If Trump is Removed From Office for Any Reason Other Than Russia Collusion? It WAS a Witch Hunt!

[post]

Gotta give you what you asked for.:

........
09/29/17: Last day of last Obama fiscal year. National debt: $20,244 billion (Debt increase, final year (2016-17): $671 billion)
......
https://www.treasurydirect.gov/NP/debt/current

There are still 4 months and 20 days remaining in the current fiscal year....and the debt increase, so far this first fiscal year under VOTUS Trump?
09/29/17 ($20,244,900,016,053) thru 04/10/18 ($21,134,791,585,045) = $889 billion

 

[Chomsky]

It is a shame that politics so bitterly divides our country, I would like to think we see far more on a forum and in the media than we do in our daily lives. I too can be extreme in my views.

In the end, I truly think that the powers that be are busy pitting us little guys in divide and conquer, while they plunder and fleece us, as a whole.

All the better to keep the collective gaze of us citizens, off of them.

In politics, it boils down to what untrusty side you "trust" The lesser of two evils. In the end, we settle. All of us, IMO.

I agree completely, Bob.

Though the Trump situation is unique, and not really one of party.

If Trump ran as a Dem, and pushed the Dem agenda, I'm not sure if the Dems would do much different than today's Republicans. I'd like to think they would, but I can't say I know they would!

 

[Chomsky]

The problem is that the party in control of both chambers of Congress is the party the president is a member of. While I think the GOP has let the Trump WH get away with an incredible amount of abuse and misconduct, I'm not sure the Democrats wouldn't also be tolerate of a rogue president from their party.

As I stated to Chomsky, Congressional investigations are just as powerful and important as special prosecutors. They have broad subpoena power and the ability to keep the public in the loop. In Watergate it was the Senate that tore the WH down, not the special prosecutor. If the Democrats can get one of the chambers of Congress, they can do pretty much all the things that Mueller can do, outside of prosecuting someone.

:thumbs:

Except their subpoena power is weaker, and they don't do Grand Juries. So it is quite a bit weaker in legal terms in my opinion, but still strong in political terms.

 

[Slingshot Bob]

I agree completely, Bob.

Though the Trump situation is unique, and not really one of party.

If Trump ran as a Dem, and pushed the Dem agenda, I'm not sure if the Dems would do much different than today's Republicans. I'd like to think they would, but I can't say I know they would!

Will we ever see revolution? The time is sure ripe, but somehow I think corruption is as old as the very first village chief. Man likes to think we are special amongst the animal kingdom, every day we prove we are as savage as any.

 

[chuckiechan]

Wow. Sounds like you're describing a scenario in a video game.

Politics has a lot of that.

I’ve been up to my neck in it for 40 years.

 

[Chomsky]

OK, obstruction is impeachable, right? So why have the proceedings not began, if firing Comey was "obstruction"?

Quite honestly, and with no disrespect, it's due to the Republican control of Congress. I have little doubts the Dems would impeach in a New York minute!

 

[Brochacholomigo]

I've seen internet forum grammar corrections, but never one to this depth & extent. I'm not sure if I should praise it, or shake my head.

So I guess I'll just leave a 'like', and move on ...

Whomst'd've expected such a literate fellow to take time out of his day to help another poster out like that?

 

[Chomsky]

Frankly, seeing how little Trump is capable of actually doing on his own has given me a newfound respect for bureaucracy. Despite the constant claims that he was the next Hitler towards the beginning of his term, he's effectively fangless. Can he appoint dangerous people? Certainly. Can he embarrass us on the international stage? You know it. Can he do a lot of stuff with executive orders that we'd rather he not do? Indubitably. But he's under investigation by a perfectly competent man, has a heavily entrenched judicial system slapping down many of his bills and a heavily Republican Congress that STILL won't do everything he says. And he's going to lose that Congressional support in just a few short months, of that I have no doubt.

We're going to have a lot of stuff to clean up once Trump is out of the picture, but every bit of the system that prevents him from doing whatever he wants will still be there, and we'll have a strong cautionary tale right behind us. This will pass soon enough, and perhaps we'll even learn something from this whole mess.

