Mueller Report Brings Into Focus Obama's Attempted Coup Against Trump

[Tom Kirkman + 8,860]

21 minutes ago, 6ACFC0 said:

Trump is a crook.  If you believe otherwise you are some stupid people.  You lie when you need to cover something up.  Why all the lies by everyone in the Trump administration.  I really really need someone to explain why all the lies if they are so innocent.  Ask any investigator who lies and they will tell you it is crooks.        

You wonder why he was investigated?  Lies.  Pure and simple.

Deep State. Ridiculous.  You have been hoodwinked by a conman.  

Apparently I've never before realized just how incredibly stupid I am.

Good to know I'm both stupid and gullible.

Gimme a minute, I'm going to turn on CNN so I can be told what to think, and be informed of the latest unbiased truth, from The Most Trusted Name In News.

[6ACFC0 + 32]

Just what I thought - for some reason Trump followers will ignore all of the lies by Trump and everyone around him.  Instead they point to "fake news" as an excuse.  Think about this really hard, which may be difficult for you to do - but please try.  People do not lie without a reason.  Ask yourself why Trump lies so much.  If Trump and gang are innocent why would you expose yourself to criminal prosecution with lies?   

You are certainly entitled to ignore this and bury your head in the sand if you would like.  But thank you Mr Kirkman for proving my point - you are a fine example of the absurd logic used by Trump followers.       

Edited April 17, 2019 by 6ACFC0

[Tom Kirkman + 8,860]

17 minutes ago, 6ACFC0 said:

Just what I thought - for some reason Trump followers will ignore all of the lies by Trump and everyone around him.  Instead they point to "fake news" as an excuse.  Think about this really hard, which may be difficult for you to do - but please try.  People do not lie without a reason.  Ask yourself why Trump lies so much.  If Trump and gang are innocent why would you expose yourself to criminal prosecution with lies?   

You are certainly entitled to ignore this and bury your head in the sand if you would like.  But thank you Mr Kirkman for proving my point - you are a fine example of the absurd logic used by Trump followers.       

You make me laugh.  And I enjoy laughing : )

Here, have a gratuitous drink on me, you might feel better 😁

[ed tuttle + 5]

Heaven help us all if Trump is setting the standard for running this great country!

[TXPower + 643]

Longing for the by-gone “leadership” of the Hope and Change Show and still believing Obama and his cronies had no scandals and he and his never lied.  That is willful blindness disingenuous and foolish.  

All politicians lie, this does not exclude Trump.  The real travesty in this current episode of the  American Experience is all the leftist believers virtue signaling constantly attempting to keep themselves and those around them convinced, in spite of the facts, that Trump is the first liar to occupy the Whitehouse.  That’s not burying head in sand that’s burying it in a closer, anatomical location.

[Ward Smith + 6,615]

How long until we get to join the banana republics of South America?

[TXPower + 643]

1 hour ago, Ward Smith said:

How long until we get to join the banana republics of South America?

Depends on how quickly the Dems/Socialists can manage to Control the WhiteHouse, both Houses of Congress and the Supreme Court all at once.  That’ll get it done.

[Jan van Eck + 7,558]

On 4/13/2019 at 7:47 PM, John Foote said:

and the democrats responded with Super Delegates to make sure that didn't happen again

And that was the most disgusting thing that the Democratic Party had done, in a very long time.  Shame on them!

[Jan van Eck + 7,558]

On 4/14/2019 at 8:53 AM, Jeffrey Brown said:

 

Remember, the Russians know what was discussed.  It's the US intelligence agencies and the American public that tRump is trying to keep in the dark about his discussions with a hostile foreign power. 

Should be fairly obvious.  Trump wanted to sell units in his Florida Mar-a-Lago operation to Russians at inflated prices, and he wanted to have Putin as a silent partner on some hotel deal in Russia.  Hard to imagine them having some serious discussion about, say, SALT IV.  Or Boris Spassky, for that matter.  You already know it was all about money - personal money. 

[Jan van Eck + 7,558]

9 hours ago, Tom Kirkman said:

You make me laugh.  And I enjoy laughing : )

Here, have a gratuitous drink on me, you might feel better 😁

whoa! Now, that is one seriously gorgeous woman!  Forget the politics!  Go drinking!

[Jan van Eck + 7,558]

On 4/15/2019 at 5:16 PM, TXPower said:

As to Trump’s diplomacy you are missing the point of Trump and what his voters sent him to the Oval Office to do.  

