NYT Interview: Trump attacks the independence of the Justice Department

[time4fun]

So Trump gave a pretty scary interview (https://www.nytimes.com/2017/07/19/us/politics/trump-interview-transcript.html)tonight threatening the independence of the Justice Department. And I understand that conservatives don't like to hear that phrase, but I'm just going to say that folks should really read the interview carefully. I've put some excerpts below. It's behind a pay wall, but I can paste the entire thing if folks want.

Seriously, this make people very nervous.



First- he attacked Jeff Sessions during the interview in a way that would normally mean you're about to get a resignation:


TRUMP: Well, Sessions should have never recused himself, and if he was going to recuse himself, he should have told me before he took the job, and I would have picked somebody else.

HABERMAN: He gave you no heads up at all, in any sense?

TRUMP: Zero. So Jeff Sessions takes the job, gets into the job, recuses himself. I then have — which, frankly, I think is very unfair to the president. How do you take a job and then recuse yourself? If he would have recused himself before the job, I would have said, “Thanks, Jeff, but I can’t, you know, I’m not going to take you.” It’s extremely unfair, and that’s a mild word, to the president. So he recuses himself. I then end up with a second man, who’s a deputy.

Next, he starts attacking Rosenstein, Deputy AG:


TRUMP: Yeah, what Jeff Sessions did was he recused himself right after, right after he became attorney general. And I said, “Why didn’t you tell me this before?” I would have — then I said, “Who’s your deputy?” So his deputy he hardly knew, and that’s Rosenstein, Rod Rosenstein, who is from Baltimore. There are very few Republicans in Baltimore, if any. So, he’s from Baltimore. Now, he, we went through a lot of things. We were interviewing replacements at the F.B.I. Did you know [Robert] Mueller was one of the people that was being interviewed?


TRUMP: So, now what happens is, he leaves the office. Rosenstein leaves the office. The next day, he is appointed special counsel. I said, what the hell is this all about? Talk about conflicts? But he was interviewing for the job. There were many other conflicts that I haven’t said, but I will at some point. So Jeff Sessions, Jeff Sessions gave some bad answers.

Then he starts talking about reorganizing the DoJ so that the FBI Director reports directly to him:


TRUMP: He said I said “hope” — “I hope you can treat Flynn good” or something like that. I didn’t say anything.

But even if he did — like I said at the news conference on the, you know, Rose Garden — even if I did, that’s not — other people go a step further. I could have ended that whole thing just by saying — they say it can’t be obstruction because you can say: “It’s ended. It’s over. Period.”


TRUMP: And nothing was changed other than Richard Nixon came along. And when Nixon came along [inaudible] was pretty brutal, and out of courtesy, the F.B.I. started reporting to the Department of Justice. But there was nothing official, there was nothing from Congress. There was nothing — anything. But the F.B.I. person really reports directly to the president of the United States, which is interesting. You know, which is interesting. And I think we’re going to have a great new F.B.I. director.

And then, finally, he threatens to fire Mueller if he starts investigating Trump's finances (which Mueller is doing):


SCHMIDT: Last thing, if Mueller was looking at your finances and your family finances, unrelated to Russia — is that a red line?

HABERMAN: Would that be a breach of what his actual charge is?

TRUMP: I would say yeah. I would say yes.

SCHMIDT: But if he was outside that lane, would that mean he’d have to go?

[crosstalk]

HABERMAN: Would you consider——

TRUMP: No, I think that’s a violation. Look, this is about Russia. So I think if he wants to go, my finances are extremely good, my company is an unbelievably successful company. And actually, when I do my filings, peoples say, “Man.” People have no idea how successful this is. It’s a great company. But I don’t even think about the company anymore. I think about this. ’Cause one thing, when you do this, companies seem very trivial. O.K.? I really mean that. They seem very trivial. But I have no income from Russia. I don’t do business with Russia. The gentleman that you mentioned, with his son, two nice people. But basically, they brought the Miss Universe pageant to Russia to open up, you know, one of their jobs. Perhaps the convention center where it was held. It was a nice evening, and I left. I left, you know, I left Moscow. It wasn’t Moscow, it was outside of Moscow.

HABERMAN: Would you fire Mueller if he went outside of certain parameters of what his charge is? [crosstalk]

SCHMIDT: What would you do?

