Front Office Football Central

Front Office Football Central (https://forums.operationsports.com/fofc//index.php)
-   Off Topic (https://forums.operationsports.com/fofc//forumdisplay.php?f=6)
-   -   The Trump Presidency – 2016 (https://forums.operationsports.com/fofc//showthread.php?t=92014)

SackAttack 03-13-2018 11:12 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by JPhillips (Post 3198484)
Crazy how 50.1-49.9 Lamb will mean Trump and the GOP are toast and 50.1-49.9 Saccone will mean a resurgent Trump and GOP.


Political media gotta spin that narrative somehow.

Because nobody has the attention span to grasp that a 50.1-49.9 race in EITHER direction in a district that's been anywhere from double-digit Republican to "strongman plebescite" territory since the turn of the millennium might be another canary in the coal mine.

Nope. It's gotta get painted as a Significant Victory for whoever wins despite the context.

bronconick 03-13-2018 11:34 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by henry296 (Post 3198505)
Not sure exactly the new lines but Lamb lives in the more republican county and saccone lives in the democratic county.



This district was Trump +19.5. Lamb will be running in November in a Trump +2.6 district.

Thomkal 03-14-2018 08:51 AM

Family of slain Democratic staffer Seth Rich sues Fox News - Mar. 14, 2018

Hope they get a big settlement/award from the judge for this

larrymcg421 03-14-2018 12:22 PM

Let us all mourn for the thousands of "Lamb wasn't progressive enough" hot taeks from deluded Berniebros and Stein idiots that will now never see the light of day.

NobodyHere 03-14-2018 01:40 PM

Well Rand Paul is squeaking again about the CIA nominee and her connection to torture. Just be quiet and he'll fall in line.

RainMaker 03-14-2018 03:41 PM

The new top economic adviser wrote this. Look at the date.

https://www.nationalreview.com/blog/...-larry-kudlow/

PilotMan 03-14-2018 07:06 PM

You should find some of the shit he was peddling during The Obama years.

Thomkal 03-15-2018 06:56 AM

In fundraising speech, Trump says he made up trade claim in meeting with Justin Trudeau - The Washington Post

Edward64 03-15-2018 07:10 AM

Trump has certainly changed the US Presidency for the foreseeable future.

bronconick 03-15-2018 01:56 PM

Mueller subpoenas the Trump Organization.

About Russia.

digamma 03-15-2018 01:57 PM

This seems like a waste of time. I mean, no one up to collusion or other shenanigans would actually use their Trump.org e-mail address for anything.

Thomkal 03-15-2018 02:11 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by bronconick (Post 3198802)
Mueller subpoenas the Trump Organization.

About Russia.


You do this on the first day of the NCAA's Mueller? How are we supposed to keep up with this news? :)

bronconick 03-15-2018 02:53 PM

There's a level of poetry of Ides of March and this leaking today that's probably lost on everyone in the Trump administration but Kelly.

stevew 03-15-2018 05:06 PM

Vanessa Trump becomes the next member of the Trump administration to quit

JPhillips 03-15-2018 05:52 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by digamma (Post 3198803)
This seems like a waste of time. I mean, no one up to collusion or other shenanigans would actually use their Trump.org e-mail address for anything.


I get the joke, but this is about more than the election. This will open up all the financial connections between Trump and Russians.

EagleFan 03-15-2018 06:28 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by digamma (Post 3198803)
This seems like a waste of time. I mean, no one up to collusion or other shenanigans would actually use their Trump.org e-mail address for anything.


You give them too much credit.

Thomkal 03-15-2018 07:23 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by stevew (Post 3198832)
Vanessa Trump becomes the next member of the Trump administration to quit


wonder how much the "white powder scare" and being married to a Trump with all the scandals and turmoil played a part in this? Just hope there's not a "Stormy Daniels" involved.

NobodyHere 03-15-2018 07:33 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Thomkal (Post 3198851)
wonder how much the "white powder scare" and being married to a Trump with all the scandals and turmoil played a part in this? Just hope there's not a "Stormy Daniels" involved.


I'd watch a Vanessa Trump/Stormy Daniels video.

cuervo72 03-15-2018 08:56 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by stevew (Post 3198832)
Vanessa Trump becomes the next member of the Trump administration to quit


Going to beat McMaster by a nose, it seems.

