Trump's Presidency

[Ricardo]

I agree absolutely. He has to own it.

I'm chuckling at the idea that it was discussed in depth. I have serious doubts about that, given the management style we're all observing

you are 'observing'? oh wow, from what source of info?

 

[Moxie]

On the emails, it's a bit of a flimsy parallel to be frank. Yeah, Pence was careless using a public account. Although, he didn't break any state or federal laws. Clinton, on the other hand had classified information on her personal server. There is a distinction between sensitive and classified. Clinton broke the law.

On the Yemen raid, Trump approved a mission put forward by military advisors. It went badly wrong. My main criticism of Clinton concerned the lead up to Benghazi when the department ignored requests to beef up security despite concluding it was high risk. They actually reduced security despite being asked to do the reverse by the people on the ground. In a nutshell, Clinton and co, went against the requests on the ground with disastrous consequences... Trump went with the requests on the ground with disastrous consequences.... Overall though, I don't agree with the Americans getting involved in Yemen at all - much like Libya.

It's not really a flimsy parallel. It's unlike you to be so sensational. Without going over it all again, it's a cloudy area, and complicated, but there is no law that HRC clearly broke. You're assuming that there's a law against using a private server, and there isn't. As to "disastrous consequences," well, to her political career, yes. As to national security, no. With Pence, his using a private server, at this stage of the game, is not just hypocritical, it's foolish. One thing about technology is that some of this is learn-as-you-go, and Pence should have known better.

One thing I'll say about Yemen and Trump is how much Trump pushed off responsibility for it. That's one thing I find especially appalling. Apparently, he thinks "The Buck Stops with Them."

 

[britbox]

It will never be established officially that Clinton broke the law.

What's not in dispute:

1) She had classified documents on her personal server and email outside of the secure systems in place.
2) The above contravenes the Federal Records Act, US Code 793 and Executive Order 13526.

What gives? Is Pence using a private server at this stage of the game? I thought this was legacy stuff from the past... and Pence didn't break any laws in doing so. There is no evidence of classified information being transmitted. There is a big distinction between sensitive and classified.

Disastrous consequences... It was pretty disastrous for those American staff who died. An embassy or consulate getting attacked is a threat to national security. I don't hold Clinton wholly responsible for Benghazi by the way, just negligent and her attempts to stonewall investigations into Benghazi and her own email tell a story on it's own.

Trump should own executive orders that he makes... that I agree with.

 

[Asmodeus]

I have to say that this continued effort to delegitimize the current administration is bordering on the idiotic. I understand that Democrats have nothing left to contribute to the policy debate and need to shift attention from that fact, but to continually repeat the same narrative over and over with the hope that repetition will make it true is embarrassing.

The problem with Democrat assertions of wrong doing is that they are continually getting caught in their hypocritical lies. I like how Fancy Nancy Pelosi said that while she met with Russian officials in the past she never met the guy in question with Sessions. However, today a picture surfaces with her in a meeting with that very diplomat. With members proudly tweeting and posting their doings opposition researchers are continually digging up dirt on both sides. I guess these social media trails never go away. Ouch!

The Demoncats would have had more credibility if they simply admitted that all member of Congress met with the Russians, and instead focused on Sessions inconsistencies in his testimony. There is certainly not enough there for a resignation but they could have scored some political points. Instead, they are turning this into an adolescent temper tantrum.

In the end, I suspect that Sessions is going no where. He loves the job and Trump likes him. Case closed, nothing to see here.

Now, the murmur in the conspiracy world is that the reason Session is getting such push back is that they are working on busting a deep, deep pedophile ring in which high members of government have participated. With Sessions on the job, there have been over 1,500 pedophiles arrested in the last month. People are starting to believe that this ring is actually a real thing and insiders are getting real nervous. I'm don't think it's true but I'll support an AG who arrests and deports illegals any day. Hasta la vista amigo!

 

[Moxie]

It will never be established officially that Clinton broke the law.

What's not in dispute:

1) She had classified documents on her personal server and email outside of the secure systems in place.
2) The above contravenes the Federal Records Act, US Code 793 and Executive Order 13526.

What gives? Is Pence using a private server at this stage of the game? I thought this was legacy stuff from the past... and Pence didn't break any laws in doing so. There is no evidence of classified information being transmitted. There is a big distinction between sensitive and classified.

Disastrous consequences... It was pretty disastrous for those American staff who died. An embassy or consulate getting attacked is a threat to national security. I don't hold Clinton wholly responsible for Benghazi by the way, just negligent and her attempts to stonewall investigations into Benghazi and her own email tell a story on it's own.

Trump should own executive orders that he makes... that I agree with.

Oh, someone's doing his homework.

