discuss it on an internet forum
Edit: i googled the stuff i mentioned before myself, and it's difficult to find stuff from 20+ years ago. Here are a couple of old articles
If you want to talk about mob connections you're gonna have to address Donald Trump, who by the way was right there with you in NYC lol.
Trump is a NYC building developer in the 80s and 90s....fo course he has connections...it's honestly no secret, at least in NYC. Anyone who wants to build anything has to deal with the mob. If the construction contract was a above a certain value, it went to the mob company. Trump himself admitted during his campaign that he had to "play that game" to find success in that environment. His involvement also included campaign contributions to the officials (mainly democrats) who held power over his projects. Which is why he used to be so buddy-buddy with the clintons.
It's not the same thing as Hillary, Schumer, even the Cuomos though. In Trump's case it was something that came with the territory of his business - the result of corruption.
some say trump was an informant, which is why he never got into trouble when italian and russian mobsters got put away, even when parts of his properties were involved in mafia activities. it makes the whole Giuliani being Trump's legal counsel make more sense
In any case the organized crime outfits in NYC have been used to support the Democratic Party since Tammany Hall
This is very generous to Trump. He went above and beyond playing the game. This is why his mentor was Roy Cohn, mob lawyer and McCarthy lawyer. And it's why he went straight to Roger Stone to be his consultant like 30 years ago. His condos in NY and FL are full of laundered money and criminals of various stripes. He's surrounded by criminals and tax cheats, and he benefits off of all of it. He didn't need to use undocumented Polish workers employed by a mob company using cheap concrete to build Trump Tower. He embraced it and became a part of it. Also wonder how he got that tax abatement on his midtown building?
EPT