Jas_lov 03-15-2018 09:28 PM

I really hope John Bolton isn't McMaster's replacement. I think Sessions and McMaster are the next to go.

BBT 03-15-2018 11:06 PM

Bolton would be an interesting choice considering that Trump was looking to talk with the North Koreans. Bolton’s persona non grata over there due to insulting the last Kim.

Guy is scum all around so it would be no surprise if he ended up in Trump’s cabinet. Supposedly, the only reason he isn’t already is that Trump doesn’t like his mustache.

stevew 03-16-2018 05:03 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Thomkal (Post 3198851)
wonder how much the "white powder scare" and being married to a Trump with all the scandals and turmoil played a part in this? Just hope there's not a "Stormy Daniels" involved.


I'm sure there's a Donald jr. Pee tape somewhere.

Edward64 03-16-2018 07:08 AM

I'm sure Trump was briefed on this prior to its release. Cyber-warfare seems like a logical extension of the information age. If real, its so hard to understand Trump's affinity for Putin.

https://www.cnn.com/2018/03/15/polit...rid/index.html
Quote:

The US government has accused Russia of remotely targeting the US power grid, as part of its newly unveiled sanctions on the country.

The Department of Homeland Security released details Thursday of what it called a multi-stage effort by Russia to target specific government entities and critical infrastructure.

The Trump administration announced extensive sanctions against Russia on Thursday morning, which included sanctions on the Internet Research Agency, a Russian troll farm that produced divisive political posts on American social media platforms during the 2016 presidential election.

According to the DHS, Russia accessed US government networks by initially targeting with malware small commercial third-party networks that were less secure.

Russia has attempted to attack targets that include "energy, nuclear, commercial facilities, water, aviation, and critical manufacturing sectors" since March 2016, DHS said.

Kodos 03-16-2018 07:41 AM

I'm starting to get the feeling that Russia is not our friend...

panerd 03-16-2018 08:35 AM

So I never really pay attention to the incumbent party during the primaries but can people run against the sitting president for the nomination? This has to happen in 2020 right?

JPhillips 03-16-2018 08:45 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by panerd (Post 3198913)
So I never really pay attention to the incumbent party during the primaries but can people run against the sitting president for the nomination? This has to happen in 2020 right?


Yes, it can happen. In both 1980, when Kennedy challenged Carter, and 1992, when Buchanan challenged Bush1, the split in the party from the primary contributed to their losses.

I don't know if there's been a credible primary opponent for an incumbent that won the general election.

PilotMan 03-16-2018 08:57 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Edward64 (Post 3198904)
I'm sure Trump was briefed on this prior to its release. Cyber-warfare seems like a logical extension of the information age. If real, its so hard to understand Trump's affinity for Putin.

https://www.cnn.com/2018/03/15/polit...rid/index.html



This is no shock at all.

From June 2017. Great article by the way. Straight up Russian blueprint.

"How an Entire Nation Became Russia's Test Lab For Cyberwar"

https://www.wired.com/story/russian-...ttack-ukraine/

PilotMan 03-16-2018 09:01 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by panerd (Post 3198913)
So I never really pay attention to the incumbent party during the primaries but can people run against the sitting president for the nomination? This has to happen in 2020 right?


IMO, Kasich has been planning to primary Trump since the end of the 2016 primary. He never bowed, never backed down, has been exceptionally vocal as the anti-Trump Republican voice. I guarantee he will be one of them.

Thomkal 03-16-2018 09:48 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by panerd (Post 3198913)
So I never really pay attention to the incumbent party during the primaries but can people run against the sitting president for the nomination? This has to happen in 2020 right?


Jeff Flake (from Arizona) was in New Hampshire yesterday "for the weather." So he's probably going to have some challengers for the nomination. He beat them all for it last time though, so remains to be seen if there are enough Republican/independent voters out there fed up enough with Trump to push him out the door.

albionmoonlight 03-16-2018 09:53 AM

Here's my Trump 2020 scenario (that does not involve voter suppression or Russian hacking):

Dems nominate a moderate candidate
Flake or Kasich run as a 3rd party
Trump runs

The Flake/Kasich candidate siphons off the anti-Trump Republicans. Trump's base stays with him. Trump ends up winning a lot of states with, like, a 45% GOP / 43% DEM / 12% THIRD PARTY split.