It pains me deeply to grant that, in this, you are absolutely correct.

 

On 4/15/2019 at 5:16 PM, TXPower said:

It doesn’t matter what you call it, if you truly think there is no deep state here in the US you aren’t paying enough attention.

It pains me even more to grant that, in this, you are again absolutely correct.

On 4/15/2019 at 5:16 PM, TXPower said:

If you genuinely feel that your lower dollar makes you more competitive I can see why the Trudeau government seems to be an acceptable Canadian failure to many Canadians despite the economic realities there.

Ouch.  Now that is seriously painful.  

Lots of harsh, raw truths in this.  Tex, you are seriously brutal, no sugar-coating in your writings.  All true. 

[Tom Kirkman + 8,860]

3 hours ago, Ward Smith said:

How long until we get to join the banana republics of South America?

^ that link:

Alan Garcia, former Peru president, dies from self-inflicted gunshot wound

"Former Peruvian president Alan Garcia died from a self-inflicted gunshot wound to the head as police were preparing to arrest him on Wednesday morning.

His death was confirmed by current President Martin Vizcarra, who expressed his condolences over Twitter.

Garcia, who served as president from 1985 to 1990 and from 2006 to 2011, was under investigation for money laundering and taking bribes in connection with a massive corruption scandal that has engulfed a number of former Latin American leaders."

==============================

And here's a quote from an email of Hillary talking about Trump before the last U.S. Presidential election, courtesy of Wikileaks:

(apologies for the foul language used by Hillary)

(p.s. Donna Brazile was the chairwoman of the Democratic Party)

==============================

 

So what was that again about joining banana republics?

 

[TXPower + 643]

23 minutes ago, Tom Kirkman said:

^ that link:

Alan Garcia, former Peru president, dies from self-inflicted gunshot wound

"Former Peruvian president Alan Garcia died from a self-inflicted gunshot wound to the head as police were preparing to arrest him on Wednesday morning.

His death was confirmed by current President Martin Vizcarra, who expressed his condolences over Twitter.

Garcia, who served as president from 1985 to 1990 and from 2006 to 2011, was under investigation for money laundering and taking bribes in connection with a massive corruption scandal that has engulfed a number of former Latin American leaders."

==============================

And here's a quote from an email of Hillary talking about Trump before the last U.S. Presidential election, courtesy of Wikileaks (apologies for the foul language used by Hillary)

==============================

 

So what was that again about joining banana republics?

 

That’s a pic of the would-be head banana 🍌.

[Jan van Eck + 7,558]

10 minutes ago, TXPower said:

That’s a pic of the would-be head banana 🍌.

You really want to be very careful about the Clintons.  Those two met at Yale  (Yale Law, not the Yale College) and took a beach house rental in the Momauguin section of East Haven, totally isolated from the university.  They spent the year there, figuring out how to take over the Federal State.  Then they did. Although when you meet them and chat with them, the Clintons come across as the warmest, nicest people on the planet, it does not quite work out that way when it comes to their actual conduct in private.  The Brasile e-mail is but an indicium of that. 

[TXPower + 643]

1 minute ago, Jan van Eck said:

You really want to be very careful about the Clintons.  Those two met at Yale  (Yale Law, not the Yale College) and took a beach house rental in the Momauguin section of East Haven, totally isolated from the university.  They spent the year there, figuring out how to take over the Federal State.  Then they did. Although when you meet them and chat with them, the Clintons come across as the warmest, nicest people on the planet, it does not quite work out that way when it comes to their actual conduct in private.  The Brasile e-mail is but an indicium of that. 

Yessir, would-be dictators the world over have many of the same qualities.  Typically stupidity isn’t among them.  But they are all bananas.

[Tom Kirkman + 8,860]

16 minutes ago, Jan van Eck said:

You really want to be very careful about the Clintons.  Those two met at Yale  (Yale Law, not the Yale College) and took a beach house rental in the Momauguin section of East Haven, totally isolated from the university.  They spent the year there, figuring out how to take over the Federal State.  Then they did. Although when you meet them and chat with them, the Clintons come across as the warmest, nicest people on the planet, it does not quite work out that way when it comes to their actual conduct in private.  The Brasile e-mail is but an indicium of that. 

Thank you for your comment, Jan.

My opinion of your intellect rose yet another notch after your comment above.

[Jan van Eck + 7,558]

1 minute ago, Tom Kirkman said:

Thank you for your comment, Jan.

My opinion of your intellect rose yet another notch after your comment above.

