Forum Thread

Donald Trump: the Case for Impeachment

Reply to ThreadDisplaying 196 - 210 of 219 Prev 1 .. 11 12 13 14 15 Next
  • Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        

    Law and Crime and Inquistr both have articles on the suspicious suicide. It sure looks like all these Deutsche bank loans to Trump were highly suspicious. Trump was even borrowing more money from the bank to pay bank loans due to the same bank. Sheesh.

    They both reference a New York Times article, A Mar-a-Lago Weekend and an Act of God: Trump’s History With Deutsche Bank

    So you can read and fill in the blanks as you see fit. This smells rotten. The reported suicide may be real as Bowers who is highly implicated in the lending schemes could be liable for not just bad loans. I cannot copy from the articles but Jared Kushner's name is there as well as having played a role.

    No wonder Trump wants all his financial dealing hidden forever. He is a con man.

  • Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        
    Schmidt Wrote:

    Law and Crime and Inquistr both have articles on the suspicious suicide. It sure looks like all these Deutsche bank loans to Trump were highly suspicious. Trump was even borrowing more money from the bank to pay bank loans due to the same bank. Sheesh.

    They both reference a New York Times article, A Mar-a-Lago Weekend and an Act of God: Trump’s History With Deutsche Bank

    So you can read and fill in the blanks as you see fit. This smells rotten. The reported suicide may be real as Bowers who is highly implicated in the lending schemes could be liable for not just bad loans. I cannot copy from the articles but Jared Kushner's name is there as well as having played a role.

    No wonder Trump wants all his financial dealing hidden forever. He is a con man.

    Yes, Schmidt; what I find so amazing is that seemingly the FBI is not investigating these cases; if this would have been Obama, then he would already be in jail. As I have said so many times that the "system" here allows all of the craziness of going from court to court and finally end up in the Supreme Court over "years" of time and then still has an lousy outcome. It shows clearly that the "legal" system here is screwed up, due to not having "black and white" laws which are implemented on the "base law" (Constitution) because otherwise the "lawyers/judges" don't get their "rip-off" money and get rich because of it.

    So the "con-man" knows that and also profits from it. He's "stupid" but knows how to manipulate this "outdated legal" system.

  • Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        

    While Donald Trump may be a total ignoramus on how government is supposed to function, at least one skill carried over from his business life is being applied in earnest as president: lawsuits.

    USA Today, June 2016: Exclusive: Trump's 3,500 lawsuits unprecedented for a presidential nominee

    As the USA Today article published before he was elected president states, "lawsuits are one of his primary negotiating tools". He never pays bills both small and large preferring instead to litigate in the courts. The Trump Organization employs an army of lawyers to challenge just about everything involving money in the courts where he can drag the litigation out for years by various tactics and appeals. In the end he just outlasts his opponents.

    So as President he has continued the practice. Wikipedia, List of lawsuits involving Donald Trump (as President).

    Donald Trump is most comfortable in dealing with litigation and courts. That's where he has spent a big chunk of his buiness life, and where he feels on strong ground as president: just continue to sue and or appeal until the clock runs out. Delay, delay, delay. He also understands that as president his litigation powers are much higher than that as a business person. A sitting president cannot be indicted and he is using that to his advantage.

    As the USA Today article states, the shear number of lawsuits are unprecedented. Everything about Trump is unprecedented.

  • Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        
    Schmidt Wrote:

    While Donald Trump may be a total ignoramus on how government is supposed to function, at least one skill carried over from his business life is being applied in earnest as president: lawsuits.

    USA Today, June 2016: Exclusive: Trump's 3,500 lawsuits unprecedented for a presidential nominee

    As the USA Today article published before he was elected president states, "lawsuits are one of his primary negotiating tools". He never pays bills both small and large preferring instead to litigate in the courts. The Trump Organization employs an army of lawyers to challenge just about everything involving money in the courts where he can drag the litigation out for years by various tactics and appeals. In the end he just outlasts his opponents.

    So as President he has continued the practice. Wikipedia, List of lawsuits involving Donald Trump (as President).

    Donald Trump is most comfortable in dealing with litigation and courts. That's where he has spent a big chunk of his buiness life, and where he feels on strong ground as president: just continue to sue and or appeal until the clock runs out. Delay, delay, delay. He also understands that as president his litigation powers are much higher than that as a business person. A sitting president cannot be indicted and he is using that to his advantage.

    As the USA Today article states, the shear number of lawsuits are unprecedented. Everything about Trump is unprecedented.

    Yes Schmidt, you've got the picture. Again I like to point to the fact that the laws in this country are totally screwed up so this gives Trump the leverage to manipulate the system. Lawsuits make the lawyers rich. It is the built in corruption which drives this country, just about with everything, even health care or anything the government does with your tax money.

    The impeachment process is for him the same as any lawsuit and he will play the same "game" as you so clearly showed.

  • Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        

    Why does it appear that Trump fears having his Taxes made public?
    What would be in his Taxes that would be game over for Trump?

    Logically, the IRS has already gone over audited him, so it is not like making his taxes public will help the IRS find fraud.

  • Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        

    If you were a Grateful Dead fan, you'll appreciate this clip.

    Keep on truckin'

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_8vzj1G4l4E

  • Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        

    Depending on how many attachments we can see to his tax returns (as opposed to just the front page) it can reveal the sources of his income, the deductions including charitable deductions, interest paid on loans, capital gains and losses and carry forwards, and how much taxes he pays. My guess is he pays no taxes because he is allowed to write of business losses (with limits) with the balance of losses above the limit carried forward into the next tax year.

    The devil is in the details...and Trump the self declared billionaire doesn't want anyone to see his taxes, including lenders. He may have provided phony tax returns to his past lenders that would be very interesting to those lenders.

    However, I doubt that for his base of avid rabid supporters nothing in his taxes would make one iota of difference. If he paid no taxes to the "feds" for years he would be hailed as a hero...a creative genius.

  • Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        

    I just wonder about the total stupidity of this country; in any other country types like Trump never would get away with this. (except where you have dictatorships)

    And still no one in the Government and neither any of the candidates comes up with the idea to make "tax returns" law.

    Nor get the money out of elections and get rid of the "electoral college"; they all just continue on the old broken system in which they get bogged down. Sorry people "corruption" wins again; if you want Trump for life just continue on this path.

  • Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        

    Jerry Nadler has invited Trump and/or his attorneys to participate in the Wednesday opening hearing of the Judiciary Committee defining what is meant by high crimes and misdemeanors. Several renown law professors will testify. Trump's attorney's have declined. Friday is the deadline for Trump to decide if he will participate in the remainder of the proceedings. Trump and his attorneys continue to deride the whole process as unfair:

    “This baseless and highly partisan inquiry violates all past historical precedent, basic due process rights, and fundamental fairness,” wrote White House counsel Pat Cipollone, continuing the West Wing’s attack on the procedural form of the impeachment proceedings. Cipollone said Nadler provided only "vague" details about the hearing, and that unnamed academics -- and not "fact witnesses" -- would apparently be attending.

    "As for the hearing scheduled for December 4, we cannot fairly be expected to participate in a hearing while the witnesses are yet to be named and while it remains unclear whether the Judiciary Committee will afford the president a fair process through additional hearings," Cipollone said. "More importantly, an invitation to an academic discussion with law professors does not begin to provide the President with any semblance of a fair process. Accordingly, under the current circumstances, we do not intend to participate in your Wednesday hearing."

  • Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        

    The GOP has published a counter report; "there is nothing to see, Trump did nothing wrong." Let the party begin" All of this is worse than an overdose; if this continues then the whole country will become "comedy" central for sure.

    Trump's visit to the NATO conference will also be an huge success for sure.

    Bring at least 10 barf buckets.

  • Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        

    Go big or go home.

    The House intelligence committee just released their report about their findings. They are recommending NINE articles of impeachment.

    https://www.nydailynews.com/news/politics/ny-impeachment-report-trump-20191203-ug5lu4midracxd2hgegxpbrt2i-story.html

  • Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        

    A "letter to the editor" in today's Daily Star details why the Senate will not vote to remove Trump from office:

    *******************************************************************

    "All of the reasons the Republicans have given for not impeaching Trump have pretty much been refuted by the hearings and Trump himself so they are left with little to argue with on a factual basis. But they will obfuscate and talk about everything except the obvious reason the senate will not vote to impeach. It has nothing to do with guilt or innocence but only with the 2020 election. A vote to impeach by Republican senators will cost the votes of the 38 percent bloc of resolute Trumpers and l their reelection, while a non-impeachment vote guarantees the Trumpers votes and much better odds for a possible reelection . The Republican senate vote will have nothing to do with the actual facts or the constitution but will be determined by the odds of being reelected in 2020. Hence Independent voters will probably determine the election outcome."