Still, HRC was great in the Benghazi hearings. She owned it, she didn't cover it up. Let's face it: it's sad for the people that died, in both Benghazi and Yemen. But while both of these qualify as "blunders," they don't raise to the level of "epic fails." And Clinton was not wholly responsible for Benghazi. Were she not setting up as the next best contender for the Democratic nomination, I don't think there would have been such a witch hunt for her head on that. "The story" you think that Benghazi and her emails tells is a story you're looking for, IMO.

 

[Moxie]

I have to say that this continued effort to delegitimize the current administration is bordering on the idiotic. I understand that Democrats have nothing left to contribute to the policy debate and need to shift attention from that fact, but to continually repeat the same narrative over and over with the hope that repetition will make it true is embarrassing.

The problem with Democrat assertions of wrong doing is that they are continually getting caught in their hypocritical lies. I like how Fancy Nancy Pelosi said that while she met with Russian officials in the past she never met the guy in question with Sessions. However, today a picture surfaces with her in a meeting with that very diplomat. With members proudly tweeting and posting their doings opposition researchers are continually digging up dirt on both sides. I guess these social media trails never go away. Ouch!

The Demoncats would have had more credibility if they simply admitted that all member of Congress met with the Russians, and instead focused on Sessions inconsistencies in his testimony. There is certainly not enough there for a resignation but they could have scored some political points. Instead, they are turning this into an adolescent temper tantrum.

In the end, I suspect that Sessions is going no where. He loves the job and Trump likes him. Case closed, nothing to see here.

Now, the murmur in the conspiracy world is that the reason Session is getting such push back is that they are working on busting a deep, deep pedophile ring in which high members of government have participated. With Sessions on the job, there have been over 1,500 pedophiles arrested in the last month. People are starting to believe that this ring is actually a real thing and insiders are getting real nervous. I'm don't think it's true but I'll support an AG who arrests and deports illegals any day. Hasta la vista amigo!

You are making false equivolences. I'm going to guess you're being clever and not just buying propaganda. A couple of things on Sessions, and the Russians, and Trump's people and the Russians. It's not untoward for politicians to meet with Russian diplomats. However, it is complicated when it looks like they were in the context of what even Trump agrees is an election that the Russians inserted themselves in. Sessions wasn't merely a Senator, (which is what Pelosi is, in this context,) he was, at the time, policy advisor to Trump during his campaign. When asked specifically if he's spoken to any Russians during the period of the campaign, during his confirmation hearings, he said, simply, "no." He could have qualified it or explained, but he didn't. That constitutes lying under oath. I don't know how else you want to coach that. Bill Clinton was impeached for lying under oath, and at least all he lied about was a blow-job. Sessions, along with his then-campaign manager Paul Manafort and then-advisor and now fired National Security Advisor Michael Flynn, and his son-in-law, now whatever advisor, Jared Kushner have all had conversations with Russians ways that have lost some their jobs, in the context of a fiddled election that is going to get us a Special Prosecutor to investigate. It's not the Democrats trying to de-legimize Trump...they hold no power. It's the Republicans that will be leading this investigation.

If all of this is fine with you because you're happy to have an AG that deports illegal aliens even if he lies under oath, well, I see where you're coming from, but it's not a place of great comfort to the Constitution, or the Country. You may get what you want in the short-term, but be careful what you allow for in the longer-term.

 

[Federberg]

I have to say that this continued effort to delegitimize the current administration is bordering on the idiotic. I understand that Democrats have nothing left to contribute to the policy debate and need to shift attention from that fact, but to continually repeat the same narrative over and over with the hope that repetition will make it true is embarrassing.

The problem with Democrat assertions of wrong doing is that they are continually getting caught in their hypocritical lies. I like how Fancy Nancy Pelosi said that while she met with Russian officials in the past she never met the guy in question with Sessions. However, today a picture surfaces with her in a meeting with that very diplomat. With members proudly tweeting and posting their doings opposition researchers are continually digging up dirt on both sides. I guess these social media trails never go away. Ouch!

The Demoncats would have had more credibility if they simply admitted that all member of Congress met with the Russians, and instead focused on Sessions inconsistencies in his testimony. There is certainly not enough there for a resignation but they could have scored some political points. Instead, they are turning this into an adolescent temper tantrum.

In the end, I suspect that Sessions is going no where. He loves the job and Trump likes him. Case closed, nothing to see here.

Now, the murmur in the conspiracy world is that the reason Session is getting such push back is that they are working on busting a deep, deep pedophile ring in which high members of government have participated. With Sessions on the job, there have been over 1,500 pedophiles arrested in the last month. People are starting to believe that this ring is actually a real thing and insiders are getting real nervous. I'm don't think it's true but I'll support an AG who arrests and deports illegals any day. Hasta la vista amigo!

