Trump's Presidency: Is this the next domino to fall?

5,975 posts in this topic

10 hours ago, Fromm said:

 

I already know the ACLU defends the right to possess child pornography(as if that weren't bad enough). I have a 45min  VHS video of a debate where the head of state ACLU chapter admits and defends the ACLU's support of the distribution of child pornography also.

 

 

I think your video is probably from ca. 2002. At the time, the Supreme Court struck down the Child Pornography Prevention Act of 1996 for being too broad. It defined such works as Romeo and Juliet as child pornography.

 

It isn’t the production and distribution of child pornography that they were defending. It was the overly broad definition of what constitutes child pornography that they objected to. 

 

PS: I think 6 days is a realistic timeframe to respond on an internet board. I also think presenting older technology as evidence is acceptable. I don’t know why that is even being questioned. 

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@A.N.Other The VHS defense is being challenged as unprovable on this digital forum. Fromm should be aware, as should you, that if such a statement existed from a public forum debate that there would exist a digital record in the form of newspaper commentary or a court case from that time. I used Fromm's premise in varying combinations as a search term and found nothing.

 

The issue about not answering in six days is that I saw Fromm lurking here during that time and not responding. This leads me to believe that his post was a whole clothe fabrication or that he realized that the ACLU representative in question did not, in fact, say any such thing. He didn't just suddenly recall his "VHS tape" six days later. He just realized he was wrong and couldn't admit it. Pathetic.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Trump contradicts top aides - again

 

 

Quote

 

President Donald Trump contradicted his own top advisers Friday by suggesting Russian President Vladimir Putin was not meddling in Venezuela

"He is not looking at all to get involved in Venezuela, other than he’d like to see something positive happen," Trump told reporters in the Oval Office on Friday. "I feel the same way." 

His remarks came just days after Secretary of State Mike Pompeo accused Russia of propping up the regime of Venezuelan President Nicolas Maduro, who is in the midst of a political showdown with opposition leader Juan Guaido. The Trump administration has pushed hard to oust Maduro in favor of Guaido, calling Guaido the legitimate leader of Venezuela.  

Russia is a key Maduro ally, and the Kremlin has been sharply critical of the Trump administration's support for Guaido.

Venezuela's political crisis escalated sharply on Tuesday when Guaido called for a popular uprising and urged the military to abandon Maduro. But so far, there have not been large-scale defections, and Maduro's security forces have clashed with protesters.

Pompeo said on Tuesday that Maduro was ready to flee Venezuela after Guaido called for a popular uprising. But Maduro changed his mind after Russia persuaded him to stay, Pompeo said. 

“He had an airplane on the tarmac, he was ready to leave this morning as we understand it, and the Russians indicated he should stay,” Pompeo told CNN on Tuesday evening. 

The next day, Pompeo had a contentious phone call with his Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov about Venezuela. 

Pompeo told Lavrov that Russia and Cuba's actions in were "destabilizing for Venezuela and for the U.S.-Russia bilateral relationship," according to a State Department readout of the conversation.  

Trump's national security adviser, John Bolton, has also slammed the Russians for sending military personnel and equipment to Venezuela amid the escalating crisis. Russia dispatched two military planes and an unspecified number of Russian military troops to Venezuela in March, according to the State Department.   

"We are not going to see the Russians take over a country in the Western Hemisphere," Bolton said Wednesday in an interview with Fox News. He accused the Russians of working in concert with the Cuban government to bolster a teetering Maduro.

In Friday's call with Putin, Trump suggested they discussed a mutual desire to help the Venezuelan people, who are suffering amid an economic crisis and widespread shortages of food and medicine. 

But according to Russia's readout of Friday's call, Putin suggested it was the U.S., not Moscow, that was interfering in Venezuela – by trying to install Guaido.

"The president of Russia underscored that only the Venezuelans themselves have the right to determine the future of their country," Putin's office said in a statement. " ... Attempts to change the government in Caracas by force undermine prospects for a political settlement of the crisis."

Pompeo and Bolton met with military officials, including Acting Defense Secretary Patrick Shanahan, at the Pentagon on Friday to discuss the situation in Venezuela. Trump has said "all options" are on the table, including U.S. military intervention. 