JPhillips 03-16-2018 10:02 AM

Trump consistently polls at @80% GOP approval. That can change between now and the primary, but I'd expect Trump to win the nomination easily. A third party run is a much bigger threat.

digamma 03-16-2018 11:28 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by albionmoonlight (Post 3198924)
Here's my Trump 2020 scenario (that does not involve voter suppression or Russian hacking):

Dems nominate a moderate candidate
Flake or Kasich run as a 3rd party
Trump runs

The Flake/Kasich candidate siphons off the anti-Trump Republicans. Trump's base stays with him. Trump ends up winning a lot of states with, like, a 45% GOP / 43% DEM / 12% THIRD PARTY split.


It would be really interesting to see what happens, but I don't see 57% of states like Michigan, Pennsylvania and Florida voting for Trump and a "true conservative."

albionmoonlight 03-16-2018 11:37 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by digamma (Post 3198939)
It would be really interesting to see what happens, but I don't see 57% of states like Michigan, Pennsylvania and Florida voting for Trump and a "true conservative."


Fair point. Those numbers are probably pretty far off.

But I do think that the general approach holds.

President Trump's floor and ceiling are very close. His base will vote for him; no one else will.If you were a 2016 Trump voter, you have to be excited about what he's done. But I don't see much reaching out beyond that.

So, for a Dem to win, they have to get above that baseline. And a 3rd party running as an anti-Trump seems likely to cut into the vote needed to do that.

chesapeake 03-16-2018 11:43 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by albionmoonlight (Post 3198924)
Here's my Trump 2020 scenario (that does not involve voter suppression or Russian hacking):

Dems nominate a moderate candidate
Flake or Kasich run as a 3rd party
Trump runs

The Flake/Kasich candidate siphons off the anti-Trump Republicans. Trump's base stays with him. Trump ends up winning a lot of states with, like, a 45% GOP / 43% DEM / 12% THIRD PARTY split.


Like digamma, I think your scenario has a lot of merit up until the end. If there is a credible "Moderate" (Kasich) or Conservative (Flake) R that runs as a 3rd party, which could realistically happen, any decent Democratic candidate gets >400 electoral votes.

JPhillips 03-16-2018 11:44 AM

The difference is a reelect is a referendum on the incumbent and the opposition candidate doesn't matter as much. If Trump is still around 40% approval it's very unlikely he can win.

NobodyHere 03-16-2018 01:31 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by albionmoonlight (Post 3198924)
Here's my Trump 2020 scenario (that does not involve voter suppression or Russian hacking):

Dems nominate a moderate candidate
Bernie Sanders run as a 3rd party
Trump runs


fixed

Atocep 03-16-2018 01:47 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by PilotMan (Post 3198915)
This is no shock at all.

From June 2017. Great article by the way. Straight up Russian blueprint.

"How an Entire Nation Became Russia's Test Lab For Cyberwar"

https://www.wired.com/story/russian-...ttack-ukraine/



And a large reason why the remain the biggest threat to us as a country. China may be 1a but no one else is in the conversation as far as threats go.

sabotai 03-16-2018 01:56 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by JPhillips (Post 3198914)
I don't know if there's been a credible primary opponent for an incumbent that won the general election.


Off the top of my head, and this going back a ways, Franklin Pierce lost the nomination to Buchanan who then won the election in 1856. There might have been 1 or 2 more in the 1800s, but not since.

NobodyHere 03-16-2018 01:59 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by sabotai (Post 3198969)
Off the top of my head, and this going back a ways, Franklin Pierce lost the nomination to Buchanan who then won the election in 1856. There might have been 1 or 2 more in the 1800s, but not since.