I suspect that we'll see tighter reigns put onto Presidential power in coming years. We might see a surge in reformers, too, and if we're really damn lucky, we might just put some controls on campaign funding and lobbying. I think that history will look back at Trump as a point where America actually turned itself around and tried fixing some of our systemic problems. Am I overly optimistic in that assessment? Yeah. But we've got one hell of a whip behind us - we just need to find the right carrot to chase.

This is a phenomenal post, Jesse!

 

[Brochacholomigo]

This is a phenomenal post, Jesse!

Of course it is, I wrote it! Are you insulting the quality of my other posts?

 

[Chomsky]

Whomst'd've expected such a literate fellow to take time out of his day to help another poster out like that?

Whom's to know??? :mrgreen:

 

[Nap]

Which equates to Trump not actually having the power to fire Mueller.

Really basic stuff here.

Fine, I will give you that point. But the fact that Rosentein is still there, can you really say he has tried to fire him? He has a clear and simple path he can take should he ultimately wanted him fired, and yet has not done so.

 

[Nap]

Which demonstrates Trump can't fire Mueller! :doh

He can't fire him personally, but there is a clear path that if he wanted him fired bad enough it could be done rather easily. I understand that he can't fire him personally, however it would not be difficult for him to have him fired so by proxy he does have the power to fire him.

 

[MovingPictures]

:thumbs:

Except their subpoena power is weaker, and they don't do Grand Juries. So it is quite a bit weaker in legal terms in my opinion, but still strong in political terms.

When it comes to tax returns and financial records, they can get their hands on pretty much anything. If something is found in Trump's records or any emolument violations are discovered, they can not only impeach, but also send legal referrals to both local US attorneys offices, as well state AG's for offenses that are more state matters.

That's the power that's up for grabs come November, lets not blow it people.

 

[MovingPictures]

I've seen internet forum grammar corrections, but never one to this depth & extent. I'm not sure if I should praise it, or shake my head.

So I guess I'll just leave a 'like', and move on ...

Some people just have nothing else to contribute.

 

[MovingPictures]

Quite honestly, and with no disrespect, it's due to the Republican control of Congress. I have little doubts the Dems would impeach in a New York minute!

You can bet on that.

 

[Cardinal]

I can handle a lot of bad grammar, even mine is not perfect, but there are times when someone crosses the line;
"whom didn't vote for him" sounds to my ears like fingernails scratching a blackboard.

Please learn when to use "who" and "whom". Thank you.

If you don't know, or can't grasp the rules, then avoid "whom" at all times, except
on prepositional phrases: "for whom", "in whom", "to whom", etc. That will improve it a lot, though using "who" in the objective case is mildly bothersome, my grammar meter won't red line as it does when using "whom" in the subjective case. Yech!

Or when people use "She and I" as object pronouns instead of subject pronouns.

Correct: "She and I went to the park and blew up trees with rocket grenades."

Wrong: "The trees in the park were blown up with rocket grenades by she and I."

 

[truthatallcost]

I’ve been watching the rabid attempts to undermine and unseat the President in the MSM and echoed in this Forum in post after post since November 2016.

Yes, ever since the election after the psychic shock of the “upset” victory wore off, there has been a no holds barred, manic effort to find some way, any way to undo the results of that election either via impeachment or resignation.

It started with simple unfitness for office with members of the mental health professions signing petitions declaring him mentally unfit. Then there was a massive deluge of leaks about any and every thing some “current or former member of government” considered “improper” poured in the willing ears of the MSN.

Finally, thanks to the Steele Dossier the “resistance” jelled around Russian election interference which the President must have actively colluded in. Didn’t he publicly ask the Russian to hack her during his campaign? :roll: (No, he actually didn’t, but don’t let facts get in the way of a narrative.)

Either Director Comey was unaware that his agency, the FBI, used it to get a FISA warrant to tap the communications of Carter Page with the intent to investigate Trump, or his unwillingness to inform the President whether or not he was under investigation which resulted in his discharge was an intentional failure to do his duty.

The President rightly lost trust in him and fired him. After that, it’s been obstruction (which it was not) and “collusion, collusion, collusion!” with nothing to actually show it.

