Russia Collusion Scandal (aka A Leftist fantasy)

nsacpi said:
interesting comments from Dershowitz re Mueller's upcoming report
Click to expand...

Honestly, though, nothing is going to be “politically devastating” for Trump. His ride-or-die folks aren’t going to care, and the judges-and-tax-cuts crowd will justify and rationalize and explain it away.
 
Julio3000 said:
Honestly, though, nothing is going to be “politically devastating” for Trump. His ride-or-die folks aren’t going to care, and the judges-and-tax-cuts crowd will justify and rationalize and explain it away.
Click to expand...

the combined size of those two groups is no more than 40% of the electorate...if the 10-15% group that make up the softer part of his support gets peeled off it will be devastating
 
nsacpi said:
the combined size of those two groups is no more than 40% of the electorate...if the 10-15% group that make up the softer part of his support gets peeled off it will be devastating
Click to expand...

Even if only 1 Rep senator flips initially, it could be the earthquake that starts a tsunami.
 
nsacpi said:
from a pure political perspective impeachment is probably not the best move for the Dems...they can destroy him through drip drip drip
Click to expand...

Unless there's a smoking cannon, I don't think the Dems should pursue impeachment. Most of the gripes against Trump have been political and stylistic, but not criminal, which really comes up short when pursuing an impeachment. I think the only place where Trump may be vulnerable is on the emoluments clause and even that would be difficult to prove (unless Trump's business handlers are so ridiculously inept that they would leave the equivalent of a bunch of oily rags lying around waiting to ignite; and that's a longshot).
 
The High Crimes and Misdemeanors are rampant
The political will to execute due to the likelihood of passage not so much.


I don't see a (R) Senate passing.
Impeachment being a 2/3 proposition
 
50PoundHead said:
Unless there's a smoking cannon, I don't think the Dems should pursue impeachment. