Jump to content
Required Reading for any Longhorn ×

Donald Trump 2018

TheFlyingBoat

By TheFlyingBoat
in Cloak Room

 Share

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 44.5k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

  • Hugo Stiglitz

    3593

  • retread

    1324

  • Brisketexan

    1195

  • jimmyjazz

    1186

Popular Days

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Popular Posts

M12BH
M12BH

SInce y'all seem to be my clearinghouse for all things political, let me tell a story.  A couple of them, actually.  Three, if you want to be specific. When I was 14 I went with a family frien

ConferenceRoom
ConferenceRoom
brown water
brown water

Slocum’s Razor

Party_Taco

Party_Taco 3771

Posted
Posted
My at least partially plausible worst case: Russia has intentionally built a house of cards around Trump designed to collapse at a time of their choosing and will use the constitutional crisis and deadlock at the office of the Commander-in-chief to invade Ukraine. The rest of NATO stalls to debate whether or not they can back Russia down without the US and by the time it is all sorted out, Russia is too entrenched in Ukraine to do anything about it without risking MAD.


I think a combination of yours plus 68’s is my worst case, though I do feel the Russian blood money penetration in both houses of Congress goes way deeper than many expect.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
GRHorn

GRHorn 105

Posted
Posted
1 hour ago, Eastwood said:
8 hours ago, Hugo Stiglitz said:
Now would be a good time to imagine and write down your worst case scenario for how bad the Trump-Russia scandal really is and see how far off you are because it’s going to be worse than you think.

My at least partially plausible worst case: Russia has intentionally built a house of cards around Trump designed to collapse at a time of their choosing and will use the constitutional crisis and deadlock at the office of the Commander-in-chief to invade Ukraine. The rest of NATO stalls to debate whether or not they can back Russia down without the US and by the time it is all sorted out, Russia is too entrenched in Ukraine to do anything about it without risking MAD.

That is some creative thinking.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Horn Dog

Horn Dog 9940

Posted
Posted
8 hours ago, Bama Chick said:

That poor baby.

Dragged to that arena full of shitbirds wasn’t punishment enough - they couldn’t even be bothered to change his piss filled diaper.

Someone should call DHR.

If being covered in piss is good enough for the orange god, then it is good for the flock as well!

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
F250

F250 28826

Posted
Posted
33 minutes ago, Steamboat1874 said:

So now we need a photo ID to buy groceries?

WTF?

 

 

25 minutes ago, Js1 said:

100% the WORST voter ID argument I've ever heard.

Trump just spews words out of his mouth. It doesn't really matter at this point. He could start reciting lines from Jabberwocky on a daily basis and it wouldn't be any different than if he was speaking in coherent sentences. It's all nonsense at this point.

I wouldn't be surprised if he starts speaking in tongues at his rallies.

 

  • Like 1
  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Hornius Emeritus

Hornius Emeritus 12490

Posted
Posted
2 hours ago, Eastwood said:
9 hours ago, Hugo Stiglitz said:
Now would be a good time to imagine and write down your worst case scenario for how bad the Trump-Russia scandal really is and see how far off you are because it’s going to be worse than you think.

My at least partially plausible worst case: Russia has intentionally built a house of cards around Trump designed to collapse at a time of their choosing and will use the constitutional crisis and deadlock at the office of the Commander-in-chief to invade Ukraine. The rest of NATO stalls to debate whether or not they can back Russia down without the US and by the time it is all sorted out, Russia is too entrenched in Ukraine to do anything about it without risking MAD.

 

The Russians would be in a world of hurt because those Ukraine girls can really knock you out. They leave the west behind.

  • Like 4
  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Anastasis

Anastasis 23489

Posted
Posted (edited)
7 hours ago, WhatTheBuck said:

An inherited tool in an inherited war. How many service members did Bush get killed? How about Obama? 

You're being disingenuous if you're asserting that there's any comparison between the two. Dumbya actually believed that the great presidents make their name during wartime. Obama was an unwilling warrior with a shit hand forced on him by his shit predecessor. 

I am not drawing equivalence between Dumbya and Bush; however, I am agreeing with the assertion that was made that the 2000s-era Anti-War Movement was co-opted into a partisan political effort, rather than some principled protest of our wars and a flawed American foreign policy.  Just like the Tea Party was co-opted.  And as with both, once the partisan political aim was achieved, i.e. taking power in DC, the principles that the movement actually coalesced around were largely dismissed as no longer relevant.    

Edited by Anastasis
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Hugo Stiglitz

Hugo Stiglitz 23367

Posted
Posted (edited)
7 minutes ago, Anastasis said:

2000s-era Anti-War Movement was co-opted into a partisan political effort, rather than some principled protest of war and a flawed American foreign policy.  Just like the Tea Party was co-opted.  And as with both, once the partisan political aim was achieved, i.e. taking power in DC, the principles that the movement actually coalesced around were largely dismissed as no longer relevant.    

