welshbairn Posted December 1, 2017 Share Posted December 1, 2017 2 minutes ago, Savage Henry said: If that's true, Trump's done for. Doubt it. They'd have to prove he was deliberately trying to undermine American foreign policy (ie. Sanctions) under another sitting President. If he ever gets serious trouble it will be over money or giving away secrets that put Americans in serious peril. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Savage Henry Posted December 1, 2017 Share Posted December 1, 2017 (edited) 8 minutes ago, welshbairn said: Doubt it. They'd have to prove he was deliberately trying to undermine American foreign policy (ie. Sanctions) under another sitting President. If he ever gets serious trouble it will be over money or giving away secrets that put Americans in serious peril. As I understand it, if Trump did indeed instruct Russia to hold off on retributions to Obama's sanctions (via Flynn), then that's precisely where Mueller is going. From what I gather, this is the first step in what will amount to Mueller indicting Trump on precisely those grounds. It all comes back to this: Flynn is getting a very light charge because he's testifying against someone higher up. There are only two people higher up. Sessions and Trump (and perhaps Pence, who says virtually nothing about anything for what should be an obvious reason). For the longest time, I thought money laundering would bring Trump down. Maybe it's wishful thinking, but the reaction to this news makes me think Trump's a goner, and that this will blow Watergate out of the water, so to speak. You could just as easily be right though, I'm letting wishful thinking cloud my judgement. This certainly isn't my area of expertise. Edit: The White House has just released a press statement calling Flynn an "Obama official". The stakes have been raised today, no question. That's a blatant lie, and these kind of malevolent lies (as opposed to Trump's generally pathological lies for lies sake) make me think this is going to bring him down. Edited December 1, 2017 by Savage Henry 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
welshbairn Posted December 1, 2017 Share Posted December 1, 2017 2 minutes ago, Savage Henry said: As I understand it, if Trump did indeed instruct Russia to hold off on retributions to Obama's sanctions (via Flynn), then that's precisely where Mueller is going. From what I gather, this is the first step in what will amount to Mueller indicting Trump on precisely those grounds. It all comes back to this: Flynn is getting a very light charge because he's testifying against someone higher up. There are only two people higher up. Sessions and Trump (and perhaps Pence, who says virtually nothing about anything for what should be an obvious reason). For the longest time, I thought money laundering would bring Trump down. Maybe it's wishful thinking, but the reaction to this news makes me think Trump's a goner, and that this will blow Watergate out of the water, so to speak. You could just as easily be right though, I'm letting wishful thinking cloud my judgement. This certainly isn't my area of expertise. Not sure if it was ever proven but Reagan was said to have used back channels to get Iran to hold onto the Embassy hostages until after the election, and Nixon sabotaged a potential Vietnam peace treaty before his. It took recordings of Nixon ordering the Watergate cover up before he was brought down, and with a Democratic majority in both Houses. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
welshbairn Posted December 1, 2017 Share Posted December 1, 2017 34 minutes ago, Savage Henry said: Edit: The White House has just released a press statement calling Flynn an "Obama official". The stakes have been raised today, no question. That's a blatant lie, and these kind of malevolent lies (as opposed to Trump's generally pathological lies for lies sake) make me think this is going to bring him down. That's Trump saying no pardon, and a cue for Flynn to spill any dirt he has. Makes you wonder what it was that made him first plead with the FBI Director to drop the Flynn investigation and then sack him. Hopefully something very juicy. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Savage Henry Posted December 1, 2017 Share Posted December 1, 2017 6 minutes ago, welshbairn said: That's Trump saying no pardon, and a cue for Flynn to spill any dirt he has. Makes you wonder what it was that made him first plead with the FBI Director to drop the Flynn investigation and then sack him. Hopefully something very juicy. You'd have to think, right? Sacking Comey stinks to high heaven. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Granny Danger Posted December 1, 2017 Share Posted December 1, 2017 Whilst delighted by this latest development I'm also a bit surprised. I expected Flynn's brother, who doesn't speak a word of English, to turn up in court causing Flynn to recant his statements and later slit his wrists in a bath following a visit from the WH chief counsel. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zetterlund Posted December 1, 2017 Share Posted December 1, 2017 Reading the Statement of the Offense, it should be much more of a story that Flynn tried to influence the votes of other nations on a UN resolution on Israeli settlements. It seems the 'very senior Trump official' who directed this was Kushner. I trust the Trump-Israel collusion investigation will begin in due course. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr. Brightside Posted December 1, 2017 Share Posted December 1, 2017 This is what happens with the scorched earth policy he deals in. Burns bridges all over the shop somehow expecting them not to come back and haunt him. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheProgressiveLiberal Posted December 1, 2017 Share Posted December 1, 2017 If all he did was have his team communicate with foreign governments after he was elected, but before he took office, he's in the clear. Like Welshy said, this has been done by everyone. The Logan Act has never been enforced and would almost assuredly be ruled unconstitutional by the Supreme Court if anyone were ever convicted. William Perry, who was the Defense Secretary under Clinton and a member of Obama's campaign, secretly met with Iranian officials in Europe just after Obama's election. A centerpiece of Obama's election campaign had been new and open negotiations with the Iranians. http://foreignpolicy.com/2009/01/30/revealed-recent-u-s-iran-nuclear-talks-involved-key-officials-updated/ You have Bernie Sanders as a mayor traveling to Cuba in the 80s and meeting with government officials. If they so much as mentioned the embargo or mentioned something so small as a setting up a friendly baseball game then he would have been in violation of the Logan Act. It's a completely nonsense law from the 1700s when the country was being ripped apart about whether to side with Britain or France. If Flynn has more information than this about illegal activity it will be a problem. But communicating with the Russians one month before taking the Presidency, when Obama is specifically trying to throw a wrench in relations before he leaves, is not an issue. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheProgressiveLiberal Posted December 1, 2017 Share Posted December 1, 2017 2 hours ago, RiG said: Yeah but her emails though. 2 hours ago, Savage Henry said: BENGHAZIIIIIIIII! Let me get this straight: The President elect directing his future National Security Advisor to talk to the Russian government about new American sanctions just imposed is a bigger deal that the Secretary of State setting up her own email system outside of government oversight and lying to the public about the causes of an attack on an American embassy in order to prop up election prospects? You people are bonkers. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
doulikefish Posted December 1, 2017 Share Posted December 1, 2017 (edited) Switch on Fox news its what the beeb will be like when queenie pops her clogs Edited December 1, 2017 by doulikefish 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DeeTillEhDeh Posted December 1, 2017 Share Posted December 1, 2017 There is still a large element of free speech and press freedom in the UK. OK the protesters would not get anywhere near him but the likely level of protest and press coverage would present an image that the WH would find difficult to spin. Can't see his fragile ego wanting to deal with the obvious unpopularity. I reckon a Trump visit to the UK would see some of the biggest protests ever in this country. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
welshbairn Posted December 1, 2017 Share Posted December 1, 2017 Never mind that previous Secretaries of State did exactly the same and it wasn't against the rules. Or that there were massive demonstrations in Benghazi simultaneously with the Embassy attack that were thought by most at the time to be connected? Congress and the FBI have run countless investigations on both issues and she's been found clean. They're only just starting on Trump and he's trying to resurrect birtherism. When will the trumpets realise the man's a fruitcake? 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
williemillersmoustache Posted December 1, 2017 Share Posted December 1, 2017 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HTG Posted December 1, 2017 Share Posted December 1, 2017 Get the c**t in the sea!!! 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HTG Posted December 1, 2017 Share Posted December 1, 2017 31 minutes ago, TheProgressiveLiberal said: Let me get this straight: The President elect directing his future National Security Advisor to talk to the Russian government about new American sanctions just imposed is a bigger deal that the Secretary of State setting up her own email system outside of government oversight and lying to the public about the causes of an attack on an American embassy in order to prop up election prospects? You people are bonkers. Cheerio now! 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
carpetmonster Posted December 1, 2017 Share Posted December 1, 2017 Switch on Fox news its what the beeb will be like when queenie pops her clogs Fair play to them then. I was expecting an 8 hour debate on whether a hot dog can be classified as a sandwich or not 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
killiefan27 Posted December 1, 2017 Share Posted December 1, 2017 42 minutes ago, TheProgressiveLiberal said: Let me get this straight: The President elect directing his future National Security Advisor to talk to the Russian government about new American sanctions just imposed is a bigger deal that the Secretary of State setting up her own email system outside of government oversight and lying to the public about the causes of an attack on an American embassy in order to prop up election prospects? You people are bonkers. 7 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Romeo Posted December 1, 2017 Share Posted December 1, 2017 1 hour ago, Granny Danger said: Whilst delighted by this latest development I'm also a bit surprised. I expected Flynn's brother, who doesn't speak a word of English, to turn up in court causing Flynn to recant his statements and later slit his wrists in a bath following a visit from the WH chief counsel. That would make a great movie ending. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KarlMarx Posted December 1, 2017 Share Posted December 1, 2017 1 hour ago, TheProgressiveLiberal said: Let me get this straight: The President elect directing his future National Security Advisor to talk to the Russian government about new American sanctions just imposed is a bigger deal that the Secretary of State setting up her own email system outside of government oversight and lying to the public about the causes of an attack on an American embassy in order to prop up election prospects? You people are bonkers. You in Trump have a lot in common. Neither of you are welcome in the UK. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.