White House spokeswoman Sarah Sanders declined to comment on that meeting.

"All options continue to be on the table. We're looking at a number of different fronts," she told reporters Friday. "I don't have any new announcements or change in direction. We continue to stand with the people of Venezuela, and the president is continuing to push for aid to be delivered to those people."

Sanders dismissed questions about whether Trump was contradicting Pompeo and Bolton's assessment of Russia's role in Venezuela.

"The president was relaying what President Putin said to him. That's it," she said.

 

 

 

2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Asking someone who thinks the solar system was created by a meteor hitting the earth 6000 years ago to provide logical, scientific evidence of anything is like asking your cat to wash your car.

3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@El Jeffo Just to be clear, I was clarifying my position for ANOther's sake. Fromm already knew that he had squat. Other just had a hard time seeing why the VHS was a problem.

1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

From "The Mueller Report" (redacted but not as much as I thought it would be. It's very long and a pdf link, so it takes a while to load)

 

Quote

The Russian government interfered in the 2016 presidential election in sweeping and systematic fashion. Evidence of Russian government operations began to surface in mid-2016. InJune, the Democratic National Committee and its cyber response team publicly announced that Russian hackers had compromised its computer network. Releases of hacked materials-hacks that public reporting soon attributed to the Russian government-began that same month. Additional releases followed in July through the organization WikiLeaks, with further releases in October and November.

...

RUSSIAN CONTACTS WITH THE CAMPAIGN

The social media campaign and the GRU hacking operations coincided with a series of contacts between Trump Campaign officials and individuals with ties to the Russian government.The Office investigated whether those contacts reflected or resulted in the Campaign conspiringor coordinating with Russia in its election-interference activities. Although the investigationestablished that the Russian government perceived it would benefit from a Trump presidency and worked to secure that outcome, and that the Campaign expected it would benefit electorally from information stolen and released through Russian efforts, the investigation did not establish that members of the Trump Campaign conspired or coordinated with the Russian government in itselection interference activities.

 

The Russian contacts consisted of business connections, offers of assistance to theCampaign, invitations for candidate Trump and Putin to meet in person , invitations for Campaignofficials and representatives of the Russian government to meet, and policy positions seeking improved U.S.-Russian relations. Section IV of this Report details the contacts between Russiaand the Trump Campaign during the campaign and transition periods, the most salient of which are summarized below in chronological order.

 

2015. Some of the earliest contacts were made in connection with a Trump Organization real-estate project in Russia known as Trump Tower Moscow. Candidate Trump signed a Letter oflntent for Trump Tower Moscow by November 2015, and in January 2016 Trump Organization executive Michael Cohen emailed and spoke about the project with the office of Russiangovernment press secretary Dmitry Peskov. The Trump Organization pursued the project throughat least June 2016, including by considering travel to Russia by Cohen and candidate Trump.

 

Spring 2016. Campaign foreign policy advisor George Papadopoulos made early contactwith Joseph Mifsud, a London-based professor who had connections to Russia and traveled to Moscow in April 2016. Immediately upon his return to London from that trip, Mifsud toldPapadopoulos that the Russian government had "dirt" on Hillary Clinton in the form of thousands of emails. One week later, in the first week of May 2016, Papadopoulos suggested to a representative of a foreign government that the Trump Campaign had received indications from the Russian government that it could assist the Campaign through the anonymous release of information damaging to candidate Clinton. Throughout that period of time and for several months thereafter, Papadopoulos worked with Mifsud and two Russian nationals to arrange a meeting between the Campaign and the Russian government. No meeting took place.

 

Summer 2016. Russian outreach to the Trump Campaign continued into the summer of 2016, as candidate Trump was becoming the presumptive Republican nominee for President. On June 9, 2016, for example, a Russian lawyer met with senior Trump Campaign officials Donald Trump Jr., Jared Kushner, and campaign chairman Paul Manafort to deliver what the emailproposing the meeting had described as "official documents and information that would incriminate Hillary." The materials were offered to Trump Jr. as "part of Russia and its government's support for Mr. Trump." The written communications setting up the meeting showed that the Campaign anticipated receiving information from Russia that could assist candidate Trump's electoral prospects, but the Russian lawyer ' s presentation did not provide suchinformation.