As predicted, the witch hunt may have found some kind of information completely unrelated to “Russian interference,” which not being under Mueller’s writ, has been passed off to “local agency” to investigate. This resulted in the Cohen "raid" via possible money laundering or fund misuse from the Stormy Daniels sex scandal.

Now, it’s “Campaign fund misuse” and “money laundering,” or whatever other dirt may have been found that had nothing to do with the original investigation. This is exactly what all those in this Forum and out in public have been hoping for.

Well, if the President is forced from office for any reason other than knowing and willing conspiracy with a foreign power to undermine the election process, then all the Left’s naysaying notwithstanding, it proves this is and always WAS a “Witch Hunt” with the intent to negate the election by any means necessary.

If successful, then my faith in our system of government will be completely erased; since this will demonstrate that mob "justice" is the rule, and "by any means necessary" is the method.

Bravo, well done Captain. Thank you for reminding those amnesia stricken posters here of the many failed attempts by the establishment, to rob the American people of their vote.

While reading your post, it reminded me of a quote by another leftist henchman, someone I'd bet Mueller respects, and possibly studies:

 

[truthatallcost]

Meh, my faith in our system of government has been completely erased since November of 2016. You are just late to the party.

Our system of government worked exceptionally well on election day, to an extent that is virtually unheard of in the world; a man who was opposed by the elitist class that runs this country, actually WON the White House due to the support of the people. It was one of the most uniquely democratic events of the past 200 years, and very well may never happen again.

 

[Puigb]

Our system of government worked exceptionally well on election day, to an extent that is virtually unheard of in the world; a man who was opposed by the elitist class that runs this country, actually WON the White House due to the support of the people. It was one of the most uniquely democratic events of the past 200 years, and very well may never happen again.

....:roll:

 

[truthatallcost]

....:roll:

Is the electoral college process still putting an itch in your ditch?

 

[Puigb]

Is the electoral college process still putting an itch in your ditch?

No, I laughed at your post somehow asserting that Trump's victory was somehow more by the "people" than any previous president.

And Trump HATED the electoral college process in 2012, but loves it now...hmmm I wonder why?

 

[post]

Our system of government worked exceptionally well on election day, to an extent that is virtually unheard of in the world; a man who was opposed by the elitist class that runs this country, actually WON the White House due to the support of the people. It was one of the most uniquely democratic events of the past 200 years, and very well may never happen again.

Opposed by the elitist class of......what? Who do you think buys that aside from the others drinking from your cup?
You got conned and bilked as thoroughly as Trump University "marks". The difference between them and you is their
reaction to VOTUS Trump was not, "thank you, SIR, I'll have another....".

ONE OF THOUSANDS of EXAMPLES

Facebook Fallout Deals Blow to Mercers' Political Clout - The New ...
https://www.nytimes.com/2018/04/10/us/politics/mercer-family-cambridge-analytica.html
1 day ago - Cambridge Analytica and Facebook: The Scandal and the Fallout So Far. Revelations that consultants to the Trump campaign misused millions of Facebook users' data set off an international furor. This is how The Times covered it. But the effort by Ms. Mercer's friend to help mend fences with Facebook ...

And....

Link
The Reclusive Hedge-Fund Tycoon Behind the Trump Presidency ...
https://www.newyorker.com/.../the-reclusive-hedge-fund-tycoon-behind-the-trump-pr...

Mar 27, 2017 - In the 2016 campaign, Mercer gave $22.5 million in disclosed donations to Republican candidates and to political-action committees. Tony Fabrizio, a Republican pollster who worked for the Trump campaign, said that Mercer had “catapulted to the top of the heap of right-of-center power brokers.” It's worth ...

What Do Robert and Rebekah Mercer Really Want? - The Atlantic
https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2017/01/no-one...mercers.../514529/

Jan 27, 2017 - Mercer's co-CEO is Jim Simons, a major donor to Democrats; one Republican operative with connections to the Mercers who spoke on condition of ... other campaigns with which the Mercers have been involved, including Trump's, the Cruz campaign engaged the Mercers's data firm Cambridge Analytica.