Does Robert Kennedy count?

cuervo72 03-16-2018 02:05 PM

Ted Kennedy took a pretty good shot at Carter in 1980.

bob 03-16-2018 02:25 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Edward64 (Post 3198904)
I'm sure Trump was briefed on this prior to its release. Cyber-warfare seems like a logical extension of the information age. If real, its so hard to understand Trump's affinity for Putin.

https://www.cnn.com/2018/03/15/polit...rid/index.html


Why is stuff like power plants on the normal grid anyway, and not some hardened, no connections outside of the nation network anyway?

RainMaker 03-16-2018 03:43 PM

Someone might run but I don't think it matters. Trump is the Republican Party. If anything I think he made their goals more defined.

BBT 03-16-2018 04:09 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by bob (Post 3198972)
Why is stuff like power plants on the normal grid anyway, and not some hardened, no connections outside of the nation network anyway?


When they were built, that wasn't a worry. Now, it takes $$$ to upgrade/fix, and the folks in charge of the government right now don't exactly want to raise the taxes to undertake such a project.

There's a similar problem with our physical infrastructure, something I agree with Trump on, but that effort also seems dead in the weeds. Taxes are bad...especially so in an election year.

Plus, these are projects that are better suited, politically, when we are in a recession, where they can be used to stimulate job growth. Of course, that would require whoever's in charge at the time to push for it. It would also make sense to raise taxes now, while the economy is good, so that money is available later to be used on projects like this.

JPhillips 03-16-2018 04:55 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by sabotai (Post 3198969)
Off the top of my head, and this going back a ways, Franklin Pierce lost the nomination to Buchanan who then won the election in 1856. There might have been 1 or 2 more in the 1800s, but not since.


I was thinking about an incumbent that had a real challenge in the primary that then went on to win the general.

NobodyHere 03-16-2018 09:25 PM

Looks like Andrew McCabe won't be collecting his pension without a legal fight.

JPhillips 03-16-2018 09:41 PM

But he will be collecting a hell of a check for his tell all book.

Scoobz0202 03-16-2018 11:05 PM

Quote:

Statement by Andrew McCabe
I have been an FBI Special Agent for over 21 years. I spent half of that time investigating Russian Organized Crime as a street agent and Supervisor in New York City. I have spent the second half of my career focusing on national security issues and protecting this country from terrorism. I served in some of the most challenging, demanding investigative and leadership roles in the FBI. And I was privileged to serve as Deputy Director during a particularly tough time.

For the last year and a half, my family and I have been the targets of an unrelenting assault on our reputation and my service to this country. Articles too numerous to count have leveled every sort of false, defamatory and degrading allegation against us. The President's tweets have amplified and exacerbated it all. He called for my firing. He called for me to be stripped of my pension after more than 20 years of service. And all along we have said nothing, never wanting to distract from the mission of the FBI by addressing the lies told and repeated about us.

No more.

The investigation by the Justice Department's Office of Inspector General (OIG) has to be understood in the context of the attacks on my credibility. The investigation flows from my attempt to explain the FBI's involvement and my supervision of investigations involving Hillary Clinton. I was being portrayed in the media over and over as a political partisan, accused of closing down investigations under political pressure. The FBI was portrayed as caving under that pressure, and making decisions for political rather than law enforcement purposes. Nothing was further from the truth. In fact, this entire investigation stems from my efforts, fully authorized under FBI rules, to set the record straight on behalf of the Bureau, and to make clear that we were continuing an investigation that people in DOJ opposed.

The OIG investigation has focused on information I chose to share with a reporter through my public affairs officer and a legal counselor. As Deputy Director, I was one of only a few people who had the authority to do that. It was not a secret, it took place over several days, and others, including the Director, were aware of the interaction with the reporter. It was the type of exchange with the media that the Deputy Director oversees several times per week. In fact, it was the same type of work that I continued to do under Director Wray, at his request. The investigation subsequently focused on who I talked to, when I talked to them, and so forth. During these inquiries, I answered questions truthfully and as accurately as I could amidst the chaos that surrounded me. And when I thought my answers were misunderstood, I contacted investigators to correct them.

But looking at that in isolation completely misses the big picture. The big picture is a tale of what can happen when law enforcement is politicized, public servants are attacked, and people who are supposed to cherish and protect our institutions become instruments for damaging those institutions and people.