This is a false equivalency.  The tea-party was AstroTurfed from the beginning.

The anti-War effort was organic and like all other political organic movements, had their own natural partisan leanings. 

Edited by Hugo Stiglitz
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Hugo Stiglitz

Hugo Stiglitz 23367

Posted
Posted
3 minutes ago, Biff Tannen said:

Sessions can't do shit anyway right?  It would have to be Rosenstein.  

Correct but Trump is demonstrating his intent to shut down the Mueller investigation in this tweet and it’s a borderline directive.

like, “I hope you can let this Flynn thing go.”

Trump doesn’t have to actually obstruct justice to have criminal liability.  It just needs to be proven he tried to obstruct justice with corrupt intent.  

I think I could convince a jury he is trying to do both with this tweet.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Chuckie Finster

Chuckie Finster 22752

Posted
Posted
4 minutes ago, Hugo Stiglitz said:

Correct but Trump is demonstrating his intent to shut down the Mueller investigation in this tweet and it’s a borderline directive.

like, “I hope you can let this Flynn thing go.”

Trump doesn’t have to actually obstruct justice to have criminal liability.  It just needs to be proven he tried to obstruct justice with corrupt intent.  

I think I could convince a jury he is trying to do both with this tweet.

Well, keep in mind that if the jury is an accurate sample of the population,  4 of them believe that Donald Trump is fighting against child trafficking rings run by Barack Obama.  So don't overestimate your ability to convince them of anything.

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Mojo Hand

Mojo Hand 4580

Posted
Posted
14 minutes ago, Biff Tannen said:

Sessions can't do shit anyway right?  It would have to be Rosenstein.  

Sessions can withdraw his recusal, can't he?  I mean, I don't think he would even want to, but l would think he has the legal power to do so. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Hugo Stiglitz

Hugo Stiglitz 23367

Posted
Posted
4 minutes ago, Mojo Hand said:

Sessions can withdraw his recusal, can't he?  I mean, I don't think he would even want to, but l would think he has the legal power to do so. 

The people under Sessions would still have to choose to acknowledge his authority and follow his orders.  That would be Rosenstein.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Mojo Hand

Mojo Hand 4580

Posted
Posted
5 minutes ago, Hugo Stiglitz said:

The people under Sessions would still have to choose to acknowledge his authority and follow his orders.  That would be Rosenstein.

If Sessions steps back in, why can't he rescind Mueller's appointment directly?  He's the AG; Rosenstein was only empowered to do this by Sessions recusing himself. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
SuingToGetAMessageBoard?

SuingToGetAMessageBoard? 3861

Posted
Posted

 This is my favorite Saturday night massacre ever. 

 

Old and busted: I demand you fire him, or I’ll find someone who will! / I’m sorry Mr President, I cannot be involved in such a corrupt course of action.  Here is my resignation. 

 

The new hotness:  I demand you fire him, or I’ll find someone who will! / Nah.  

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Hugo Stiglitz

Hugo Stiglitz 23367

Posted
Posted
8 minutes ago, Mojo Hand said:

If Sessions steps back in, why can't he rescind Mueller's appointment directly?  He's the AG; Rosenstein was only empowered to do this by Sessions recusing himself. 

Theoretically he could but that would likely unleash the Kraken of indictments.

The FBI is still going to investigate all the crimes and refer criminal prosecutions with or without Mueller.  

Trump can’t stop what’s coming without completely burning down the Justice Dept.

I wouldn’t put it past him to try.

But any move on the Mueller investigation would be almost purely political at this point. 

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Mojo Hand

Mojo Hand 4580

Posted
Posted (edited)
7 minutes ago, Hugo Stiglitz said:

Theoretically he could but that would likely unleash the Kraken of indictments.

The FBI is still going to investigate all the crimes and refer criminal prosecutions with or without Mueller.  

Trump can’t stop what’s coming without completely burning down the Justice Dept.

I wouldn’t put it past him to try.

But any move on the Mueller investigation would be almost purely political at this point. 

 

No doubt it would create problems.  My point is more that Trump's demand to Sessions today is not without actual force, legally.  He's asked the AG to stop an investigation that the AG has the legal power to stop.   While Sessions is going to tell him to get fucked, it looks like an attempt at obstruction to me, at least for purposes of impeachment. 

Edited by Mojo Hand
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
 Share
Go to topic listing


Football ... Basketball ... Baseball ... Other Sports ... Futbol ... 🤫995🤫 ... Gambling ... Movies & TV ... Music ... Hobbies ... Lulz ... Food & Travel ... Daily Texan ... Business and Markets ... Cloak Room ... Help ... For Sale ... Board Discussion ... Subscribe!... Donate!... Advertise... COOKIE MONSTER!

×
×
  • Create New...