[crosstalk]

TRUMP: I can’t, I can’t answer that question because I don’t think it’s going to happen. [Note- NYT is reporting tonight that Mueller IS looking into Trump's finances]

[Gelston]

"pretty scary" You scare pretty fucking easily.

[Tgo01]

Then he starts talking about reorganizing the DoJ so that the FBI Director reports directly to him:

Your entire post is hysterical nonsense but the above really stood out to me.

First of all that's not him saying he's going to "reorganize" anything, how you read that is really fascinating. What he said was the FBI "person" reports directly to the president. Which I mean he's basically right.

The FBI director currently reports directly to the Director of National Intelligence who reports directly to the president.

[time4fun]

Please paraphrase what Trump just said and did in that interview.

[cwolff]

I am watching CNN right now. I can't fucking believe this interview. He's comfortable enough in his position to do this which is pretty scary. I hope congress reacts.

[time4fun]

So let me summarize for you:

1) He just faulted Jeff Sesison for following the ethics guidelines of the Executive Branch and recusing himself. He said that he woudn't have hired him if he knew he was going to recuse himself- which means, Trump's #1 priority for the position was to have them be his puppet in regards to the Russia investigation.

2) He then put immense pressure on Sessions- the kind of pressure that normally gets people to resign.
3) He then started talking about Rosenstein and saying he wasn't impartial because he's from Baltimore- which means, he was putting more pressure on the Deputy AG, the kind of thing that normally gets people to resign
4) He then started surmising that the Director of the FBI really should be reporting directly to the President (this is the same guy who fired the last Director for not backing off on the Russia investigation)
5) Finally, he threatend to fire Special Prosecutor Mueller for looking into his financial records, which we just found out Mueller is doing.

Do you see what Trump just did? There are four people beneath him who have some degree of formal infuence in the investigation going on into his campaign and his potential obstruction of justice.

AG Jeff Sessions
Deputy AG Rosenstein
The new Director of the FBI
and Special Prosecutor Mueller

He just threatened to fire one, put pressure on the other two to leave, and then talked about reorganizing the DoJ to have the fourth person report directly to him.

He aslo explicitly stated that he didn't want an AG who wasn't directly involved in the Russian Collusion investigation.

[time4fun]

I am watching CNN right now. I can't fucking believe this interview. He's comfortable enough in his position to do this which is pretty scary. I hope congress reacts.

They won't.

But at minimum, Ryan needs to remember that he's an American and needs to bring the damn Russian sanctions bill up for debate NOW.

[cwolff]

They won't.

But at minimum, Ryan needs to remember that he's an American and needs to bring the damn Russian sanctions bill up for debate NOW.

Fucking A right. Instead we'll be giving their compounds back and apologizing while Ryan tries to maintain the illusion that actually he's the one using trump to his benefit.

[Tgo01]

1) He just faulted Jeff Sesison for following the ethics guidelines of the Executive Branch and recusing himself. He said that he woudn't have hired him if he knew he was going to recuse himself- which means, Trump's #1 priority for the position was to have them be his puppet in regards to the Russia investigation.

Or maybe he would have hired someone who wouldn't be in a position to recuse themselves? Just a thought.

I was going to go through the rest of your nonsense but honestly I don't think my brain could handle the retardation.

[time4fun]

Or maybe he would have hired someone who wouldn't be in a position to recuse themselves? Just a thought.

I was going to go through the rest of your nonsense but honestly I don't think my brain could handle the retardation.

But that's not what he said Tgo. He said he wouldn't have hired him if he knew he was going to recuse himself, NOT that he wouldn't have hired him if he knew that he had conflicts that would impair his abiity to do his job.

But even you can't possibly be supporting Trump threatening to fire the Special Prosecutor for looking into his finances and talking about reorganizing the DoJ so that the Director of the FBI reports directly to him (after firing the last FBI Director for not backing off of the Russia investigation).

Tell me that you understand why those two things are so fundamentally un-American and scary from a President who is currently under investigation by the DoJ.

[cwolff]

Why defend trump on this? This shit's so inappropriate and it does injury to the idea of our Republic. We shouldn't have let this guy anywhere near the Oval Office. Now that he's in there, he'll be abusing every power he can.

He's also obviously spending some time getting briefed on how far he can push, or even ignore, each inconvenient law and traditions. Remember when he said he'd have his business in a blind trust, then he learned that he wasn't require to do that legally? Now he's brushing up on the law relating to his power to fire Mueller. Too bad he doesn't put his energy into helping the USA instead of just himself.

Bill Kristol is speculating that the reason he's worried about this investigation is because he's got shit to hide. I'll say it again, it's a damn shame the GOP quit following it's conservatives in favor of the lunatic fringe.

[Tgo01]

But that's not what he said Tgo.

That's exactly what he said. How are you reading differently?


If he would have recused himself before the job, I would have said, “Thanks, Jeff, but I can’t, you know, I’m not going to take you.”

Trump's whole point is that Sessions didn't say before hand that he would have recused himself from the Russia bullshit. It's not like the Russia hysterical nonsense was something no one could have foreseen ahead of time, Trump and Sessions knew it was going to a matter.

I also love it the shifting narrative on the left.

Democrats: Comey cost Hillary the election! He's literally Hitler and needs to resign or Trump needs to fire him!
Trump fires Comey.
Democrats: OMG! COMEY WAS SUCH A GOOD MAN! Trump fired him to cover up the Russian investigations!

Democrats: Sessions is such a racist bigoted asshole with Russian ties!
Trump doesn't like the way Sessions is doing his job.
Democrats: OMG! Sessions is such a good man! Is he going to make Sessions resign?!

[Tgo01]

Why defend trump on this?

Why defend Trump for saying he didn't want to hire someone who was going to recuse themselves from the Russian investigations? Because I just so happen to think Trump brings up a good point. He clearly wanted to hire someone who was going to do the job he was hired for, not recuse himself on the very first investigation that is thrown his way.


This shit's so inappropriate and it does injury to the idea of our Republic.

Seriously stop watching blackmail news already.

[cwolff]

Why defend Trump for saying he didn't want to hire someone who was going to recuse themselves from the Russian investigations? Because I just so happen to think Trump brings up a good point. He clearly wanted to hire someone who was going to do the job he was hired for, not recuse himself on the very first investigation that is thrown his way.



Seriously stop watching blackmail news already.

That doesn't hold up TG. He even said something about getting stuck with a guy from Baltimore. "Are they even any republicans in Baltimore" or something. What the fuck man. I get that you like to argue here but does none of this bother you?

[Tgo01]

That doesn't hold up TG. He even said something about getting stuck with a guy from Baltimore. "Are they even any republicans in Baltimore" or something. What the fuck man. I get that you like to argue here but does none of this bother you?

Given the fact that the Democrat party hasn't shied away from the fact that they want to impeach Trump at any costs, with even some Democrat politicians literally threatening Trump's life, is it any wonder he's slightly pissed that he was in a position to have a Republican head up the investigation only to have said Republican recuse himself and a Democrat takes over?

Stop being played by blackmail news already. I worry about you.

[time4fun]

Anyone who defends this interview is someone who has absolutely no regard for the future of our country.

If a President of the United States is allowed to dismantle the institutions that are intended to protect us from the President's own abuse of power, then we're not a country worth fighting for.

We're Russia.

[cwolff]

Given the fact that the Democrat party hasn't shied away from the fact that they want to impeach Trump at any costs, with even some Democrat politicians literally threatening Trump's life, is it any wonder he's slightly pissed that he was in a position to have a Republican head up the investigation only to have said Republican recuse himself and a Democrat takes over?

Stop being played by blackmail news already. I worry about you.

No wonder you like trump. Both of you will say anything at anytime. Whatever is most comfortable.


Even though emails show that the session had been set up to pass along incriminating information about Hillary Clinton, the president said he did not need such material from Russia about Mrs. Clinton last year because he already had more than enough.

This is an interesting quote. It lends credence to other reports that trump has been receiving information from russia for a while.

8753

[drauz]

No wonder you like trump. Both of you will say anything at anytime. Whatever is most comfortable.

If that was true then liberals would love him. They love to call people names without any evidence or even knowing the person. They'll say anything to shut you up.

[drauz]

8753

You're smarter than this, I think..

[cwolff]

If that was true then liberals would love him. They love to call people names without any evidence or even knowing the person. They'll say anything to shut you up.

Ahhh....the classic "I know you are, but what am I defense." Well played my child, well played.

