• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Is This The End? Trump Suborned Perjury With Michael Cohen's Testimony to Congress

Here's how it probably went down in Mueller's office...

Bob, some news site got some facts wrong.

Damnit, we have the goods on Trump, can't they stay out of our way?

Should we say anything?

No. Wait, yes. This one time. We don't want all our work compromised by other people saying we're leaking.
 
cabse5 said:
The Mueller investigation didn't claim the Cohen lie was prompted by Trump. You guys want to get Trump, don't you? Duh? Buzzfeed, if true, would've sent shockwaves throughout the Trump presidency.

Buzzfeed wasn't 100% accurate. Who knows which part is accurate (or not). I tend to believe Mueller will say something about this in his report...now. Mueller doesn't think it was prosecutable against Trump and, if were completely true, would be prosecutable against Trump.

BTW, you guys ever read the story of the boy who cried wolf?
Click to expand...

Now you are talking about something else. My first comment towards you was in relation to this:

cabse5 said:
I tend to think some of it is a piece of crap, at least. I also think that if the allegations of Buzzfeed were completely true, the Mueller investigation would have a whole lot of 'splaining' to do if they didn't vigorously follow up on the Buzzfeed truth and why that 'truth' wasn't one of the, at least, perjury charges levelled against Cohen by Mueller.
Click to expand...

To which I responded that he was indeed charged with perjury for his lie about Trump Tower Moscow. There would be no additional charge on Cohen for being told to lie by someone else.

That said, I was very first person in this thread to warn that the Buzzfeed article should not be relied upon, so the rest of your post is not directed towards me.
 
You dems need to stop putting pressure on the Mueller investigation and let them do their own job.
 
Airyaman said:
Now you are talking about something else. My first comment towards you was in relation to this:



To which I responded that he was indeed charged with perjury for his lie about Trump Tower Moscow. There would be no additional charge on Cohen for being told to lie by someone else.

That said, I was very first person in this thread to warn that the Buzzfeed article should not be relied upon, so the rest of your post is not directed towards me.
Click to expand...

Mueller would've asked Cohen if he was told by Trump to lie. If were true and Cohen lied, another charge against Cohen for perjury and one big one for Trump. And Trump's big one trumps all the other little ones against Cohen. You've figured it out, now?
 
cabse5 said:
Mueller would've asked Cohen if he was told by Trump to lie. If were true and Cohen lied, another charge against Cohen for perjury and one big one for Trump. And Trump's big one trumps all the other little ones against Cohen. You've figured it out, now?
Click to expand...

Yes, I've figured out that you are adding to the original discussion (see bolded).
 
ttwtt78640 said:
Which the writers (some allege are reporters) of the story (some allege is news) have never seen. Of course, "they" are two unnamed people connected with "an investigation". The idea that Cohen himself would forget to say that he lied under direct orders from Trump is the most unbelievable part of this story.
Click to expand...

The objective remains impeachment. That's the goal of the House. Dems were all ready to start an investigation. If it only takes a rumor to get them moving, I'd say they've betrayed their true intentions here - not that such a thing was required to know such intentions..
 
humbolt said:
The objective remains impeachment. That's the goal of the House. Dems were all ready to start an investigation. If it only takes a rumor to get them moving, I'd say they've betrayed their true intentions here - not that such a thing was required to know such intentions..
Click to expand...

Impeachment (charging the POTUS with impeachable offenses) requires only a simple majority House vote, something that demorats could do on their own, but conviction (removal from office) requires a super-majority (67 votes?) in the Senate and is very unlikely to happen.

The demorats would be much better off if they resisted the temptation to go for impeachment and simply ran an electable (meaning one that appeals to "independents") candidate in 2020 - with Trump's approval (well?) below 50% that should not be a problem. By removing Trump (especially in the near future) the demorats risk the republicants being able to run a far better 2020 POTUS candidate than Trump.
 
ttwtt78640 said:
Impeachment (charging the POTUS with impeachable offenses) requires only a simple majority House vote, something that demorats could do on their own, but conviction (removal from office) requires a super-majority (67 votes?) in the Senate and is very unlikely to happen.

The demorats would be much better off if they resisted the temptation to go for impeachment and simply ran an electable (meaning one that appeals to "independents") candidate in 2020 - with Trump's approval (well?) below 50% that should not be a problem. By removing Trump (especially in the near future) the demorats risk the republicants being able to run a far better 2020 POTUS candidate than Trump.
Click to expand...