Don't tell me HRC was involved in that ring please...

 

[Ricardo]

Oh, someone's doing his homework.

Still, HRC was great in the Benghazi hearings. She owned it, she didn't cover it up. Let's face it: it's sad for the people that died, in both Benghazi and Yemen. But while both of these qualify as "blunders," they don't raise to the level of "epic fails." And Clinton was not wholly responsible for Benghazi. Were she not setting up as the next best contender for the Democratic nomination, I don't think there would have been such a witch hunt for her head on that. "The story" you think that Benghazi and her emails tells is a story you're looking for, IMO.

so did HRC break any laws or not? lets see if you do any homework and face the facts.

 

[Federberg]

so did HRC break any laws or not? lets see if you do any homework and face the facts.

Better yet why don't you do some homework and actually make a contribution to the discussion? All you seem to do is snipe at people you despise, like some sort of cheerleading bitch

 

[Asmodeus]

You are making false equivolences. I'm going to guess you're being clever and not just buying propaganda. A couple of things on Sessions, and the Russians, and Trump's people and the Russians. It's not untoward for politicians to meet with Russian diplomats. However, it is complicated when it looks like they were in the context of what even Trump agrees is an election that the Russians inserted themselves in. Sessions wasn't merely a Senator, (which is what Pelosi is, in this context,) he was, at the time, policy advisor to Trump during his campaign. When asked specifically if he's spoken to any Russians during the period of the campaign, during his confirmation hearings, he said, simply, "no." He could have qualified it or explained, but he didn't. That constitutes lying under oath. I don't know how else you want to coach that. Bill Clinton was impeached for lying under oath, and at least all he lied about was a blow-job. Sessions, along with his then-campaign manager Paul Manafort and then-advisor and now fired National Security Advisor Michael Flynn, and his son-in-law, now whatever advisor, Jared Kushner have all had conversations with Russians ways that have lost some their jobs, in the context of a fiddled election that is going to get us a Special Prosecutor to investigate. It's not the Democrats trying to de-legimize Trump...they hold no power. It's the Republicans that will be leading this investigation.

If all of this is fine with you because you're happy to have an AG that deports illegal aliens even if he lies under oath, well, I see where you're coming from, but it's not a place of great comfort to the Constitution, or the Country. You may get what you want in the short-term, but be careful what you allow for in the longer-term.

He did not, technically, lie under oath if he was asked if in his capacity as campaign advisor he meet with the Russians, which is how the question was asked, I believe. Also, all presidential nominees and their advisor meet with foreign leaders. It's part of the process. Diplomats are attempting to forge good relations early on.

I'm not sure why you're bringing in the Constitution on mere procedural matters of immigration policy. Illegal immigrate have no status under the Constitution so they can't claim the same rights as a citizen. International law does require that foreign visitors, even illegals, receive fair treatment (they can't be abused in other words). They have absolutely no right to demand or request rights that are simply not theirs. If anything, the Constitution requires, particularly Article II, that the executive faithfully execute the law. How can we legitimately say we are a country of laws if we allow people who are not even citizens to break it? Do I, as a citizen, then have the right to violate law myself? I should be able to by your logic. The problem with past presidents, in particular the Obama Administration, is that it used political judgment and failed to act in a way that it was constitutionally tasked. Circumvention of law for political reasons, then, is abhorrent to the Constitution. Your bastardization of the document and who should have rights under it is a perverse distortion of law. So, and I will say that I have taken a more hardline stance on this issue over the past few years, that all criminals need to atone for their crimes. Don't try to change law to suit your political preferences. That is where the long-term damage to the Constitution will come from.

Nice try on your part, though.

 

[Federberg]

He wasn't asked at all by Franken if he had met with the Russians. He was asked what he would do if he found that a member of the campaign had had a meeting with the Russians. So I do agree he didn't perjure himself. He did offer up false information, and worse he didn't correct his error after the event. This is not what is expected of an Attorney General, the highest lawyer in the land. I believe others in that post have been forced to resign in the past. Can you not see that in this febrile atmosphere where truth is a casualty of politics this shouldn't be allowed to stand? Can party be so important to you that the integrity of your institutions can be allowed to fall by the wayside? Nation is more important

 

[Asmodeus]

He wasn't asked at all by Franken if he had met with the Russians. He was asked what he would do if he found that a member of the campaign had had a meeting with the Russians. So I do agree he didn't perjure himself. He did offer up false information, and worse he didn't correct his error after the event. This is not what is expected of an Attorney General, the highest lawyer in the land. I believe others in that post have been forced to resign in the past. Can you not see that in this febrile atmosphere where truth is a casualty of politics this shouldn't be allowed to stand? Can party be so important to you that the integrity of your institutions can be allowed to fall by the wayside? Nation is more important

First, I'm not a Republican so I don't have a party allegiance to Trump. Second, all nominees for political positions mislead in their testimony. I hope you realize that this is a political position, if it weren't presidents wouldn't be able to appoint members to them. Even Supreme Court nominees avert the truth so as not to lose the opportunity of obtaining the position. If you can't see that the calls for Sessions to step down are entirely politically motivated and really have no sound basis, then there's not much we can discuss. Finally, the integrity of the institution, if you mean the Justice Department, will not fail over accidental or purposefully misleading testimony.

 

[Ricardo]

Better yet why don't you do some homework and actually make a contribution to the discussion? All you seem to do is snipe at people you despise, like some sort of cheerleading bitch

cheerleading bitch? what have you got against cheerleaders? commonly cheerleaders are female, and bitch also refers to females, surely you can do a bit better than that.......or not, you are just an idiot.

The question remains, did she break the law or not? its so much fun to see her diehards avoid such obvious question, and we all know why.

 

[Nekro]

cheerleading bitch? what have you got against cheerleaders? commonly cheerleaders are female, and bitch also refers to female

That was a very sexist insult from Federberg, call the PC police I bet even Moxie would disapprove if Federberg wasn't her democrat posting buddy

 

[Ricardo]

That was a very sexist insult from Federberg, call the PC police I bet even Moxie would disapprove if Federberg wasn't her democrat posting buddy

its also a common known fact that Federberg has the tendency to kick his own butt when trying to mount an argument.....because he is just that stupid. oh yeah, cheerleading bitch, vanity fair,

and for your info, he does pride himself being a PC police.

I guess he is fired

 

[Federberg]

First, I'm not a Republican so I don't have a party allegiance to Trump. Second, all nominees for political positions mislead in their testimony. I hope you realize that this is a political position, if it weren't presidents wouldn't be able to appoint members to them. Even Supreme Court nominees avert the truth so as not to lose the opportunity of obtaining the position. If you can't see that the calls for Sessions to step down are entirely politically motivated and really have no sound basis, then there's not much we can discuss. Finally, the integrity of the institution, if you mean the Justice Department, will not fail over accidental or purposefully misleading testimony.

Congratulations for making an attempt a contribution. There is a significant difference between misleading testimony (which can be done by parsing truths) and making verifiably false statements. I won't even try to explain to you why of all positions the Attorney General needs to be held to a higher standard

 

[Federberg]

Tell me Trump's wiretap allegations aren't completely beyond the pale. This is a blatant distraction, and I have a feeling this will blowback at him in a bad way. He's going to start losing Republican politicians. It's one thing to try to hold his base, it's another thing to make it toxic for your own party's officials to continue supporting you

 

[Asmodeus]

Congratulations for making an attempt a contribution. There is a significant difference between misleading testimony (which can be done by parsing truths) and making verifiably false statements. I won't even try to explain to you why of all positions the Attorney General needs to be held to a higher standard

This isn't really a response. It is a nothing comment and a straw man response.

Better luck next time.

 

[Asmodeus]

Tell me Trump's wiretap allegations aren't completely beyond the pale. This is a blatant distraction, and I have a feeling this will blowback at him in a bad way. He's going to start losing Republican politicians. It's one thing to try to hold his base, it's another thing to make it toxic for your own party's officials to continue supporting you

I think we'll have to see on this. There was a FISA application in June 201 to tap Trump's line but was denied. It was then granted in October. So, it does seem that his lines were bugged. The question is whether the NSA did it no its own or the president approved it. If the NSA did it on their own then that would be troubling. If the president or his office approved it then that would also be troubling.

The point we have to first wait on is whether this is real or fake news. It's looking as if this is true but I'll reserve judgement till its confirmed. If its fake then your comment is valid. If it's not, then. . . . .

 

[mrzz]

First, I'm not a Republican so I don't have a party allegiance to Trump. Second, all nominees for political positions mislead in their testimony. I hope you realize that this is a political position, if it weren't presidents wouldn't be able to appoint members to them. Even Supreme Court nominees avert the truth so as not to lose the opportunity of obtaining the position. If you can't see that the calls for Sessions to step down are entirely politically motivated and really have no sound basis, then there's not much we can discuss. Finally, the integrity of the institution, if you mean the Justice Department, will not fail over accidental or purposefully misleading testimony.

I agree that at this level, all positions have political status. However, "political" does not necessarily means partisan or short term quid pro quo calculations. While on one hand I agree that all this seem to be politically (in the worst sense) inflated, it is hard not to observe that this gentleman lost an opportunity to elevate the standards followed in this political struggle. Looking from the outside, the USA seems to be in downward spiral, and somebody will have to make the first move to stop it.