[cwolff]

You're smarter than this, I think..

Er....You may think to highly of my ability to attach items and show pictures in my posts.

[Tgo01]

Anyone who defends this interview is someone who has absolutely no regard for the future of our country.

If a President of the United States is allowed to dismantle the institutions that are intended to protect us from the President's own abuse of power, then we're not a country worth fighting for.

We're Russia.

Trump gave an interview! He's trying to dismantle our government and turn us into Russia!

Holy shit. Trump Derangement Syndrome just mutated to a totally new virus that turns people into literal babbling retards.

[drauz]

Ahhh....the classic "I know you are, but what am I defense." Well played my child, well played.

Well, you got part of the message... I was saying that he does, but so do liberals. You said it like it was something that must make you a Trump supporter.

I said liberal but I meant the protesters at these college campuses who are liberals.

[Tgo01]

No wonder you like trump. Both of you will say anything at anytime. Whatever is most comfortable.

wut?

[drauz]

Er....You may think to highly of my ability to attach items and show pictures in my posts.

Did you even read that report? That has the "he had hookers piss on the bed of the hotel Obama stayed at" bullshit in it.

[cwolff]

Well, you got part of the message... I was saying that he does, but so do liberals. You said it like it was something that must make you a Trump supporter.

I said liberal but I meant the protesters at these college campuses who are liberals.

I get what you're saying, and there is truth to what you're saying. I just don't want to hear that shit right now. I'm feeling too anti-trump.


wut?

Ok brother, lookie here. What I'm saying is that you say anything, twist anything, dismiss or overreact to anything you find uncomfortable in the moment. You and trump will do anything to try to "win" or even right now with no regard to past statements, ethics or some sort of external objectivism. I get that you like to win arguments on the computer. I hope that deep down inside you know this shit is pretty fucked up and we're in unchartered waters here with this authoritarian style president.

[Parkbandit]

So Trump gave a pretty scary interview (https://www.nytimes.com/2017/07/19/us/politics/trump-interview-transcript.html)
Seriously, this make people very nervous.



He's comfortable enough in his position to do this which is pretty scary.


scary from a President who is currently under investigation by the DoJ.

Jesus. Fucking. Christ.

You two should crawl back under your beds.

[cwolff]

Did you even read that report? That has the "he had hookers piss on the bed of the hotel Obama stayed at" bullshit in it.

Ya the golden shower dossier from Steele.

[Tgo01]

Ok brother, lookie here. What I'm saying is that you say anything, twist anything, dismiss or overreact to anything you find uncomfortable in the moment.

How am I twisting or overreacting to anything here?

And yes I am "dismissing" this shit because I DON'T find it uncomfortable.

The president is mad because he wanted to hire someone who would NOT recuse himself from the Russian investigation? OMG! LITERALLY HITLER!

And considering the vultures (Democrats) pounced on that recusal like it was the beginning of the end for Trump I don't really blame him for being pissed.

Seriously, just articulate to me in your own words why it's a big deal that Trump wanted to get the ideal person (to Trump) for the job? Where is the danger to our society here?

It's pretty telling that no one has had a problem with the president appointing people to these positions their entire lives, but as soon as Trump says has a problem with one of these appointments suddenly it's the end of Democracy as we know it.

[time4fun]

How am I twisting or overreacting to anything here?

And yes I am "dismissing" this shit because I DON'T find it uncomfortable.

The president is mad because he wanted to hire someone who would NOT recuse himself from the Russian investigation? OMG! LITERALLY HITLER!

And considering the vultures (Democrats) pounced on that recusal like it was the beginning of the end for Trump I don't really blame him for being pissed.

Seriously, just articulate to me in your own words why it's a big deal that Trump wanted to get the ideal person (to Trump) for the job? Where is the danger to our society here?

It's pretty telling that no one has had a problem with the president appointing people to these positions their entire lives, but as soon as Trump says has a problem with one of these appointments suddenly it's the end of Democracy as we know it.

So it's fine for Trump to threaten to fire the man investigating him for looking into his finances?

No issues arise from this?

[Tgo01]

So it's fine for Trump to threaten to fire the man investigating him for looking into his finances?

No issues arise from this?

Did you read, or at least understand, what you quoted?

The questions posed to him were:


SCHMIDT: Last thing, if Mueller was looking at your finances and your family finances, unrelated to Russia — is that a red line?