Keep in mind that Bill Clinton and I did not exactly overlap at Yale, so I never met him, at least not that I can recall.  I did meet up with Bill years later, also Hillary,several times,  but then again, neither offered me a job in their Administration, so I must not have made enough of an impression  (plus, my guess is that they were prejudiced against European Monarchists.)  Oh, well. 

When you went down to the Administration during Clinton's term, the place looked like a college campus, all these really young people hanging about.  It struck me as surreal.  Then the Monica thing hit, and it started to make more sense.  Guess I was seriously naive. 

[Okie + 83]

You know, I have been away busy at work for a couple of weeks.  When I come back, I see you all talking crazy again.  Like really crazy.  Going off on a bunch madman conspiracy theories.  So much misinformation here from a lawyer's perspective.

OK, first off, "treason" can only happen during wartime.  No one, from the legal community, anyway, was ever considering charging Donald Trump with treason.  Espionage on the other hand.....  Or conspiracy to commit theft of intellectual property via cyberespionage, yes.  Or Obstruction of Justice.  Money Laundering.  Violation of campaign finance laws.  Tax evasion.  However, there is no crime called "collusion" in legal terms, the crime is conspiracy.  "Collusion" is a commoner's word describing the crime.  The problem comes from "low information voters" who are not intelligent enough to know the difference between the legal meaning and the colloquial one.  I think President Trump is trying to "pollute the jury pool" in an attempt to make people believe there is no evidence against him at all.  I don't think it will work, but it might be all he has got.  Some of the crimes are "paper" crimes, where the evidence is in black and white.  This is particularly true of tax evasion.  Most of the people I know in the legal community are convinced he didn't just stop suddenly outside the statute of limitations.  And winning the presidency should not make you immune for crimes you committed along the way to getting there.

I trust the psychologists I know that say Donald Trump has "malignant narcissism."  This is the combination of narcissistic personality disorder and anti-social personality disorder (also known as psychopathy).  In the old days, this was called "criminally insane."  However, this often confused juries because the law says you cannot be a criminal and insane.  In order to commit a crime, you have to form what is known as "mens rea" or guilty mind.  This is referred to in the law as "scienter" or the knowledge that you are committing a wrongful act.  However, there were clearly people who had knowledge of their wrongdoing (insane people don't have this knowledge) and intended to harm to others.  Psychologist had to come up with a way to explain someone who was so depraved that they would harm others without a conscious.  In other words, they would know their actions were wrong, but they just did not care.  That is where we get the idea of the psychopath.

Occam's Razor, people.  (It means the simplest explanation is usually best.)

Also, some of the quotes above by Tom Kirkman (alleging things Hillary said) very well might have been altered (there are reports that Russian agents altered or created fake e-mails to damage Hillary).  I know many of you here want to believe she said it, but given what we know (or should know) happened during the 2016 election, you should be more careful.  Yes, you are being manipulated.  We all are to some extent.  We all have out biases.  I have mine, too.  But, as a lawyer, I am waiting for all of the facts to come out first.  Given Donald Trump's psychology, I am more inclined to think he is guilty of something.  Probably lots of things.  The investigations are not over.  The investigators had probable cause for initiating their investigations.  Don't let your political biases get in the way of the facts.

For the benefit of the one gentleman who inquired about the use of "tRump," it is a use of his name to insult him.  This is allowed in the United States (at least for now).  It is sometimes used by those on the political left as a way of expressing disdain for his being elected president.

Please see the definition of "rump."  https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/rump

One meaning of the word is "butt."  Another is "a small or inferior remnant or offshoot" as in a "rump convention," which has a political meaning, suggesting that Trump only has a small group supporting him.  It could mean both things at the same time.

What I don't know is what is meant by the term "Deep State" as it is thrown around by you right-wingers.  How do you define this term?  To be quite honest, I doubt that any of you here know what it means.  It has a specific meaning to somebody (who came up with the term), but I am not sure the people who throw the term around know what it means.

[Jan van Eck + 7,558]

5 minutes ago, Okie said:

You know, I have been away busy at work for a couple of weeks.  When I come back, I see you all talking crazy again.  Like really crazy.  Going off on a bunch madman conspiracy theories.  So much misinformation here from a lawyer's perspective.

