The 2017 General Salma Hayek discussion thread...Part 3!!!

[Kutnupe14]

Yes, same as with Nixon.

Functionally it may not have damaged the nation, but American beliefs and ideals in how govt should be, would be fundamentally changed forever. And would certainly, at some future point, affect our nation in a negative way.

 

[Kutnupe14]

If tweets were to be used in a courtroom, would they require evidence of who authored a tweet or would it be taken at face value?

I think I see where this is going.

Of course. Someone at Twitter could potentially change the president's tweets, so yeah, you would need to lockdown who actually wrote the tweet. The WH is saying a lawyer did it. That lawyer is admitting he did it. So the questions at play are "do you have a twitter acct," "why do you have access to the president's twitter acct," "Have you tweeted from it before," "were you directed to make that statement," and "why did you use the pronoun 'I' which implicates the president if he wasn't the one writing the tweet."
Needless to say, this lawyer has just been added to the Mueller interview list.

 

[Tombs]

Functionally it may not have damaged the nation, but American beliefs and ideals in how govt should be, would be fundamentally changed forever. And would certainly, at some future point, affect our nation in a negative way.

With a large portion of the country fully convinced that Russia physically altered the polls to elect Trump, the the other half of the country believing globalism controlled the direction of the nation, I think the damage would be as minor as a distasteful tweet.

People are getting really jaded, man.

 

[Kutnupe14]

With a large portion of the country fully convinced that Russia physically altered the polls to elect Trump, the the other half of the country believing globalism controlled the direction of the nation, I think the damage would be as minor as a distasteful tweet.

People are getting really jaded, man.

I'm not... and still have a strong belief observing rule of law, and the traditions of the nation. When we give up on those, and it's universally accepted, this won't be the United States of America anymore, and (if I'm alive-probably won't be) I will be looking for the next most promising experiment in freedom and belief in rule of law.

 

[Tombs]

I'm not... and still have a strong belief observing rule of law, and the traditions of the nation. When we give up on those, and it's universally accepted, this won't be the United States of America anymore, and (if I'm alive-probably won't be) I will be looking for the next most promising experiment in freedom and belief in rule of law.

I've felt "rule of law" hasn't existed in a meaningful capacity since Clinton first took office. I'm too young to remember much further back.

When everything is fungible to the point national security comes second to growing voter bases, I'd say we've already crossed that threshold.

 

[hoosierdoc]

I'm not... and still have a strong belief observing rule of law, and the traditions of the nation. When we give up on those, and it's universally accepted, this won't be the United States of America anymore, and (if I'm alive-probably won't be) I will be looking for the next most promising experiment in freedom and belief in rule of law.

i don't recall you demanding prosecution of comey, bill Clinton, Hillary Clinton, Loretta lynch, and the other jerks in obama's white gouse. I don't recall you being incensed when obama lied and said Obamacare did what it didn't. Or that it wasn't a tax, but then argued at Supreme Court it WAS a tax, and then his architect said they only passed it thanks to how stupid Americans are.

yeah, you're a big rule of law guy, now.

 

[Kutnupe14]

i don't recall you demanding prosecution of comey, bill Clinton, Hillary Clinton, Loretta lynch, and the other jerks in obama's white gouse. I don't recall you being incensed when obama lied and said Obamacare did what it didn't. Or that it wasn't a tax, but then argued at Supreme Court it WAS a tax, and then his architect said they only passed it thanks to how stupid Americans are.

yeah, you're a big rule of law guy, now.

Not my fault you can't "recall." Perhaps you should pay attention in the future.

 

[SheepDog4Life]

If people think their elected officials have crossed a line when information like this comes up, they should demand an impeachment. Will they? Probably Conyers' constituents would not impeach him. Probably Franken's constituents would not impeach him. Probably Roy Moore's constituents will vote for him, and he'll win his election, even with the full understanding that the dude perv'ed teenagers when he was 30--and maybe he still does. Who is willing to hold their own accountable? Anyone?

You are correct, no one is willing to hold their own Representative or Senator accountable. We will see with Alabama, but my prediction, given the closeness in the polls, is that Moore will win. The "shame" bias, that is those ashamed to tell anyone, pollsters included, that they will vote for Moore, overcomes the margin of error. Hope I'm wrong, but if they do elect Moore, it's just more of the same, only to the most extreme.

The House and Senate should impeach/expel anyone completely unfit for the body (that includes Moore). But that is not what they will base their decision upon. Their calculus will be about how that vote affects their re-election chances and the chances of their party regaining/keeping power. Hence, Pelosi's recent announcement on Franken and Conyers, ditto every "national" Republican except Trump on Moore... other than Trump, you pretty much have to go to state GOP'ers to find support for Moore.

Alpo apparently isn't. I mean, who hasn't stuck their tongue down the throats of any random subordinate? Who hasn't grabbed a little ass? Ain't no big deal.

I recognize the implied purple, but the straight answer is ME. Any other guy who has never done these things, or worse, is welcome to re-quote with #MeToo.

We got agendas to legislate.

Let's call it the "Clinton get out of jail free card" which equated to keeping Clinton meant keeping power, which is what it's all about, right?!?!?

It's contagious and apparently, Republicans have finally caught the bug after decades of falling on their swords in shame.

 

[SheepDog4Life]

It's my understanding that Flynn did not tell the truth to the FBI. That's the charge. The charge isn't collusion. It's lying to the FBI. He copped to it. I don't know what the source of controversy should be about that.

The FBI and Mueller have the recording and transcripts of the conversation. They know exactly what was said and know what to ask. If they asked "Did you ask the Russians to refrain from retaliating and did they respond?", then "no" is a straight-up lie. If they merely asked, "Did you discuss sanctions?", then that's sketchy, gotcha, setup, etc. Another setup is an open-ended "What did you discuss?" and if he didn't recount every detail of the conversation from memory, then "he lied". Typically, for perjury charges, they would need to prove that he did remember the ommitted details, for example, he had told another person those details in recounted the conversation but omitted them to the FBI, or claimed he didn't recall. AND, that witness testimony would be part of the facts presented to show it was intentional... it wasn't.

Which is why I'm suspicious that actual quotes were omitted, only the prosecutor's interpretive paraphrase of the Q&A was included... which I've not seen before in such documents.

 

[IndyDave1776]

Probably not the best comparison, but ok. I would completely welcome Pence into the WH. I'm just trying to figure out, if it IS proven that Trump committed significant crimes against the nation, working in conjunction with the Russians, why my fellow Americans wouldn't want him impeached? Does political ideology garner more loyalty to rule of law and national sovereignty?

You really have to ask?

As for the previous question, when worse men have been excused of worse to continue being detrimental to the nation, I have a hard time being too concerned even if he and Vlad did discuss kicking Hillary in the shins. Why should Trump be held to a standard that no one else is?

 

[SheepDog4Life]

So there are some that think it's a possibility that the Russians asked Flynn about sanctions, Flynn said he couldn't talk about sanctions, and when interviewed by the FBI, and asked if he discussed sanctions and he replied "no," and the feds charged him for lying?

O-M-G... no seriously O-M-G...
Even if I hadn't read the charging documents, surely I can't be the only one thinking that such thinking is WAAAAAY beyond the pale.

It is WAAAAAY beyond the pale... so, if they did so, it's unethical prosecutorial abuse... and dis-barment is appropriate.

Since this story first hit, it's been entirely consistent with Flynn saying something like "We cannot the snactions, now" or "until after the inauguration".

So, is saying that they couldn't discuss sanctions actually discussing the santions? Please show your work for credit. (sheesh, I'm channeling Alpo now, lol)

 

[jamil]

I recognize the implied purple, but the straight answer is ME. Any other guy who has never done these things, or worse, is welcome to re-quote with #MeToo.

yes, I don't use purple. People can figure out when I am or am not serious. You did. But we're not talking about a teen trying to get past 2nd base. We're talking about a person in power using their position to have their way with people. We're talking about the epitome of what Trump said, that celebrities have such power that they can just go up to women and grab them by the *****, because there's nothing they can do.