Here is the reality: I am being singled out and treated this way because of the role I played, the actions I took, and the events I witnessed in the aftermath of the firing of James Comey. The release of this report was accelerated only after my testimony to the House Intelligence Committee revealed that I would corroborate former Director Comey's accounts of his discussions with the President. The OIG's focus on me and this report became a part of an unprecedented effort by the Administration, driven by the President himself, to remove me from my position, destroy my reputation, and possibly strip me of a pension that I worked 21 years to earn. The accelerated release of the report, and the punitive actions taken in response, make sense only when viewed through this lens. Thursday's comments from the White House are just the latest example of this.

This attack on my credibility is one part of a larger effort not just to slander me personally, but to tain the FBI, law enforcement, and intelligence professionals more generally. It is part of this Administration's ongoing war on the FBI and the efforts of the Special Counsel investigation, which continue to this day. Their persistence in this campaign only highlights the importance of the Special Counsel's work.

I have always prided myself on serving my country with distinction and integrity, and I always encouraged those around me to do the same. Just ask them. To have my career end in this way, and to be accused of lacking candor when at worst I was distracted in the midst of chaotic events, is incredibly disappointing and unfair. But it will not erase the important work I was privileged to be a part of, the results of which will in the end be revealed for the country to see.

I have unfailing faith in the men and women of the FBI and I am confident that their efforts to seek justice will not be deterred.



Source: ABC News on Twitter: "JUST IN: Statement from Andrew McCabe: "I am being singled out and treated this way because of the role I played, the actions I took, and the events I witnessed in the aftermath of the firing of James Comey.” https://t.co/t2XUf57p21… https://t.co/mbl45Lhiwh"

bronconick 03-17-2018 12:11 AM

Sessions firing someone for "lack of candor while under oath" is a pot and kettle situation.

Julio Riddols 03-17-2018 03:38 AM

This stuff is coming to a head, I think we will see some real action leading up to the 60 minutes interview. I hope everyone stays out of harms way until the dust settles but something tells me I shouldn't expect that. It's crazy that I think it is entirely feasible that people could die as a result of their involvement with this because I don't know how desperate Trump can get, but I do know how untouchable he thinks he is and how poorly guided he is.

Flasch186 03-17-2018 03:53 PM

wont matter, gop has no backbone. and ive been wrong about the bottom on this one too often to guess again.

whomario 03-17-2018 04:58 PM



Thomkal 03-17-2018 05:18 PM

wow put that on playback on every Fox news channel twitter.

NobodyHere 03-17-2018 08:23 PM

A couple of Democratic congressmen are offering McCabe a job so he can get his full pension. Apparently he only has to work a day.

whomario 03-17-2018 08:56 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by NobodyHere (Post 3199167)
A couple of Democratic congressmen are offering McCabe a job so he can get his full pension. Apparently he only has to work a day.


That's what imo is the real problem with a guy like Trump: He makes everything personal and actively seeks to hurt people as much as he can. Not just fire a guy, but fire him a day short of his pension and personally attack him.

And he doesn't seem to grasp at all that people in the public agencies are not his employees but civil servants. There's a difference and he doesn't get it.

Thomkal 03-17-2018 09:21 PM

So this is what set off Trump's latest tweet storm:

Mueller gives Trump's legal team questions for potential interview: report | TheHill

JPhillips 03-17-2018 09:27 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by whomario (Post 3199175)
That's what imo is the real problem with a guy like Trump: He makes everything personal and actively seeks to hurt people as much as he can. Not just fire a guy, but fire him a day short of his pension and personally attack him.

And he doesn't seem to grasp at all that people in the public agencies are not his employees but civil servants. There's a difference and he doesn't get it.


Just to clarify, make someone else fire a guy. He's too much of a pussy to do it himself.

JPhillips 03-17-2018 10:29 PM

dola

I'm sure this is just an odd coincidence.

Quote:

Cambridge Analytica, the data firm the Trump campaign used during the 2016 election, met with Russian business executives, The New York Times reported Saturday.

The firms’ employees had been in contact with executives from Russian oil giant Lukoil in 2014 and 2015, according to company documents.

There were reportedly three meetings with Lukoil executives in London and Turkey and Lukoil was interested in how data was used to target American voters.

AlexB 03-18-2018 02:47 AM

While I agree with the complete double standard on the Fox clips, and think Trump is a disaster in general, note that Obama said he would talk/meet, Trump said he is meeting, so there is something to crow about.

It may well be that Kim agreed to meet with Trump as he thinks he is far more likely to be able to get what he wants through Trump than with Obama, but until the meet actually happens and Trump announces that the US has become the junior partner in the new Kormerica, Trump definitely has a ‘win’ to claim.

whomario 03-18-2018 06:23 AM

Until it happens it can't be a win, not if you say it can't be a loss either.

Edward64 03-18-2018 10:31 AM

Rambling thoughts this morning.

Hillary is starting (continuing?) to sound like a sore loser now. She should just fade away gracefully or play behind the scenes as the grand dame.

I think the odds of Mueller being fired has increased. Looking forward to the Mueller vs Trump escalation. I'm still thinking no collusion between Trump and Russians but can easily believe collusion with Trump's team and Russians.

No specific details on what/how McCabe mislead but he was probably wrong. I like a response from a talking head this morning (paraphrased) ... "the firing may have merit but its not without taint".

If I was Rex, I would be glad the attention wasn't on me all week.

Atocep 03-18-2018 11:36 AM

Trump seems to be getting really worried about the Mueller investigation.

BBT 03-18-2018 12:26 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Edward64 (Post 3199223)
Rambling thoughts this morning.

Hillary is starting (continuing?) to sound like a sore loser now. She should just fade away gracefully or play behind the scenes as the grand dame.


Agreed. She's doing more harm than good. Needs to bow out gracefully; her time is done.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Edward64 (Post 3199223)
I think the odds of Mueller being fired has increased. Looking forward to the Mueller vs Trump escalation. I'm still thinking no collusion between Trump and Russians but can easily believe collusion with Trump's team and Russians.


Mueller can only be fired by Rosenstein since Sessions recused himself. Rosenstein would have to be fired first by Sessions and they'd have to replace him with someone that had to be approved by the Senate. Senate wants the investigation to continue.

Whether Trump himself colluded isn't really the issue anymore. The evidence is piling up that he's obstructing justice. Honestly, for his own sake, he should throw everybody that he thinks colluded under the bus and move on. Continuing to tweet like he is won't help him.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Edward64 (Post 3199223)
No specific details on what/how McCabe mislead but he was probably wrong. I like a response from a talking head this morning (paraphrased) ... "the firing may have merit but its not without taint".


It's typical Trump.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Edward64 (Post 3199223)
If I was Rex, I would be glad the attention wasn't on me all week.


Yep

Edward64 03-18-2018 01:00 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Atocep (Post 3199229)
Trump seems to be getting really worried about the Mueller investigation.


I'm thinking not about collusion. I figure its more about Mueller getting into his and family's business. There are likely some embarrassing things there.

Atocep 03-18-2018 01:06 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Edward64 (Post 3199246)
I'm thinking not about collusion. I figure its more about Mueller getting into his and family's business. There are likely some embarrassing things there.


I agree, but I don't think collusion is what Mueller is going to hiit him with.

On a side note, keep in mind that Trump can also fire Mueller by firing Sessions and replacing him with someone that doesn't need to recuse himself.

Marc Vaughan 03-18-2018 01:47 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Edward64 (Post 3199246)
I'm thinking not about collusion. I figure its more about Mueller getting into his and family's business. There are likely some embarrassing things there.


I think he'll definitely go down for tax evasion without a doubt - collusion I wouldn't be surprised if it happened, but proving it will be far harder than catching him for dodgy business practices ..

mckerney 03-18-2018 02:47 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mckerney (Post 3198316)
It's amazing what you can't find when you're not looking for it.


Shocking.

House Intel Republican says panel did not investigate collusion | TheHill

Quote:

Rep. Mike Conaway (R-Texas) said Sunday the House Intelligence Committee was not tasked with investigating collusion between Russia and the Trump campaign, despite the committee issuing a report last week stating it found no evidence of collusion in the 2016 election.

“Our committee was not charged with answering the collusion idea,” Conaway said on NBC's “Meet The Press.”

"So we really weren’t focused on that direction."