Oh, I agree, but given the volatility of some of the new members (and a few older members) of Pelosi's House, I'm m not sure they realize the futility of their wish. They seem to be purely emotionally driven.
 
humbolt said:
Oh, I agree, but given the volatility of some of the new members (and a few older members) of Pelosi's House, I'm m not sure they realize the futility of their wish. They seem to be purely emotionally driven.
Click to expand...

Who cares about those new members.
Those older ones have plans too, ya know.
On another thread I just mentioned that poor Adam Schiff must be distraught.
His European trip gets cancelled and now this.
 
Yakshi said:
Exactly. The response from Special Counsel's office doesn't say that the heart of the Buzzfeed article is false. It is very specific about what it finds to be inaccurate.

It ends up sounding more like a nitpicky confirmation.

Every day, Trump looks more and more screwed.
Click to expand...

So the statements and documents that are at the core of the story, and what Buzzfeed based it’s entire narrative on, are inaccurate, but you think the story is correct.

Channeling Dan Rather probably isn’t the way to go.
 
humbolt said:
Oh, I agree, but given the volatility of some of the new members (and a few older members) of Pelosi's House, I'm m not sure they realize the futility of their wish. They seem to be purely emotionally driven.
Click to expand...

Pelosi does and has the power to make her wishes be known and respected. Impeachment may still be done for show (knowing that conviction is extremely unlikely) but not likely until the 2020 POTUS campaign is well under way (close to the primary mid-season?). That timing would likely result in maximum chaos among the republicants.
 
bubbabgone said:
Who cares about those new members.
Those older ones have plans too, ya know.
On another thread I just mentioned that poor Adam Schiff must be distraught.
His European trip gets cancelled and now this.
Click to expand...

Heh. Can you imagine? Schiff: "Just who in the he'll does Trump think he is? Why, I never... Packed my hair spray, and everything."
 
ttwtt78640 said:
Pelosi does and has the power to make her wishes be known and respected. Impeachment may still be done for show (knowing that conviction is extremely unlikely) but not likely until the 2020 POTUS campaign is well under way (close to the primary mid-season?). That timing would likely result in maximum chaos among the republicants.
Click to expand...

I expect a few republicans will challenge Trump in 2020 anyway. The saying, "May you live in interesting times" is right up there with the one suggesting that you get your neighbor's children a drum.
 
humbolt said:
Heh. Can you imagine? Schiff: "Just who in the he'll does Trump think he is? Why, I never... Packed my hair spray, and everything."
Click to expand...

Oh sure. You laugh but we have to pay extra for special airline seats for him when he flies on our dime.
They call it bobble head seating in the airline business.
When he's on Government junkets the military calls them "Schiraffes".
You know the military, they have cool names for everything.

schiff airline seat.jpg
 
ttwtt78640 said:
Impeachment (charging the POTUS with impeachable offenses) requires only a simple majority House vote, something that demorats could do on their own, but conviction (removal from office) requires a super-majority (67 votes?) in the Senate and is very unlikely to happen.

The demorats would be much better off if they resisted the temptation to go for impeachment and simply ran an electable (meaning one that appeals to "independents") candidate in 2020 - with Trump's approval (well?) below 50% that should not be a problem. By removing Trump (especially in the near future) the demorats risk the republicants being able to run a far better 2020 POTUS candidate than Trump.
Click to expand...

Exactly. Impeachment is a possibility, but conviction is a pipe dream. If the Democrats can field a credible candidate in 2020, they can remove Trump from office. If not, then we're in for six more years of tweets, shutdowns, and "poor me, the media hates me" statements from the Oval Office instead of just two more. At least, the economy is perking along nicely, which even anti Trumpers like me can't deny. Also, unless the loose cannon that is Trump makes a real turnaround, getting into yet another limited and undeclared war seems unlikely.
 
bubbabgone said:
Oh sure. You laugh but we have to pay extra for special airline seats for him when he flies on our dime.
They call it bobble head seating in the airline business.
When he's on Government junkets the military calls them "Schiraffes".
You know the military, they have cool names for everything.

View attachment 67248316
Click to expand...

Most men have an entirely different appendage that's inflatable. Something went horribly wrong with Adam.
 