HABERMAN: Would that be a breach of what his actual charge is?


To which Trump replies:


TRUMP: I would say yeah. I would say yes.


TRUMP: No, I think that’s a violation. Look, this is about Russia.

Trump is saying if Mueller starts investigating shit unrelated to Russia then he thinks that's going outside the scope of his investigation.

And then the last bit here, which you have bolded in red for some reason, is:


HABERMAN: Would you fire Mueller if he went outside of certain parameters of what his charge is? [crosstalk]

SCHMIDT: What would you do?

[crosstalk]

TRUMP: I can’t, I can’t answer that question because I don’t think it’s going to happen.

How is Trump saying he can't answer a question mean he's going to fire Mueller for looking into his finances?

Did your blackmail news or MSDNC go over these talking points yet? Or are they still in the "THIS IS AN OUTRAGE" mode and you don't know how to answer yet?

[drauz]

I get what you're saying, and there is truth to what you're saying. I just don't want to hear that shit right now.

Now who's acting like a Trump supporter!

https://media2.giphy.com/media/3og0IzNaAxQb8tJq5W/giphy.gif

[tyrant-201]

Jesus. Fucking. Christ.

You two should crawl back under your beds.

Now, now. Don't make me call your convalescent home and make them put you back to bed.

[drauz]

Now, now. Don't make me call your convalescent home and make them put you back to bed.

I bet we have a lot more in common politically than you realize.

[Parkbandit]

You're smarter than this, I think..

There has been zero evidence of this thus far.


Er....You may think to highly of my ability to attach items and show pictures in my posts.

"Too"

[Parkbandit]

Now, now. Don't make me call your convalescent home and make them put you back to bed.

OMG GOOD ONE!

Remember when you were funny on purpose and people actually laughed at something you posted instead of laughing at you??

Yea... Neither do I...

[Androidpk]

Jesus how many Trump threads do you need? Your obsession is growing out of control.

[cwolff]

Jesus how many Trump threads do you need? Your obsession is growing out of control.

He simply provides excellent source material. By all rights we should have many more trump threads if we were obsessive about correctly cataloguing his Bullshit. You're welcome!

[Wrathbringer]

But that's not what he said Tgo. He said he wouldn't have hired him if he knew he was going to recuse himself, NOT that he wouldn't have hired him if he knew that he had conflicts that would impair his abiity to do his job.

But even you can't possibly be supporting Trump threatening to fire the Special Prosecutor for looking into his finances and talking about reorganizing the DoJ so that the Director of the FBI reports directly to him (after firing the last FBI Director for not backing off of the Russia investigation).

Tell me that you understand why those two things are so fundamentally un-American and scary from a President who is currently under investigation by the DoJ.

Dear god you're retarded.

[Androidpk]

He simply provides excellent source material. By all rights we should have many more trump threads if we were obsessive about correctly cataloguing his Bullshit. You're welcome!

Or, I dunno, put it all in one thread.

[Fortybox]

But that's not what he said Tgo. He said he wouldn't have hired him if he knew he was going to recuse himself, NOT that he wouldn't have hired him if he knew that he had conflicts that would impair his abiity to do his job.

But even you can't possibly be supporting Trump threatening to fire the Special Prosecutor for looking into his finances and talking about reorganizing the DoJ so that the Director of the FBI reports directly to him (after firing the last FBI Director for not backing off of the Russia investigation).

Tell me that you understand why those two things are so fundamentally un-American and scary from a President who is currently under investigation by the DoJ.

The president has constitutional authority to do this.

[cwolff]

This will be interesting. Mueller's almost daring trump to fire him.


(Bloomberg) -- The U.S. special counsel investigating possible ties between the Donald Trump campaign and Russia in last year’s election is examining a broad range of transactions involving Trump’s businesses as well as those of his associates, according to a person familiar with the probe.

The president told the New York Times on Wednesday that any digging into matters beyond Russia would be out of bounds. Trump’s businesses have involved Russians for years, making the boundaries fuzzy so Special Counsel Robert Mueller appears to be taking a wide-angle approach to his two-month-old probe.

[time4fun]

This will be interesting. Mueller's almost daring trump to fire him.

Yeah, it's pretty clear that Trump caught wind of this.