Thomkal 03-18-2018 03:39 PM

Just digging his hole deeper

JPhillips 03-18-2018 03:47 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Atocep (Post 3199248)
I agree, but I don't think collusion is what Mueller is going to hiit him with.

On a side note, keep in mind that Trump can also fire Mueller by firing Sessions and replacing him with someone that doesn't need to recuse himself.


I expect the report on collusion will be blistering, but much, maybe all of it won't be illegal, so Mueller will put them in jail through perjury and financial crimes. That way he doesn't have to hope the GOP congress will take action for what are political crimes.

Ben E Lou 03-18-2018 04:53 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Edward64 (Post 3199246)
I'm thinking not about collusion. I figure its more about Mueller getting into his and family's business. There are likely some embarrassing illegal things there.

Fixed.

miami_fan 03-18-2018 06:43 PM

No love for the re-election of President Putin? 73.9% is impressive.

PilotMan 03-18-2018 07:08 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ben E Lou (Post 3199285)
Fixed.


Numerous. Incredibly numerous.

whomario 03-18-2018 08:32 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by miami_fan (Post 3199300)
No love for the re-election of President Putin? 73.9% is impressive.


Not really, not with the state of the russian “democracy“. Even without going into this (plenty of hidden camera vids out there showing officials stuffing ballot boxes with bogus votes and such, not to mention more systematic fraud), this is essentially like a US vote would go if you had just one major party with 90% of the media beholden to it and then a bunch of independent-like competitors in terms of ressources both financially and logistically. The communist party the biggest of those but that message isn't exactly inspiring the younger generation to vote. Most of the others a big portion of voters dont even have on their radar.

I mean, victory was such a foregone conclusion that the main empasise towards the end was purely getting the voter participation up (which was down a decent amount even by the official numbers).

Edward64 03-18-2018 09:18 PM

I don't think US democracy works everywhere. FWIW, the % may be less but I think Putin would have won in a "fair" election anyway.

sabotai 03-18-2018 09:37 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by whomario (Post 3199322)
(plenty of hidden camera vids out there showing officials stuffing ballot boxes with bogus votes and such, not to mention more systematic fraud)


Выборная Навка (@Gulay_Pole) | Twitter

Twitter page of someone posting CCTV footage of people stuffing ballot boxes.

Groundhog 03-18-2018 09:49 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Edward64 (Post 3199330)
I don't think US democracy works everywhere. FWIW, the % may be less but I think Putin would have won in a "fair" election anyway.


To be perfectly honest, not sure it works anywhere, US included. I won't claim a dictatorship is a better solution, but two party opposition politics is hardly a political utopia.

JPhillips 03-18-2018 10:19 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by whomario (Post 3199322)
Not really, not with the state of the russian “democracy“. Even without going into this (plenty of hidden camera vids out there showing officials stuffing ballot boxes with bogus votes and such, not to mention more systematic fraud), this is essentially like a US vote would go if you had just one major party with 90% of the media beholden to it and then a bunch of independent-like competitors in terms of ressources both financially and logistically. The communist party the biggest of those but that message isn't exactly inspiring the younger generation to vote. Most of the others a big portion of voters dont even have on their radar.

I mean, victory was such a foregone conclusion that the main empasise towards the end was purely getting the voter participation up (which was down a decent amount even by the official numbers).


And the only possible threat(Navalny) arrested and deemed ineligible for the election.

Thomkal 03-19-2018 07:07 AM

This will come as no surprise but Trump made senior staff sign NDA's to try to prevent them from leaking:

https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/...ort/436778002/

cuervo72 03-19-2018 07:28 AM

Yeah, that doesn't seem enforceable.

Marc Vaughan 03-19-2018 08:35 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Thomkal (Post 3199372)
This will come as no surprise but Trump made senior staff sign NDA's to try to prevent them from leaking:

https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/...ort/436778002/


That I would have expected would be standard for any WH job surely? (in terms of revealing secrets about decisions etc.).

cartman 03-19-2018 09:07 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Marc Vaughan (Post 3199376)
That I would have expected would be standard for any WH job surely? (in terms of revealing secrets about decisions etc.).


Those kinds of things would be covered by your security clearance.