 

Days after the June 9 meeting, on June 14, 2016, a cybersecurity firm and the DNC announced that Russian government hackers had infiltrated the DNC and obtained access to opposition research on candidate Trump, among other documents.

In July 2016 , Campaign foreign policy advisor Carter Page traveled in his personal capacity to Moscow and gave the keynote address at the New Economic School. Page had lived and worked in Russia between 2003 and 2007. After returning to the United States, Page became acquainted with at least two Russian intelligence officers, one of whom was later charged in 2015 withconspiracy to act as an unregistered agent of Russia . Page ' s July 2016 trip to Moscow and his advocacy for pro-Russian foreign policy drew media attention . The Campaign then distanced itself from Page and, by late September 2016, removed him from the Campaign.

 

July 2016 was also the month WikiLeaks first released emails stolen by the GRU from theDNC. On July 22, 2016, WikiLeaks posted thousands of internal DNC documents revealing information about the Clinton Campaign. Within days, there was public reporting that U.S. intelligence agencies had "high confidence" that the Russian government was .behind the theft ofemails and documents from the DNC. And within a week of the release, a foreign governmentinformed the FBI about its May 2016 interaction with Papadopoulos and his statement that the Russian government could assist the Trump Campaign. On July 31, 2016, based on the foreign government rep01ting, the FBI opened an investigation into potential coordination between the Russian government and individuals associated with the Trump Campaign.

 

Separately, on August 2, 2016 , Trump campaign chairman Paul Manafort met in New YorkCity with his long-time business associate Konstantin Kilimnik, who the FBI assesses to have ties to Russian intelligence. Kilimnik requested the meeting to deliver in person a peace plan for Ukraine that Manafort acknowledged to the Special Counsel's Office was a "backdoor" way forRussia to control part of eastern Ukraine; both men believed the plan would require candidateTrump 's assent to succeed (were he to be elected President). They also discussed the status of the 

Trump Campaign and Manafort's strategy for winning Democratic votes in Midwestern states. Months before that meeting, Manafort had caused internal polling data to be shared with Kilimnik, and the sharing continued for some period of time after their August meeting.

 

Fall 2016. On October 7, 2016, the media released video of candidate Trump speaking in graphic terms about women years earlier, which was considered damaging to his candidacy. Less than an hour later, WikiLeaks made its second release: thousands of John Podesta ' s emails that had been stolen by the GRU in late March 2016. The FBI and other U.S. government institutions were at the time continuing their investigation of suspected Russian government efforts to interfere in the presidential election. That same day, October 7, the Department of Homeland Security and the Office of the Director of National Intelligence issued a joint public statement "that the RussianGovernment directed the recent compromises of e-mails from US persons and institutions, including from US political organizations ." Those "thefts" and the "disclosures " of the hacked materials through online platforms such as WikiLeaks, the statement continued, "are intended to interfere with the US election process."

 

Post-2016 Election.

 Immediately after the November 8 election , Russian governmentofficials and prominent Russian businessmen began trying to make inroads into the new administration. The most senior levels of the Russian government encouraged these efforts. The Russian Embassy made contact hours after the election to congratulate the President-Elect and to arrange a call with President Putin. Several Russian businessmen picked up the effort from there.

 

Kirill Dmitriev, the chief executive officer of Russia's sovereign wealth fund, was among the Russians who tried to make contact with the incoming administration. In early December , a business associate steered Dmitriev to Erik Prince, a supporter of the Trump Campaign and anassociate of senior Trump advisor Steve Bannon. Dmitriev and Prince later met face-to-face in January 2017 in the Seychelles and discussed U.S.-Russia relations. During the same period ,another business associate introduced Dmitriev to a friend of Jared Kushner who had not served on the Campaign or the Transition Team. Dmitriev and Kushner's friend collaborated on a shortwritten reconciliation plan for the United States and Russia, which Dmitriev implied had been cleared through Putin. The friend gave that proposal to Kushner before the inauguration , andKushner later gave copies to Bannon and incoming Secretary of State Rex Tillerson.