[Latrinsorm]

Your entire post is hysterical nonsense but the above really stood out to me. First of all that's not him saying he's going to "reorganize" anything, how you read that is really fascinating. What he said was the FBI "person" reports directly to the president. Which I mean he's basically right. The FBI director currently reports directly to the Director of National Intelligence who reports directly to the president.You don't see any difference between "directly reporting" and "not directly reporting".

Sounds legit.

[Tgo01]

You don't see any difference between "directly reporting" and "not directly reporting".

Sounds legit.

If the FBI director reports directly to director of National Intelligence who in turn reports directly to the president then you're really just splitting hairs since the president can fire and hire them both.

This would actually be an attempt at presidential overreach if the FBI director reported directly to congress and congress was the one who can hire and fire the FBI director and Trump came along and said "I'm going to make it so the FBI director reports directly to me."

In that case one could actually make an argument for presidential overreach.

But how things stand now? No. You're just being overly hysterical, time4latrinsorm.

[Latrinsorm]

If the FBI director reports directly to director of National Intelligence who in turn reports directly to the president then you're really just splitting hairs since the president can fire and hire them both.No. You either directly report to someone, or you don't. That's not splitting hairs, that's an express contradiction.
This would actually be an attempt at presidential overreachDid I say presidential overreach? No. Because I'm an American, and I wouldn't fail to capitalize Presidential.

Come to think of it, Olivier sounds kinda European to me. Got your long form birth certificate handy, "Terry", if that is your real name, which I doubt?

[Gelston]

No. You either directly report to someone, or you don't.

Latrin is right here. The FBI Director does not directly report the President.

[Tgo01]

Latrin is right here. The FBI Director does not directly report the President.

Semantics.

[Gelston]

Semantics.

It is a pretty significant distinction. Either you do or you don't directly report to the President.

[Tgo01]

It is a pretty significant distinction. Either you do or you don't directly report to the President.

Chain of command.

[Gelston]

Chain of command.

Uh, so? I mean, when I was a Squad Leader I reported directly to my Platoon Leader, who reported to my Company Commander. I didn't report directly to my Company Commander.

[hello]

Uh, so? I mean, when I was a Squad Leader I reported directly to my Platoon Leader, who reported to my Company Commander. I didn't report directly to my Company Commander.

I only reported to myself.

[Tgo01]

Uh, so? I mean, when I was a Squad Leader I reported directly to my Platoon Leader, who reported to my Company Commander. I didn't report directly to my Company Commander.

Would it really had made much of a difference if your company commander said you were going to start reporting directly to him? Would it really have made much of a difference if your platoon leader were cut out of the picture?

[Gelston]

Would it really had made much of a difference if your company commander said you were going to start reporting directly to him? Would it really have made much of a difference if your platoon leader were cut out of the picture?

Well, yes. It would completely undermine the Lt's authority.

[Tgo01]

Well, yes. It would completely undermine the Lt's authority.

Authority smothority.

[Methais]

Trump gave an interview! He's trying to dismantle our government and turn us into Russia!

Holy shit. Trump Derangement Syndrome just mutated to a totally new virus that turns people into literal babbling retards.

Plot twist: She's always been a babbling retard. In fact she has 3 PhD's in babbling like a retard along with a lifetime of experience.

[Methais]

It is a pretty significant distinction. Either you do or you don't directly report to the President.

I'm reporting both of them to Kranar.

[time4fun]

Trump is continuing to talk (http://www.abc.net.au/news/2017-07-23/donald-trump-tweets-russia-clinton-pardons/8734788) about his Presidential Pardon powers, among other disturbing subjects in a 10 post tweet storm this morning. It's pretty desparate talk and indicates Trump may very well believe he's about to get in some real trouble:


US President Donald Trump has fired off a volley of early morning tweets complaining about the investigation into possible Russian meddling in his 2016 campaign, while insisting that he has "complete power to pardon".

The tweets were unusual in their breadth and scope, even for Mr Trump, given the wide variety of topics he touched on as Saturday dawned in the US.

His 10 tweets, all sent within two hours starting before 6:30 am (local time) ranged from the Russia investigation and Attorney General Jeff Sessions to Hillary Clinton, the health care effort and his newly appointed White House communications director.