The girl whose ass you grabbed. If she didn't want it grabbed, she could slap the **** out of you, right? We're not talking about male/female social experimentation here.

 

[Kutnupe14]

It is y beyond the pale... so, if they did so, it's unethical prosecutorial abuse... and dis-barment is appropriate.

Yeah, if they did I would totally support that disbarment. But c'mon seriously, you can't think that's a realistic option.

 

[jamil]

Probably not the best comparison, but ok. I would completely welcome Pence into the WH. I'm just trying to figure out, if it IS proven that Trump committed significant crimes against the nation, working in conjunction with the Russians, why my fellow Americans wouldn't want him impeached? Does political ideology garner more loyalty to rule of law and national sovereignty?

The only evidence there is that this happened is the hyperbole of the press. Maybe there's some smoke there. But my default assumption is that the reporting so far, has been mostly hyperbole driven by ideological butthurt. The basis of your default assumption is most obviously, ideological butthurt. You assume he did it.

 

[SheepDog4Life]

yes, I don't use purple. People can figure out when I am or am not serious. You did. But we're not talking about a teen trying to get past 2nd base. We're talking about a person in power using their position to have their way with people. We're talking about the epitome of what Trump said, that celebrities have such power that they can just go up to women and grab them by the *****, because there's nothing they can do.

Unfortunately, there WAS truth to Trump's statement about p***y grabbing... until Weinstein. Or, more accurately, until Fox cleaned house of Ailes and O'Reilly, which was the water receding prior to the Weinstein tsunami, IMO.

The girl whose ass you grabbed. If she didn't want it grabbed, she could slap the **** out of you, right? We're not talking about male/female social experimentation here.

Please re-read my post, I have NEVER done such a thing to a random stranger or fellow employee. Nor would I. Not even at drunken college parties. Consensual kissing precedes any derriere touching in the "rule book" I was taught, and it's more of a slow march downward, waiting for green or red lights, than a "grab".

If I had, grabbed that is, I would expect a slap to the face at a minimum, though I've taught my daughters how to use their knee to good effect in such situations.

 

[SheepDog4Life]

Probably not the best comparison, but ok. I would completely welcome Pence into the WH. I'm just trying to figure out, if it IS proven that Trump committed significant crimes against the nation, working in conjunction with the Russians, why my fellow Americans wouldn't want him impeached? Does political ideology garner more loyalty to rule of law and national sovereignty?

Re-read the news stories... the one that Trump directed Flynn to talk to the Russians prior to the election (election collusion is before the election, right?) is false and the news anchor that originated it has been suspended for 4 weeks for getting it utterly wrong.

Having your foreign policy advisors establish formal diplomatic communications between the election and inauguration is normal. Planting foreign policy "bombshells" (Obama sanctions and timing) after the election by lame duck Presidents, especially for partisan political reasons, without consulting the incoming administration, is not normal and usually frowned upon by the national media, except of course, but, but, but, Trump!

Yeah, if they did I would totally support that disbarment. But c'mon seriously, you can't think that's a realistic option.

Yeah, if the bar would only follow their ethical standards rather than bowing to political power... lawyers, sheesh!!!

They only do so when there is tremendous outcry by the unwashed public, witness Nyfong.

 

[Kutnupe14]

Re-read the news stories... the one that Trump directed Flynn to talk to the Russians prior to the election (election collusion is before the election, right?) is false and the news anchor that originated it has been suspended for 4 weeks for getting it utterly wrong.

Having your foreign policy advisors establish formal diplomatic communications between the election and inauguration is normal. Planting foreign policy "bombshells" (Obama sanctions and timing) after the election by lame duck Presidents, especially for partisan political reasons, without consulting the incoming administration, is not normal and usually frowned upon by the national media, except of course, but, but, but, Trump!