 

On December 29, 2016, then-President Obama imposed sanctions on Russia for having interfered in the election. Incoming National Security Advisor Michael Flynn called Russian Ambassador Sergey Kislyak and asked Russia not to escalate the situation in response to thesanctions. The following day, Putin announced that Russia would not take retaliatory measures in response to the sanctions at that time. Hours later , President-Elect Trump tweeted, "Great moveon delay (by V. Putin)." The next day, on December 31, 2016, Kislyak called Flynn and told him the request had been receiv ed at the highest levels and Russia had chosen not to retaliate as a resultof Flynn's request.

 

National Security Agency-that concluded with high confidence that Russia had intervened in the election through a variety of means to assist Trump's candidacy and harm Clinton 's. A declassified version of the assessment was publicly released that same day.

 

Between mid-January 2017 and early February 2017, three congressional committees -theHouse Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence (HPSCI), the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence (SSCI), and the Senate Judiciary Committee (SJC)-announced that they wouldconduct inquiries, or had already been conducting inquiries, into Russian interference in the election. Then-FBI Director James Corney later confirmed to Congress the existence of the FBI's investigation into Russian interference that had begun before the election. On March 20, 2017, in open-session testimony before HPSCI, Corney stated:

 

I have been authorized by the Department of Justice to confirm that the FBI, as part of our counterintelligence mission, is investigating the Russian government's efforts to interfere in the 2016 presidential election, and that includes investigating the nature of any links between individuals associated with the Trump campaign andthe Russian government and whether there was any coordination between the campaign and Russia ' s efforts ... As with any counterintelligence investigation, this will also include an assessment of whether any crimes were committed.

 

The investigation continued under then-Director Corney for the next seven weeks until May 9, 2017, when President Trump fired Corney as FBI Director-an action which is analyzed in Volume II of the rep01t.

On May 17, 2017, Acting Attorney General Rod Rosenstein appointed the Special Counsel and authorized him to conduct the investigation that Corney had confirmed in his congressional testimony, as well as matters arising directly from the investigation , and any other matters withinthe scope of 28 C.F .R. § 600.4(a), which generally covers efforts to interfere with or obstruct the investigation.

 

President Trump reacted negatively to the Special Counsel's appointment. He told advisorsthat it was the end of his presidency, sought to have Attorney General Jefferson (Jeff) Sessions unrecuse from the Russia investigation and to have the Special Counse l removed, and engaged in efforts to curtail the Special Counsel's investigation and prevent the disclosure of evidence to it, including through public and private contacts with potential witnesses. Those and related actions are described and analyzed in Volume II of the report.

 

 

... it goes on and on and on and on...

 

 

1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Everything old is new again.  This Herb Block cartoon is from 1974.

5ccdb61c7b595_HerblockWatergateAG1974.jp

3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't understand. If the Mueller Report is a "total exoneration" of Trump and his team, why is it a problem for Mueller to testify before Congress? I thought all of the Trump-loving toadies were all for Mueller testifying. I thought Trump himself was fine with whatever Barr decided on Mueller's possible testimony to Congress. Why the fear, anger, and ire?

 

Quote

President Trump reversed himself on Sunday and said that the special counsel, Robert S. Mueller III, should not testify before Congress, setting up a potentially explosive confrontation with Democrats over presidential authority and the separation of powers.

 

The president argued on Twitter that Mr. Mueller’s report on Russian interference in the 2016 election — which found no conspiracy between Moscow and Mr. Trump’s campaign but did not exonerate the president on obstruction of justice — was conclusive and that Congress and the American people did not need to hear from Mr. Mueller. “Bob Mueller should not testify,” he said. “No redos for the Dems!”

 

On Friday, Mr. Trump had said it was up to Attorney General William P. Barr whether Mr. Mueller testified. The president’s about-face now puts new pressure on Mr. Barr, who must decide whether to accede to Mr. Trump’s call. Last week, Mr. Barr said he had no objection to Mr. Mueller testifying.