On the other hand, looking at it (the big mess) from a non-lawyer perspective, it becomes plausible to conclude that the US Government, and the attorneys who work for it as prosecutors, end up doing whatever they want to do - and the laws be damned.  While you make a good point that the idea that the President could be charged with "treason" is absurd, not much seems to be stopping the charging of Julian Assange with something that looks suspiciously similar.  Although the real charge is: "We don't like you because you embarrassed us," the paper charge will end up as - what? - being a traitor to America?  Whoa, there.  Mr. Assange is an Australian, not an American, and for a while there he was also Ecuadorean, until the new President's administration rather nastily revoked his citizenship for embarrassing that Government  (Moral:  never trust a sovereign government; they give, and then they take away).  Whatever he did, he did outside the borders of the USA, and he is not American, thus by definition owes no fealty to the US Government.  How does the US Dept of Justice get it in its head that they can go snatch him and throw him in jail  (presumably Marion Penitentiary, forever)?  

It reminds me of the US deciding they did not much like the "pimpleface" any more, that fellow Noriega down in Panama, who ran afoul of US good graces, so the Americans invaded the place, dropped troops down on his palace (he fled into the Vatican Embassy, as I recall), then the US set  up those loudspeakers to blast him out of there with rock music, then put him in chains and paraded him down the streets of Miami.  Now, that sort of conduct has not been seen since about 60 BC, when the Romans used to parade captured barbarian chieftains through the streets of Rome in chains  (before being executed, of course). Where do you guys get the notion that you can do that in some sovereign jurisdiction?  Or:  is that the Deep State at work?  

Either way, the Deep State gets into some serious over-reach. 

[Enthalpic + 1,496]

2 hours ago, Jan van Eck said:

whoa! Now, that is one seriously gorgeous woman!  Forget the politics!  Go drinking!

If there is one thing that could unite us all, it's boobs.

Edited April 18, 2019 by Enthalpic

[TXPower + 643]

30 minutes ago, Okie said:

You know, I have been away busy at work for a couple of weeks.  When I come back, I see you all talking crazy again.  Like really crazy.  Going off on a bunch madman conspiracy theories.  So much misinformation here from a lawyer's perspective.

OK, first off, "treason" can only happen during wartime.  No one, from the legal community, anyway, was ever considering charging Donald Trump with treason.  Espionage on the other hand.....  Or conspiracy to commit theft of intellectual property via cyberespionage, yes.  Or Obstruction of Justice.  Money Laundering.  Violation of campaign finance laws.  Tax evasion.  However, there is no crime called "collusion" in legal terms, the crime is conspiracy.  "Collusion" is a commoner's word describing the crime.  The problem comes from "low information voters" who are not intelligent enough to know the difference between the legal meaning and the colloquial one.  I think President Trump is trying to "pollute the jury pool" in an attempt to make people believe there is no evidence against him at all.  I don't think it will work, but it might be all he has got.  Some of the crimes are "paper" crimes, where the evidence is in black and white.  This is particularly true of tax evasion.  Most of the people I know in the legal community are convinced he didn't just stop suddenly outside the statute of limitations.  And winning the presidency should not make you immune for crimes you committed along the way to getting there.

I trust the psychologists I know that say Donald Trump has "malignant narcissism."  This is the combination of narcissistic personality disorder and anti-social personality disorder (also known as psychopathy).  In the old days, this was called "criminally insane."  However, this often confused juries because the law says you cannot be a criminal and insane.  In order to commit a crime, you have to form what is known as "mens rea" or guilty mind.  This is referred to in the law as "scienter" or the knowledge that you are committing a wrongful act.  However, there were clearly people who had knowledge of their wrongdoing (insane people don't have this knowledge) and intended to harm to others.  Psychologist had to come up with a way to explain someone who was so depraved that they would harm others without a conscious.  In other words, they would know their actions were wrong, but they just did not care.  That is where we get the idea of the psychopath.

Occam's Razor, people.  (It means the simplest explanation is usually best.)

Also, some of the quotes above by Tom Kirkman (alleging things Hillary said) very well might have been altered (there are reports that Russian agents altered or created fake e-mails to damage Hillary).  I know many of you here want to believe she said it, but given what we know (or should know) happened during the 2016 election, you should be more careful.  Yes, you are being manipulated.  We all are to some extent.  We all have out biases.  I have mine, too.  But, as a lawyer, I am waiting for all of the facts to come out first.  Given Donald Trump's psychology, I am more inclined to think he is guilty of something.  Probably lots of things.  The investigations are not over.  The investigators had probable cause for initiating their investigations.  Don't let your political biases get in the way of the facts.

For the benefit of the one gentleman who inquired about the use of "tRump," it is a use of his name to insult him.  This is allowed in the United States (at least for now).  It is sometimes used by those on the political left as a way of expressing disdain for his being elected president.

