US Politics

Squinty wrote:
Moggy wrote:
Squinty wrote:Huge envelope for tiny hands.

Do you think they sent a big envelope just to troll him about his small hands?

I think they did

I think it's the North Korean equivalent of the giant cheques given to lottery winners.

twitter.com/SethAbramson/status/1002918117713108993

Washington (CNN) - President Donald Trump's lawyers argued in a confidential January letter to special counsel Robert Mueller that the President cannot illegally obstruct the Russia probe because he, as the top law enforcement officer, has authority over all federal investigations, The New York Times reported Saturday.

The 20-page letter from Trump attorney Jay Sekulow and then-Trump lawyer John Dowd, which CNN reported on last week and the Times has obtained, says that Trump could not possibly have committed obstruction in the Russia investigation because the Constitution empowers him to "terminate the inquiry, or even exercise his power to pardon if he so desired."

https://www.cnn.com/2018/06/02/politics ... index.html

twitter.com/SteveSchmidtSES/status/1003049033127034880

Oh boy.

twitter.com/steve_vladeck/status/1002985379371405312

twitter.com/MarshallCohen/status/1003004292192784384

As someone notes in the thread, if the response was short but accurate, that means Trump knew ahead of the statement what the meeting had been about, the meeting he never even knew took place that is. :fp:

twitter.com/MichaelAvenatti/status/1003276602594086912

twitter.com/ThisWeekABC/status/1003260443815698435

"Our recollection keeps changing" sounds like a solid excuse. :slol:

Might have to use that one myself!

twitter.com/HamillHimself/status/1003323006612004864

PostRe: US Politics by **Harry Ola** » Mon Jun 04, 2018 6:15 am

Trump tweeting about Paul Manafort for the first time in 7 months has got people speculating if he is about to flip. If he does this thread explains why that is a very big deal.

twitter.com/gregolear/status/1003404215799222272

PostRe: US Politics by **Knoyleo** » Mon Jun 04, 2018 7:25 am

GOOD GUYS WITH GUNS

twitter.com/RyanHaarer/status/1003084052226822153

PostRe: US Politics by **Squinty** » Mon Jun 04, 2018 7:52 am

Seems like their argument has switched to 'he's the president and therefore untouchable!'

It ain't gonna be long until this is over.

Edit - Just seen the Manafort tweet. Why didn't they tell they were investigating him WAHHHHHHHHH. This guy is a total strawberry floating moron.

PostRe: US Politics by **Alvin Flummux** » Mon Jun 04, 2018 11:11 am

Squinty wrote:Seems like their argument has switched to 'he's the president and therefore untouchable!'

So, the Nixon defense? Didn't work before, won't work now; Ken Starr concluded that he could indict Bill Clinton, but declined to do so.

PostRe: US Politics by **Lex-Man** » Mon Jun 04, 2018 12:02 pm

Alvin Flummux wrote:
Squinty wrote:Seems like their argument has switched to 'he's the president and therefore untouchable!'

So, the Nixon defense? Didn't work before, won't work now; Ken Starr concluded that he could indict Bill Clinton, but declined to do so.

Clinton did actually get indicted, he just wasn't prosecuted.

PostRe: US Politics by **Alvin Flummux** » Mon Jun 04, 2018 12:04 pm

lex-man wrote:
Alvin Flummux wrote:
Squinty wrote:Seems like their argument has switched to 'he's the president and therefore untouchable!'

So, the Nixon defense? Didn't work before, won't work now; Ken Starr concluded that he could indict Bill Clinton, but declined to do so.

Clinton did actually get indicted, he just wasn't prosecuted.

That's the part Starr could've done but didn't end up doing. :fp:

Silly me.

Anyway, yes, Trump is not untouchable, he will be touched.

PostRe: US Politics by **Lex-Man** » Mon Jun 04, 2018 12:11 pm

Alvin Flummux wrote:
lex-man wrote:
Alvin Flummux wrote:
Squinty wrote:Seems like their argument has switched to 'he's the president and therefore untouchable!'

So, the Nixon defense? Didn't work before, won't work now; Ken Starr concluded that he could indict Bill Clinton, but declined to do so.

Clinton did actually get indicted, he just wasn't prosecuted.

That's the part Starr could've done but didn't end up doing. Silly me.

Anyway, yes, Trump is not untouchable, he will be touched.

The issue is that Trump could be indicted but to actually get charges through 67 members of the senate would have to vote to prosecute which would mean that republicans would have to vote for charges. There are currently 51 Republicans and 47 Democrats in the senate so it's unlikely IMO that he'd actually be charged.

PostRe: US Politics by **Alvin Flummux** » Mon Jun 04, 2018 12:12 pm

lex-man wrote:
Alvin Flummux wrote:
lex-man wrote:
Alvin Flummux wrote:
Squinty wrote:Seems like their argument has switched to 'he's the president and therefore untouchable!'

So, the Nixon defense? Didn't work before, won't work now; Ken Starr concluded that he could indict Bill Clinton, but declined to do so.

Clinton did actually get indicted, he just wasn't prosecuted.

That's the part Starr could've done but didn't end up doing. Silly me.

Anyway, yes, Trump is not untouchable, he will be touched.

The issue is that Trump could be indicted but to actually get charges through 67 members of the senate would have to vote to prosecute which would mean that republicans would have to vote for charges. There are currently 51 Republicans and 47 Democrats in the senate so it's unlikely IMO that he'd actually be charged.

They could wait until he's out of office, but Mueller's more likely to name Trump an unindicted co-conspirator, much the same as Nixon was.

PostRe: US Politics by **Garth** » Mon Jun 04, 2018 1:54 pm

Apparently Melania hasn't been seen in public for about a month now and she's not going to the G7 or North Korea summits.

Trump doesn't see her much these days either:

PostRe: US Politics by **Garth** » Mon Jun 04, 2018 1:56 pm

twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/1003616210922147841

Save Melanie.

Has any legal scholar actually said that Trump could pardon himself? :dread:

No way the president is that far above the law...

twitter.com/PreetBharara/status/1003618507420991488

Alvin Flummux wrote:Has any legal scholar actually said that Trump could pardon himself? No way the president is that far above the law...

twitter.com/PreetBharara/status/1003618507420991488

The lawyer on Trump Con Law seemed to think it wasn't doable. It'd be fun to watch him try though.

https://trumpconlaw.com/3-pardon-power

Trump genuinely seems to think he’s an all powerful Emperor. :lol:

US Politics

Who is online

Affiliates