 

The conflict over Mr. Mueller escalates Mr. Trump’s fight with Democrats just as his re-election campaign is taking shape. It comes on top of numerous refusals by the administration to turn over records to Congress, including a request for Mr. Trump’s tax returns. Mr. Trump has also balked at testimony from his former White House counsel, Donald F. McGahn II.

 
 

Still, the confrontation over Mr. Mueller, however much it antagonizes Democrats, could be short-lived. Mr. Mueller, who as special counsel is an employee of the Justice Department, is likely to finish his work this month. After that, any decision to testify before Congress would not be constrained by Mr. Barr, assuming the White House does not try to stop him by some other means, possibly through the courts.

 

3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And now Trump comes out in favor of the far right internet celebs who were banned by Facebook, but not Louis Farrakhan. Why? Why would he do that?

 

Quote

President Donald Trump took to Twitter on Saturday to blast social media platforms for unfairly marginalizing conservative voices, days after Facebook banned several so-called extremist users from its platform.
 

The series of tweets and retweets by the president intensified his public feud with social media giants like Twitter and Facebook. Trump has claimed social media companies unfairly target conservative voices, but platforms like Facebook said the ban is routine.

This week Facebook permanently banned several so-called extremist figures, including InfoWars conspiracy theorist Alex Jones, white nationalist Paul Nehlan, alt-right figure Milo Yiannopoulos and Louis Farrakhan, the Nation of Islam leader who made numerous anti-Semitic statements for promoting violence, hate, or racism on the platform, according to media reports.




 

 

2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Quote

 

President Donald Trump complained on Sunday about two “stollen” years in office, and Twitter users took him to the bakery over the typo. 

Trump initially retweeted one of his evangelical supporters who claimed the president should get two extra years in office as “reparations” for special counsel Robert Mueller’s investigation:

 

 

Do read the tweets for amusement.

4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Over 400 former federal prosecutors state in an open letter that what Donald Trump has done is definitively chargeable as obstruction by any normal measurement.

 

Quote

The Mueller report describes several acts that satisfy all of the elements for an obstruction charge: conduct that obstructed or attempted to obstruct the truth-finding process, as to which the evidence of corrupt intent and connection to pending proceedings is overwhelming. These include:

· The President’s efforts to fire Mueller and to falsify evidence about that effort;

· The President’s efforts to limit the scope of Mueller’s investigation to exclude his conduct; and

· The President’s efforts to prevent witnesses from cooperating with investigators probing him and his campaign.

...[NOTE: The meat is in this middle part, go read it.]

Of course, these aren’t the only acts of potential obstruction detailed by the Special Counsel. It would be well within the purview of normal prosecutorial judgment also to charge other acts detailed in the report.

We emphasize that these are not matters of close professional judgment. Of course, there are potential defenses or arguments that could be raised in response to an indictment of the nature we describe here. In our system, every accused person is presumed innocent and it is always the government’s burden to prove its case beyond a reasonable doubt. But, to look at these facts and say that a prosecutor could not probably sustain a conviction for obstruction of justice — the standard set out in Principles of Federal Prosecution — runs counter to logic and our experience.

As former federal prosecutors, we recognize that prosecuting obstruction of justice cases is critical because unchecked obstruction — which allows intentional interference with criminal investigations to go unpunished — puts our whole system of justice at risk. We believe strongly that, but for the OLC memo, the overwhelming weight of professional judgment would come down in favor of prosecution for the conduct outlined in the Mueller Report.

 

2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So, that's what trumpsters are reduced to? That seems...fitting and appropriate.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The company you keep informs people who you are.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
25 minutes ago, Fromm said:

Is that the Hollywood sex cult?

 

I believe there are several. This is in the news now though. The "John of God" story is dormant for now, if that's what you mean.

 

https://bigleaguepolitics.com/bombshell-interview-nxivm-whistleblower-reveals-human-trafficking-from-mexico-satanism-democrat-involvement/

 

https://www.theepochtimes.com/former-members-set-to-testify-against-nxivms-leader_2907788.html

 

 

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now