Please see the definition of "rump."  https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/rump

One meaning of the word is "butt."  Another is "a small or inferior remnant or offshoot" as in a "rump convention," which has a political meaning, suggesting that Trump only has a small group supporting him.  It could mean both things at the same time.

What I don't know is what is meant by the term "Deep State" as it is thrown around by you right-wingers.  How do you define this term?  To be quite honest, I doubt that any of you here know what it means.  It has a specific meaning to somebody (who came up with the term), but I am not sure the people who throw the term around know what it means.

Well, good thing we have you,  another lawyer, to help us with what we can’t understand legally and psychologically and to tell us what we should believe.  One thing is clear, we here on this forum, Washington and America in general need a few more lawyers.

[Jan van Eck + 7,558]

11 minutes ago, Enthalpic said:

If there is one thing that could unite us all, it's boobs.

Especially Canadian versions.  The ones up in Winnipeg, the daughters of the immigrants from Finland. Whoa!

[Okie + 83]

26 minutes ago, Jan van Eck said:

... not much seems to be stopping the charging of Julian Assange with something that looks suspiciously similar. 

It reminds me of the US deciding they did not much like the "pimpleface" any more, that fellow Noriega down in Panama, who ran afoul of US good graces, so the Americans invaded the place, dropped troops down on his palace (he fled into the Vatican Embassy, as I recall), then the US set  up those loudspeakers to blast him out of there with rock music, then put him in chains and paraded him down the streets of Miami.  Now, that sort of conduct has not been seen since about 60 BC, when the Romans used to parade captured barbarian chieftains through the streets of Rome in chains  (before being executed, of course). Where do you guys get the notion that you can do that in some sovereign jurisdiction?  Or:  is that the Deep State at work?  

Either way, the Deep State gets into some serious over-reach. 

I believe he was charged with conspiracy to commit theft of U.S. government property (hacking).  The difference between him and a reporter that receives classified information is that he reportedly told Bradley Manning (now known as Chelsea Manning) how to access the files.  In other words, he was not a passive actor.  He actively participated in the crime.  That may be a fine distinction without a difference in yours eyes, but it is a legally significant difference, nonetheless.

And what do you mean by "Deep State?"  I seriously want to know what it means.  The term means nothing to me, because I don't talk in those terms.

[Okie + 83]

22 minutes ago, TXPower said:

One thing is clear, we here on this forum, Washington and America in general need a few more lawyers.

Well, given how Lord of the Flies you guys get, yes you do.  Cooler heads need to prevail.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lord_of_the_Flies

[Jan van Eck + 7,558]

Just now, Okie said:

I believe he was charged with conspiracy to commit theft of U.S. government property (hacking).  The difference between him and a reporter that receives classified information is that he reportedly told Bradley Manning (now known as Chelsea Manning) how to access the files.  In other words, he was not a passive actor.  He actively participated in the crime.  That may be a fine distinction without a difference in yours eyes, but it is a legally significant difference, nonetheless.

You do appreciate just how ridiculous that is.  "Conspiracy," to me and to any jury, means some people skulking around hiding in some hidden room, plotting something nefarious, say a murder.  The US Govt takes a more expansive view:  it says: "No matter where you are on the planet, no matter how remote the island you are parked on, if you even think cross-eyed, we will come after your for Conspiracy against us!  And then we will kill you!" 

See, it is all BS.  Assange has no inherent internal knowledge of "how to access the files."  They are not his files.  All he could do, maybe, is conjecture as to how files might have been set up, and if the US proprietary Server set-up were configured in a certain way, then possibly they could be accessed from outside.  That's it.  Did Assange have some security clearance to go wandering around inside some Server room?  Not quite.   

If the US Govt wants to keep "classified files," then the simple solution is to not connect them to the internet. Once you are on the Web, your stuff is popping up anywhere and everywhere.  If your files are electronically in Belarus, albeit encrypted, then some Belarusian hacks them open, is that a US crime?  Well, the US Dept of Justice seems to think so.  I do not.  Nor does any reasonable person.  If you require privacy, keep it unconnected. 

Next, you call it "a crime."  I disagree.  Some guys sitting on the other side of the planet are not on US soil, and are committing no US "crime."  That is a legal fantasy indulged in by your Dept. of Justice, in order to be convenient for your purposes.  What that is, is your Dept. of Justice taking jurisdiction all over the globe.  Now, that is serious self-aggrandizement.