Who are mega-donors Bob and Rebekah Mercer, and why are they ...
https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2017/...donors...mercer/98812284/

Mar 7, 2017 - The intensely private Mercers have emerged as big power brokers in Trump's Washington. They financially backed Trump's campaign when many establishment donors steered clear of the brash real estate magnate. Rebekah Mercer helped persuade Trump to hire two key strategists on his campaign ...

https://www.motherjones.com/politic...anned-parenthood-kills-150000-females-a-year/
Watch This Federal Judicial Nominee Evade Questions About Whether Planned Parenthood Kills 150,000 Females a Year

She also won’t say if Brown v. Board of Education was decided correctly.

Kate Harloe Apr. 11, 2018

Wendy Vitter, Trump’s judicial nominee for a district court in eastern Louisiana, testified before the Senate Judiciary Committee Wednesday morning, moving one step closer to earning a lifetime appointment as a federal judge. As expected (and as I wrote earlier), she faced extensive questions about her record of anti-abortion activism—in particular, about a statement she made at a rally against a Planned Parenthood clinic in 2013: “Planned Parenthood says they promote women’s health,” Vitter said, according to New Orleans’ Clarion Herald. “It is the saddest of ironies that they kill over 150,000 females a year.”

In her hearing this morning, Sen. Richard Blumenthal (D-C.T.) asked her repeatedly if she stood by that statement. Vitter refused to give a yes-or-no answer:
.....

 

[OscarLevant]

Cap'n, with all due respect...and sympathies...that's what you get for electing a jackass. Populism is always doomed to fail, one way or another. He had a chance to wow, and does nothing but provide fodder for the people he suggested he was better than. If "they" get him, it's because he did something to get got. If that erases your faith in government, I'm sorry, but I don't understand how. I don't say any of this flippantly, man...no matter what happens I'm guessing it's going to take a long time to heal. You gotta wonder if flipping the establishment and the Liberals the bird was worth all this.

You know the old saying, be careful about what you wish for.


Btw, Trump is not a populist.

 

[holbritter]

He can't be forced out if he hasn't committed a crime. Isn't that how it works in the US?

It's how it's supposed to work.

 

[OscarLevant]

Our system of government worked exceptionally well on election day, to an extent that is virtually unheard of in the world; a man who was opposed by the elitist class that runs this country,

You mean like the Koch Bros, the Mercers, those elitist types?

actually WON the White House due to the support of the people. It was one of the most uniquely democratic events of the past 200 years, and very well may never happen again.

Whaddaya mean "...support of the people...it was one of the most uniquely democratic events of the past 200 years"? That kind of hyperbole is right out of the Trump playbook.

Anyway, you can't be serious, given...

1. That Trump lost the popular vote by almost 3 million vote, where other presidents won the election on less than that. Therefore, one cannot say he has the "will of the people" that is, if you define it as a clear majority.

2. That Trump took the White House solely on a fluke of the electoral college system.

3. That Trump won illegitimately With the Help of Sec'y of State Kris Kobach's "Interstate Crosscheck" program, which purged 1.1 million (mostly blacks, Asians, & Hispanics) from the voter registration rolls where the purged numbers in the swing states vastly exceeded the vote count Trump won by ( see Greg Palast | Investigative Reporter ) NOTE: But for crosscheck, Hillary would have taken the swing states.

4. That Republican de facto voter suppression techniques

5. That Comey letter (I personally don't believe it could have single-handedly turned the election, without the other items).

6. Russian meddling. (if Trump only won by 70,000 votes, then it's conceivable the meddling could have tipped the scales, because, yes, FB/Twitter/Soc Media advertising/trolling works, don't think it doesn't ).

Yes, a stronger candidate would have overcame the vote deficits such things caused, but if things were square, despite the fact that she could have directed her campaign more efficiently and effectively, still, she would have won, and that's the point.

Now, I'm not saying "playing unfair" is an issue, since most campaigns do not play fair, and surely Hillary did not play fair during the primary, it's just that there were these other factors beyond her control.
Before anyone shouts "sore loser", check out the Greg Palast link about Interstate Crosscheck. If it were not for that one, you might have had a point.

Those who argue she stole the primary, perhaps, but that's a different debate.