Edward64 03-19-2018 09:32 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Marc Vaughan (Post 3199376)
That I would have expected would be standard for any WH job surely? (in terms of revealing secrets about decisions etc.).


That's what I would have thought. TBH, I think a NDA is appropriate. I would assume that does not cover any criminal activities.

cuervo72 03-19-2018 09:49 AM

Seems like a big assumption to me.

Thomkal 03-19-2018 10:02 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Marc Vaughan (Post 3199376)
That I would have expected would be standard for any WH job surely? (in terms of revealing secrets about decisions etc.).


As far as I know Trump is the first President to require them. Freedom of Speech, protecting potential whistleblowers, etc is what I was thinking of here.

whomario 03-19-2018 10:21 AM

If you can't inspire loyalty, force it.

miami_fan 03-19-2018 02:52 PM

Details. I am sure if you asked Putin, he would tell you that all those things had no impact whatsoever on the election results.

#Don’tQuestionThePresidentialElections

Edward64 03-19-2018 03:57 PM

Not sure where to put this but wanted to record it for posterity sake.

If I was him, I would have said "sorry, bad joke" but the apology implies he really believed it. Weird.

https://www.cnn.com/2018/03/19/polit...ent/index.html
Quote:

A Washington, DC, council member apologized Sunday night after receiving backlash for comments he made in a video implying Washington's snowy March weather was controlled by Jewish financiers.
:
:
"Man, it just started snowing out of nowhere this morning, man. Y'all better pay attention to this climate control, man, this climate manipulation," he says in the video, which was shot through windshield of a car driving through downtown Washington. "And DC keep talking about, 'We a resilient city.' And that's a model based off the Rothschilds controlling the climate to create natural disasters they can pay for to own the cities, man. Be careful."

Thomkal 03-19-2018 07:31 PM

Pennsylvania Repub's strike out in their attempt to prevent the new congressional map from taking place:

Supreme Court denies GOP request to block new Pa. congressional map | TheHill

Thomkal 03-19-2018 07:37 PM

The firm Trump campaign used in the 2016 election Cambridge Analytica for data gathering, caught on camera detailing some of the things it did to influence more than 200 elections around the world:

Cambridge Analytica CEO filmed talking about using bribes, sex workers in political work | TheHill

Thomkal 03-19-2018 07:40 PM

Lots of stories breaking today:

Trump hiring former federal prosecutor who's argued FBI framed president | TheHill

Thomkal 03-19-2018 08:03 PM

Ari Melber had Stormy Daniels attorney on again-Trump had to admit in lawsuit against Stormy that he was David Dennison-check out of msnbc for interview. And Fox covering the story less than "mainstream media" and her attorney has not received one request for an interview.

kingfc22 03-19-2018 09:39 PM

Looks like Jr prefers cheating on his wife with a blonde with fake tits just as much as pops.

Groundhog 03-19-2018 09:43 PM

The dung doesn't fall far from the donkey's asshole, or however that saying goes.

JPhillips 03-19-2018 09:57 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Thomkal (Post 3199487)


Hiring 70-some year old Joe DiGenova is so pathetic.

cuervo72 03-20-2018 01:07 PM

https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/pol...gnancy-n857686

Again, none of this is about pregnancy, it is about sex.

PilotMan 03-20-2018 04:00 PM

Gay sex is the real answer to unwanted pregnancies.

molson 03-20-2018 04:24 PM

Wasn't the Sermon on the Mount about female sexual purity?

That Jesus guy was always going on and on about sex.

NobodyHere 03-20-2018 04:43 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by PilotMan (Post 3199619)
Gay sex is the real answer to unwanted pregnancies.


The South prefers bestiality

Edward64 03-20-2018 04:46 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by NobodyHere (Post 3199626)
The South prefers bestiality


WTF? Where did that come from?

ISiddiqui 03-20-2018 04:47 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by NobodyHere (Post 3199626)
The South prefers bestiality


The South will rise again... for pig sex.

PilotMan 03-20-2018 05:30 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by NobodyHere (Post 3199626)
The South prefers bestiality


Growing up in North Dakota, it was Montana where the men were men, and the sheep were scared.


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 08:43 PM.

Powered by vBulletin Version 3.6.0
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.