    *************************************************************************

    Adam Schiff was asked this morning on having the Senate vote on the issue. Although he acknowledged that the impeachment process my strengthen Trump's chances for re-election, failure to do so what further embolden Trump to become even worse. He also reminded the interviewer that Trump's July 25 call was one day after Mueller's testimony to Congress.

    On July 24, 2019, Mueller testified before the House Intelligence Committee after being subpoenaed. When asked as to why the Special Counsel did not subpoena President Trump, Mueller stated that they did not subpoena the president "because of the necessity of expediting" the investigation. "If we did subpoena the president, he would fight the subpoena and we would be in the midst of the investigation for a substantial period of time.

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

  • Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        

    Meanwhile, back at the ranch ...

    The Washington Post this morning reported that there is a LOT going on in the hearings this morning, but the most significant item is this one:

    Three constitutional scholars summoned by Democrats are testifying Wednesday that President Trump’s conduct toward Ukraine rises to the level of impeachment, as the inquiry moves to a new phase with the first hearing by the House Judiciary Committee, a panel prone to theatrics and partisan brawls.

    Significantly, a law professor invited to testify by Democrats quoted an unexpected source in support of the idea that foreign nationals should not be allowed to interfere in U.S. elections: conservative Supreme Court Justice Brett M. Kavanaugh.

    https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/impeachment-hearings-live-updates/2019/12/04/b7cc7b4e-1682-11ea-a659-7d69641c6ff7_story.html

    One indication of how crazy things are going to become is these items:

    1) Rep. Devin Nunes (R-Calif.) has filed a lawsuit against CNN, seeking $435,350,000 in damages and claiming that the news outlet defamed him last month when it published a “demonstrably false hit piece.”

    The Nov. 22 story reported that in December 2018, while serving as chairman of the House Intelligence Committee, Nunes traveled to Vienna and met with Ukrainian former prosecutor general Victor Shokin to discuss digging up dirt on Biden — which Nunes’s complaint says is untrue.

    2) Republicans stepped up attacks early Wednesday morning on House Judiciary Committee Chairman Jerrold Nadler (D-N.Y.), seeking to undermine him in much in the same way they targeted House Intelligence Committee Chairman Adam B. Schiff (D-Calif.) when his panel was in the spotlight.

    3) Some of the members of the Judiciary Committee are Louie Gohmert, Jim Jordan. Matt Gaetz, and Andy Biggs, so it's bound to be a circus.

    ttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_House_Committee_on_the_Judiciary#Members,_116th_Congress

  • Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        
    The people you mention under 3) are "cult" members of the Trump "mafia" as well some others. I can not understand what their motivation is other than act stupid and refuse to accept the fact that in the future President's then also can do whatever they like to do, if you don't punish the behavior of Trump and his cronies now. They are an brainless bunch and can't understand that they ever were voted into office. How did Jordan get his job? Unbelievable that people here vote for such incompetent people. I guess it is time that everyone who wants to become Senator, first has to "study" the Constitution in detail and get an exam to prove they understand it, if not then you don't qualify for the job.
  • Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        
    that guy in AZ Wrote:

    Go big or go home.

    The House intelligence committee just released their report about their findings. They are recommending NINE articles of impeachment.

    https://www.nydailynews.com/news/politics/ny-impeachment-report-trump-20191203-ug5lu4midracxd2hgegxpbrt2i-story.html

    The article below, in today's New York Times, also recommends "going big". What virtually all of us have forgotten, though, is that the House had actually drawn up FOUR articles of impeachment against Nixon. Interestingly, the fourth one was actually the most serious offense, since it indirectly led to the killing of 1.7 million people in Cambodia.

    For Nixon’s impeachment, there was actually a fourth article of impeachment. It encompassed more serious offenses and incited intense debate among the members. Introduced by Representative John Conyers of Michigan, it charged the president with “the submission to the Congress of false and misleading statements concerning the existence, scope and nature of American bombing operations in Cambodia in derogation of the power of Congress to declare war, to make appropriations and to raise and support armies.”

    https://www.nytimes.com/2019/12/05/opinion/trump-impeachment-articles.html?smid=nytcore-ios-share

    The 4th article was not included due to the fact that it was too tight a link between the process of impeachment and the Vietnam War, and would be needlessly divisive at a time when he was seeking consensus and bipartisanship.

    https://manonthelam.com/sad-truth-killing-fields-cambodia/