Yeah, if the bar would only follow their ethical standards rather than bowing to political power... lawyers, sheesh!!!

They only do so when there is tremendous outcry by the unwashed public, witness Nyfong.

There may have been ZERO collusion between the Trump campaign and the Russians. IDK. But this investigation was tapped to find out Russian involvement. During the course of that investigation some troubling thing scame up, associated with the current administration. Investigators are duty bound to look into it. Let's not forget what beginning investigation led to Clinton's impeachment, it wasn't the Monica affair.

 

[Alpo]

Public service announcement:

Please do impeach Trump, democrats.

Please make him a martyr, crucify the savior of more than half the country. Install Mike Pence (a fundamentalist Christian) as president, I'm sure he aligns more with your values than a man who was once a democrat does.

You'll ensure I never see a democrat controlled senate, house, white house, or judicial branch for the rest of my lifetime.

So once again, please impeach Trump!

You seem to be combining the people who have a Trump thing with the people who have a "I can't stand Hillary" thing. Trump doesn't have the support of more than half the country. He is not considered a savior by more than half the country.

He is clearly not considered an ORANGE JESUS by more than half the country.

I don't know where you get your statistics, but I'd check out past Saturn.

 

[SheepDog4Life]

There may have been ZERO collusion between the Trump campaign and the Russians. IDK. But this investigation was tapped to find out Russian involvement.

The investigation was into Russian involvement, and any collusion with them, IN INFLUENCING THE ELECTION. How does a conversation well after the election is over influence the election!?!?!? It doesn't, this is purely political.

During the course of that investigation some troubling thing scame up, associated with the current administration. Investigators are duty bound to look into it. Let's not forget what beginning investigation led to Clinton's impeachment, it wasn't the Monica affair.

I didn't agree with the impeachment and did believe there was an aspect of "witch hunt" there. However, before Starr started investigating the Lewinsky affair, he was brought probable cause evidence of a crimes committed by the President, perjury, obstruction of justice, and witness tampering, by Paula Jones lawyer. Starr, even though he went far afield of Whitewater, didn't go looking for this, it was served to him on a silver platter. Just to be clear, Clinton had already perjured himself in the Jones case, trying to make the "bimbo eruptions" disappear, he wasn't "tricked" into it by Starr.

Muller, on the other hand, has no crime, no PC of a crime, that he is investigating. ZERO evidence that he is starting from. It does look like Manafort was laundering money for a decade prior to the elections, but he was also dumped by Trump during the primaries and had no effect on the election. Papadopolous are only charged with lying to the FBI.

What is the crime, and what is the evidence of that crime, that Mueller is investigating? There isn't any... it's a witch hunt combined with a fishing trip.

 

[BugI02]

You are correct, no one is willing to hold their own Representative or Senator accountable. We will see with Alabama, but my prediction, given the closeness in the polls, is that Moore will win. The "shame" bias, that is those ashamed to tell anyone, pollsters included, that they will vote for Moore, overcomes the margin of error. Hope I'm wrong, but if they do elect Moore, it's just more of the same, only to the most extreme.

The House and Senate should impeach/expel anyone completely unfit for the body (that includes Moore). But that is not what they will base their decision upon. Their calculus will be about how that vote affects their re-election chances and the chances of their party regaining/keeping power. Hence, Pelosi's recent announcement on Franken and Conyers, ditto every "national" Republican except Trump on Moore... other than Trump, you pretty much have to go to state GOP'ers to find support for Moore.



I recognize the implied purple, but the straight answer is ME. Any other guy who has never done these things, or worse, is welcome to re-quote with #MeToo.



Let's call it the "Clinton get out of jail free card" which equated to keeping Clinton meant keeping power, which is what it's all about, right?!?!?

It's contagious and apparently, Republicans have finally caught the bug after decades of falling on their swords in shame.

Republicans have finally learned that it amounts to unilateral disarmament

You cannot shame a dishonorable master via seppuku in a country that knows no shame, you only preserve your own honor. Sometimes this is not enough