Puterbac News Network and Political Discussion Thread

[Professor Tiger]

Do I feel a double-barrell'd THIS IS IT! coming on?

Wait for it...

Wait for it...

[bluetick]

BIG bombshells in Trumplandia today.


Donnie found two black guys to stand behind him at the WVA rally!

[bluetick]

This is for you, prof. I know you'll appreciate it.


[youtube]4NwP3wes4M8[/youtube]

[hedge]

Don't know if "this is it", but I do know that during the very limited air time Fox News gave to the Cohen proceedings tonight, the hosts and the pro-Trump guests seemed uncharacteristically... concerned...

[Professor Tiger]

Let’s see; between Manafort and Cohen, there are three words that were never mentioned: Trump, Russia, and Collusion.

Manafort was convicted on less than half of what he was charged with. And all those convictions were over stuff that happened ten years ago. What Captain Kirk told Khan is true of the great ex-Marine war hero, epitome of decency, and all-around stand up guy Mueller: “Like a poor marksman he just... keeps... missing... the target.”

Cohen suddenly says Trump knew about the payments to Stormy. I guess the obvious next question is, does he have an email, or text, or tape, or reliable independent witness, or anything empirical, to prove his assertion? If not, then you’re taking the word of a guy that just got convicted of telling multiple lies under oath now trying to avoid jail time: That won’t move the Trump approval needle at all - especially since we’re talking about who payed a hooker, not colluding with Russians, which is what the his witch hunt was supposed to be about. Besides, I believe >90% of his supporters have always assumed he knew about Cohen paying Stormy.

Nice try, though.

[hedge]

So obviously your opinion is that the only impeachable offense that Trump could possibly be brought up on is something to do with Russian collusion. Ask Bill Clinton how that worked out. Nice try, though...

[hedge]

How quickly things change...

"Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) once believed that it didn’t take a conviction or even a crime for impeachment.

He made the case not today, with President Donald Trump in office, but in 1999 when President Bill Clinton was impeached and Graham was a member of the House of Representatives.

“You don’t have to be convicted of a crime to lose your job in this Constitutional Republic,” Graham said in a 1999 clip posted on Twitter by MSNBC’s Lawrence O’Donnell.

He said a president could get the boot if Congress decides “your conduct as a public official is clearly out of bounds”:

“Impeachment is not about punishment. Impeachment is about cleansing the office. Impeachment is about restoring honor and integrity to the office.”

Graham was one of the House prosecutors during the Clinton impeachment proceedings. "

https://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/li ... 327df7d6f4

[bluetick]

Tapes?? No way...

https://www.vox.com/2018/7/24/17610584/ ... -recording

[bluetick]

Lanny Davis spelled it out - Cohen will tell Mueller that Donnie conspired to collude with the Russians wrt the 2016 election. That Trump knew beforehand of the email hackings, and he had prior knowledge of the Trump Tower meeting with the Russians. And has evidence to back it up...emails and audio tape.


Wow..young Lindsey..a banty rooster he was. heh

[Professor Tiger]

If Cohen has emails and tapes proving that "Trump colluded with the Russians wrt the 2016 elections" then I'd like to see/hear them. The problem is, for 1.5 years now, if Trump eats caviar, the Left and MSM consider that to be "proof" of Trump colluding with the Russians. I guess we'll see what Cohen really has.

[Jungle Rat]

Bye bye Orange idiot

[hedge]

What if Cohen has emails that prove that Trump violated campaign finance laws?

[Professor Tiger]

I don’t care about who paid Stormy. Especially with all the laws Hillary and the Deep State broke without a peep.

[hedge]

So basically you are saying Trump could shoot somebody on 5th Ave. and you'd give him a pass, as long as it didn't have anything to do with Russia...

[bluetick]

"Deep state"? Wtf has happened to you? Never thought you would go full tard....

I'm telling you straight - this makes me sad.

[bluetick]

Ah well. The show must go on.

{GOP Rep.] Hunter and his wife—who had previously been on his campaign payroll for years—allegedly spent $250,000 in campaign funds on things like vacations, school tuition, dental work, movie tickets, restaurant meals from fast food to high end, golfing, video games, and much more.

Hunter claims he’s “excited about going to trial with this,” claiming that a politicized Justice Department is out to get him. Bear in mind here that the Justice Department is run by a partisan Republican.

The Republican congressman added, “This is the Democrats’ arm of law enforcement, that’s what’s happening right now. It’s happening with [President] Trump, it’s happening with me. We’re going to fight through it and win and the people get to vote in November … I think they’ve used every dirty trick in the book, so it’ll go to court when they want it to.”

[hedge]

Interestingly enough, I'm sure you'd love nothing more than for Hillary and multiple others to be prosecuted to the fullest extent for any and every violation you think they've made, yet you give Trump a pass. For my own part, if an investigation and/or prosecution was started on Hillary for legitimate reasons and through legitimate channels, I wouldn't have a problem with it at all. The fact that nothing of the sort has been undertaken kinda gives me the hint that there's nothing there, or at least not enough to warrant legal action. John Edwards was prosecuted and went to trial on similar charges as what Cohen (and a now "unnamed" co-conspirator) are now facing, I bet you didn't have any problem with that either...

[bluetick]

Hillary may not have been indicted but the other Clinton did get famously impeached. Prof applauded that event like a trained seal. How soon they forget..

[hedge]

Don't recall him complaining about the Benghazi investigation going on too long, either...

[Professor Tiger]

For my own part, if an investigation and/or prosecution was started on Hillary for legitimate reasons and through legitimate channels, I wouldn't have a problem with it at all. The fact that nothing of the sort has been undertaken kinda gives me the hint that there's nothing there, or at least not enough to warrant legal action.

The Hillary ”investigation” is one of several reasons I consider this whole Trump investigation to be fraudulent, and worthy of the same credibility of a Soviet or Venezuelan investigation. In real investigations, the investigator doesn’t write an exoneration letter long before the investigation is complete. In a real investigation, the investigator doesn’t spend the first 15 minutes confirming that Hillary violated numerous laws regarding handling of classified information, and then the last five minutes exonerating her for the preposterous reason that “she didn’t mean to do it.” So, in that same spirit, I hereby exonerate Trump for whatever he did because “he didn’t mean to do it.” That should settle the whole thing right?