Dittohead not! said:
Exactly. Impeachment is a possibility, but conviction is a pipe dream. If the Democrats can field a credible candidate in 2020, they can remove Trump from office. If not, then we're in for six more years of tweets, shutdowns, and "poor me, the media hates me" statements from the Oval Office instead of just two more. At least, the economy is perking along nicely, which even anti Trumpers like me can't deny. Also, unless the loose cannon that is Trump makes a real turnaround, getting into yet another limited and undeclared war seems unlikely.
Click to expand...

Every time I get frustrated trying to decipher TrumpSpeak I remind myself that having Hillary would likely have been worse. The demorats seem to be leaning more and more towards democratic socialism and open borders while the republicants seem reluctant to restrain the continued growth of federal power and expense - pretending that federal bribes (largely borrowed and) paid to the states with all manner of strings attached count as state 'control'.
 
ttwtt78640 said:
Every time I get frustrated trying to decipher TrumpSpeak I remind myself that having Hillary would likely have been worse. The demorats seem to be leaning more and more towards democratic socialism and open borders while the republicants seem reluctant to restrain the continued growth of federal power and expense - pretending that federal bribes (largely borrowed and) paid to the states with all manner of strings attached count as state 'control'.
Click to expand...

I'm not sure how it could have been even worse, but we'll never know now.

Few Democrats are are really for open borders, but the Republicans seem to think that anyone who doesn't support the boondoggle wall project must be for bringing the whole third world inside our borders.
 
Dittohead not! said:
I'm not sure how it could have been even worse, but we'll never know now.

Few Democrats are are really for open borders, but the Republicans seem to think that anyone who doesn't support the boondoggle wall project must be for bringing the whole third world inside our borders.
Click to expand...

That (bolded above) is hard to square with constant calls for (more) amnesty, sanctuary states/cities, "free" medical care, free public education and no mandate for E-Verify. I do not support adding 220 miles of the Great Wall Of Trump while essentially ignoring the 12M to 20M illegal immigrants already here. So long as jobs and social services are granted to all comers, regardless of immigration/citizenship status, then there is no point in trying to 'secure' the border. Adding 25% more more physical barriers on the border which can be (and are being) breached by going over, under or around them is a waste of resources.
 
I suspect that we'll look back on this Buzzfeed article as the beginning of the end for Trump.
 
ttwtt78640 said:
That (bolded above) is hard to square with constant calls for (more) amnesty, sanctuary states/cities, "free" medical care, free public education and no mandate for E-Verify. I do not support adding 220 miles of the Great Wall Of Trump while essentially ignoring the 12M to 20M illegal immigrants already here. So long as jobs and social services are granted to all comers, regardless of immigration/citizenship status, then there is no point in trying to 'secure' the border. Adding 25% more more physical barriers on the border which can be (and are being) breached by going over, under or around them is a waste of resources.
Click to expand...

I'm not sure where you're hearing "constant calls for (more) amnesty, sanctuary states/cities, "free" medical care, free public education and no mandate for E-Verify."

We already have "free" public education that includes children of illegals. There are also sanctuary states and cities. No one is calling for amnesty except perhaps for the "dreamers." Free medical care is not, of course, free, but that is for Americans. I haven't heard much from either side of the aisle about E Verify, or about penalties for hiring illegals. I wouldn't be surprised to learn that Trump himself is hiring illegals at Mar a Lago.
 
Rogue Valley said:
I would say that Donald J Trump is toast. His daughter Ivanka and son Don Jr. are in definite legal peril. Possibly also Jared Kushner.

Giuliani now tacitly admits that the Trump campaign colluded with the Putin regime. (but not Donald, although how Giuliani separates Trump from his own campaign is a mystery)
Click to expand...

How many times have people said that Donald Trump is toast, and he keeps surviving?
I don't like him, but I don't engage in wishful thinking.
Trump will finish his first term.
The Senate will never convict him, even if the House impeaches him.
 
GreatNews2night said:
How many times have people said that Donald Trump is toast, and he keeps surviving?
I don't like him, but I don't engage in wishful thinking.
Trump will finish his first term.
The Senate will never convict him, even if the House impeaches him.
Click to expand...

Absent a real bombshell of a revelation, he'll finish his first term. It's up to the Democrats to field an electable candidate. Let's see if they can do it.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom