[andrat2000]

I heared Trumpel tweeted and threatened Comey that he better don't speak to the media. Trumpel threatens Comey with potentially illegal achieved audio material blackmailing Comey with it.

Is this true?

If this is true he is worser than Nixon.

Edit: Wait, he was already worser than Nixon.

[andrat2000]

They worked hard detailing the reason Comey was fired,  and Trump couldn't stick to the script.

Comey also, as I understand it, would NOT swear loyalty to Trump; another reason Trump didn't like him and wanted him gone.

What?
Trumpel wants that people swear loyality to him? Like in a totalitarian dictatorship rather than swear loyality to the american people and the constitution?

And doesn't this mean he was trying to influence the investigations by people swearing loyality to him?

Unbelievable evil. Dry up that Trumpel swamp. But I have the feeling the Trumpel swamp is like 10 miles deep - at least.

[rtpoe]

Why this has the potential to be worse than Watergate:

1. The nature of the allegations and crime:

The Watergate break-in was because Nixon was trying to get dirt on his enemies. That's a pretty localized, "normal" crime. The current scandal is about a political campaign colluding with a rival government in an effort to influence an election. You can, without overreacting, mention the term "treason" in reference to it. And it's hard to find a worse crime than betraying your own country. Well, one where there aren't dead bodies, anyway.....

2. The political environment:

In the 70s, Republicans and Democrats had their differences, but they could put them aside and work together for the common good when the situation demanded it. No one in the media was actively spewing hate and demonizing the opposition. No one ever questioned where a politician was born. Today, one party categorically refuses to work with the other, and even actively tries to undo the accomplishments of the previous administration.

3. Respect for norms and the Law:

In the end, Nixon knew he had to give in. After a rather silly attempt at compromise, he surrendered his tapes. And when there was nothing left for him, he resigned and left without a fight. Who knows if Trump will ever go peacefully?

[TheZookie007]

Who knows if Trump will ever go peacefully?

I don't know. But it brings to mind the quote often attributed to Mark Twain: "Never pick a fight with people who buy ink by the barrel."

To which I might add, "...or with people whose job it is to dig up secrets, when you have built your entire career on doing illegal things under the cover of secrecy."

[TheZookie007]

3. Respect for norms and the Law:

In the end, Nixon knew he had to give in. After a rather silly attempt at compromise, he surrendered his tapes. And when there was nothing left for him, he resigned and left without a fight.

And this is where the current occupant of the White House is sorely lacking: he has nothing but contempt for "norms", for "the law" or for "the Law". He fancies himself a Teflon Don, like the Mafia wiseguys he tries (and woefully fails) to emulate, whether it is in his cheap suits, or his attempt to use heavies to deliver letters to fire the Director of the FBI. This isn't an episode of The Sopranos. He thinks he's Tony, but in actuality he is a Big Pussy.

He's so stupid that he's tweeting nonsense like:

James Comey better hope that there are no "tapes" of our conversations before he starts leaking to the press!

without realizing that he's just admitted to obstruction of justice...and that his Tweets are now part of the public record. He's digging his own grave with his own big mouth and with his itchy-on-the-Twitter-trigger (short) fingers. In an essay posted on Lawfare, Bob Bauer (former White House Counsel for President Obama) just laid out the case for the current occupant of the White House's legal peril:

Mr. Trump appears not to understand that he is drawing a certain picture of himself, which is neither pretty nor without consequence for his legal position. This self-portrait can be counted on to color unfavorably any assessment of his motives when more formal inquiries into his behavior are considered or take place. While it is certainly true that prosecutors should pursue the crime and not specific individuals, suspicious behavior cannot help but draw attention to itself and push forward an investigation...

The picture that Mr. Trump has managed to create so far consists of the following:

* The admission that he sought repeated assurances about his legal exposure in an ongoing criminal investigation

* The pursuit of those reassurances at a time when he was quite actively holding open the possibility that Mr. Comey might not hold onto his job. (Apparently one of these conversations took place over dinner—as it was being served, was the President making it clear that Mr. Comey might have “to sing for his supper”?)

* The admission that in firing Mr. Comey, he was moved decisively by his frustration over the FBI's handling of the Russia probe investigation.

* The President's repeated very public statements, heard by all, including those charged with investigating the matter, that he views the Russia probe as having no merit.  Responsible for the faithful execution of the laws and the integrity of the system of justice, Mr. Trump has chosen to actively dispute the basis for an ongoing FBI investigation that affects his interests.

* The repeated adjustments to the story the White House originally told about the circumstances surrounding the decision to dismiss Mr. Comey. As noted in the earlier posting, it is not advantageous to somebody under suspicion to be altering his story—or, in this case, changing it in every material detail.

   
And now Mr. Trump has resorted to Twitter to suggest that he might have information about these conversations with the former FBI Director that the latter should worry about before deciding to disseminate his version of events. The President has drawn attention to the possibility that he has some material—some evidence—bearing on those conversations, which will certainly be of interest in any future inquiry into this dismissal.  Mr. Trump’s threat to deploy these “tapes” unless Mr. Comey refrains from giving his side of the story is highly imprudent.

What is most remarkable is that the President has willingly created this self-portrait.  As scandals-in-the-making go, this one may become famous for featuring the President as the principal witness against himself: he seems committed to uncovering any cover-up.

No wonder this happened back in February.

[TheZookie007]

Unbelievable evil. Dry up that Trumpel swamp. But I have the feeling the Trumpel swamp is like 10 miles deep - at least.

If we have learned nothing from this debacle, we should have learned this: whenever he says something, he's doing the exact opposite. His slogan was "Drain The Swamp" but instead he's filled the swamp even deeper with nepotism and corruption and incompetence in every direction. If any enemy of the United States wanted to ensure that the departments of the executive branch were headed by the absolute worst of the worst, that enemy couldn't have done a better job of it than this man has.

What?
Trumpel wants that people swear loyality to him? Like in a totalitarian dictatorship rather than swear loyality to the american people and the constitution?

And doesn't this mean he was trying to influence the investigations by people swearing loyality to him?

Indeed it does. But this is nothing new for Republicans. They would rather swear an oath to a non-elected person like Grover Norquist, than respect the oath of office they swore when they took their seat in the Senate or in the House of Representatives, which states:

"I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion; and that I will well and faithfully discharge the duties of the office on which I am about to enter: So help me God."

That's what these hypocrites swore to "bear true faith and allegiance" to: the Constitution, not to any person. The fact that none of the Republicans sees anything wrong with what their head of state is doing, shows that they are in violation of the oath.

It's unconscionable.

[andrat2000]

Unbelievable evil. Dry up that Trumpel swamp. But I have the feeling the Trumpel swamp is like 10 miles deep - at least.

If we have learned nothing from this debacle, we should have learned this: whenever he says something, he's doing the exact opposite. His slogan was "Drain The Swamp" but instead he's filled the swamp even deeper with nepotism and corruption and incompetence in every direction. If any enemy of the United States wanted to ensure that the departments of the executive branch were headed by the absolute worst of the worst, that enemy couldn't have done a better job of it than this man has.

What?
Trumpel wants that people swear loyality to him? Like in a totalitarian dictatorship rather than swear loyality to the american people and the constitution?

And doesn't this mean he was trying to influence the investigations by people swearing loyality to him?

Indeed it does. But this is nothing new for Republicans. They would rather swear an oath to a non-elected person like Grover Norquist, than respect the oath of office they swore when they took their seat in the Senate or in the House of Representatives, which states:

"I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion; and that I will well and faithfully discharge the duties of the office on which I am about to enter: So help me God."

That's what these hypocrites swore to "bear true faith and allegiance" to: the Constitution, not to any person. The fact that none of the Republicans sees anything wrong with what their head of state is doing, shows that they are in violation of the oath.

It's unconscionable.

So in summary crooked republicans.

[TheZookie007]

So in summary crooked republicans.

Sadly, yes.

Another example of how conscience-less Republicans are: when the North Carolina headquarters of the Republican Party was damaged by a firebomb, their Democratic colleagues chipped in money to help re-build and repair it. And how did the North Carolina GOP repay the Democrats for their show of bipartisan support?

At 3:07 a.m. on Friday morning, North Carolina Senate GOP leaders rushed through a budget amendment that stripped education funding for teaching assistants and STEM programs in districts led by Democrats, cut funding to provide fresh produce to food deserts, reallocated money that was supposed to go to an arts museum and a downtown revitalization project, and eliminated a position that works to secure federal aid for disaster relief.

It appears the amendment wasn’t passed to achieve specific policy goals though, but rather as an act of political retribution after a prolonged and contentious budget negotiation in the state’s senate...

A rural district in northeastern North Carolina, represented by Sen. Erica Smith-Ingram (D), is impacted the most by this amendment. The budget would strip $316,646 in funding away from two early college high schools in her district, and prohibits state funding for Eastern North Carolina STEM, a summer program for science, math, and technology. The program primarily serves African-American students from low-income families, and Smith-Ingram said that if the amendment is included in the final budget, it will effectively shut down the STEM program.

“I don’t know what motivated the amendment, but it will have a devastating effect on an area that is already suffering,” Smith-Ingram told the News & Record. “The future of chi1dren should not be caught up in a political disagreement between members.”

[rtpoe]

It's getting worse.

The headline on the Washington Post website RIGHT NOW:

Trump revealed highly classified information to Russian diplomats

"The president’s disclosures to the Russian foreign minister and ambassador in their Oval Office meeting last week jeopardized a critical source of intelligence on the Islamic State — an information-sharing arrangement considered so sensitive that details have been withheld from allies and tightly restricted even within the U.S. government, current and former U.S. officials said. Trump appeared to be boasting of the “great intel” he receives when he described a looming terror threat, according to an official with knowledge of the exchange. "

(emphasis mine)

Will the GOP find enough spine to stop him?

[TheZookie007]

Will the GOP find enough spine to stop him?

If this history is anything to go by: NO.

[3deroticer]

http://www.rawstory.com/2017/05/watch-explosive-dutch-documentary-says-trump-has-deep-ties-to-russias-mafia-underworld/

[TheZookie007]

Totally off-topic but since this is the Off-Topic part of the Forum, I can get away with it ...: 3de, who is that in your avatar??? And can I have a high-res version of it please?

[3deroticer]

Totally off-topic but since this is the Off-Topic part of the Forum, I can get away with it ...: 3de, who is that in your avatar??? And can I have a high-res version of it please?

She is Danielle_Derek
I only got a gif file of her in this scene so I morph the gif

[rtpoe]

Back to where we were.....

The White House sends National Security Adviser H.R. McMaster to tell the press that "No, Trump did not give away secrets to the Russians." Then, after the NY Times and Buzzfeed confirm the story, Trump says "Yes, I did. I can do that."

This is getting mind-numbing. We can't keep up with it all.

Not only can we not trust the President, we can't believe anything coming out of the White House. And if we can't, what chance have our allies got?

Trump is making his first overseas visit later this week, and it includes a NATO meeting.

“It’s kind of ridiculous how they are preparing to deal with Trump,” said one source briefed extensively on the meeting’s preparations. “It’s like they’re preparing to deal with a **09** — someone with a short attention span and mood who has no knowledge of NATO, no interest in in-depth policy issues, nothing,” said the source, who spoke on condition of anonymity. “They’re freaking out.”

"NATO Frantically Tries to Trump-Proof President’s First Visit" -  Robbie Gramer, Foreign Policy, May 15, 2017

Our institutions depend on people who have enough engraved character traits to fulfill their assigned duties. But there is perpetually less to Trump than it appears. When we analyze a president’s utterances we tend to assume that there is some substantive process behind the words, that it’s part of some strategic intent.

But Trump’s statements don’t necessarily come from anywhere, lead anywhere or have a permanent reality beyond his wish to be liked at any given instant.

We’ve got this perverse situation in which the vast analytic powers of the entire world are being spent trying to understand a guy whose thoughts are often just six fireflies beeping randomly in a jar.

“We badly want to understand Trump, to grasp him,” David Roberts writes in Vox. “It might give us some sense of control, or at least an ability to predict what he will do next. But what if there’s nothing to understand? What if there is no there there?”

"When the World Is Led by a Ch|ld" - David Brooks, NY Times, 5/16/17

Trump
Is
Not
Well.



And all of us are suffering for it.

---

Oh, I almost forgot:

"Individuals who are "extremely careless" with classified information should be denied further access to such info." - Paul Ryan, July 7, 2016

https://twitter.com/SpeakerRyan/status/751106162574053376

[andrat2000]

Is it true that Trumpel tried Comey to stop investigations in case Flynn?