In one missive, Mr Trump said: "While all agree the US President has the complete power to pardon, why think of that when only crime so far is LEAKS against us. FAKE NEWS."

[Archigeek]

Thought this opinion by former Nixon counsel was interesting:

https://verdict.justia.com/amp/2017/07/21/trumps-mueller-scheming-will-fail

[SHAFT]

Thought this opinion by former Nixon counsel was interesting:

https://verdict.justia.com/amp/2017/07/21/trumps-mueller-scheming-will-fail

Just shows how much trump is in over his head. If he thinks he can divert or alter this Mueller investigation in a way to benefit himself, he's mistaken.

The President himself put out a tweet talking about pardons today. We're barely 6 months in, and the President is talking about pardons!

I'm not sure he gets it, but he doesn't understand the difference between life insurance and health insurance so I'm not surprised.

I was surprised to see Scaramucci hop aboard the administration now. Usually people are trying to get off a sinking ship, not hop aboard.

¯\_(ツ)_/¯

[time4fun]

Thought this opinion by former Nixon counsel was interesting:

https://verdict.justia.com/amp/2017/07/21/trumps-mueller-scheming-will-fail

That was a fantastic article- thank you for posting it.

It was good to get some more understanding of the legal and administrative logicistcs behind what Trump is trying to accomplish.

Unfortunately, I do agree that there's nothing that Trump will do that will cause Congressional Republicans to impeach Trump. They're already in bed with him, and if he goes down- so do they. Mueller's report is the only thing that could happen that would force Republican hands here- especially with the right wing media apparatus doing its best to obscure and distract from what's going on.

[Wrathbringer]

I've been so scared since Trump beat the hell out of my girl! waaaaaaaaaaaaaa waaaaaaaaaaaaa I lost! waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

Get over it.

[cwolff]

Just shows how much trump is in over his head. If he thinks he can divert or alter this Mueller investigation in a way to benefit himself, he's mistaken.

The President himself put out a tweet talking about pardons today. We're barely 6 months in, and the President is talking about pardons!

I'm not sure he gets it, but he doesn't understand the difference between life insurance and health insurance so I'm not surprised.

I was surprised to see Scaramucci hop aboard the administration now. Usually people are trying to get off a sinking ship, not hop aboard.

¯\_(ツ)_/¯

Talking heads are speculating that trump leaked the information about sessions. It helps put pressure on Sessions to quit and then he doesn't have to fire him. Added benefit is that he can bitch about leaks. No proof of that but worth keeping an eye on.


That was a fantastic article- thank you for posting it.

It was good to get some more understanding of the legal and administrative logicistcs behind what Trump is trying to accomplish.

Unfortunately, I do agree that there's nothing that Trump will do that will cause Congressional Republicans to impeach Trump. They're already in bed with him, and if he goes down- so do they. Mueller's report is the only thing that could happen that would force Republican hands here- especially with the right wing media apparatus doing its best to obscure and distract from what's going on.

I also don't believe the republican congress will impeach trump. They've forgiven every transgression to date.

[SHAFT]

I wouldn't be shocked if Trump's team did leak the Sessions thing, but it's not a good look for Trump and the campaign. Doesn't make sense. Not that that would differ from Trump's usual behavior.

[cwolff]

I wouldn't be shocked if Trump's team did leak the Sessions thing, but it's not a good look for Trump and the campaign. Doesn't make sense. Not that that would differ from Trump's usual behavior.

I think the question most reasonable people keep coming back to is this: "Is Trump actively engineering a coverup of malfeasance or is he just too stupid or inexperienced and fumbling his way because he's used to running his business with very little pushback."

Either way, it's not a good look.

[cwolff]

This is interesting (https://www.nytimes.com/2017/07/22/us/politics/can-president-be-indicted-kenneth-starr-memo.html?_r=0). How funny if Kenn Starr comes back to bite trump in the ass:


WASHINGTON — A newfound memo from Kenneth W. Starr’s independent counsel investigation into President Bill Clinton sheds fresh light on a constitutional puzzle that is taking on mounting significance amid the Trump-Russia inquiry: Can a sitting president be indicted?
...
“It is proper, constitutional, and legal for a federal grand jury to indict a sitting president for serious criminal acts that are not part of, and are contrary to, the president’s official duties,” the Starr office memo concludes. “In this country, no one, even President Clinton, is above the law.”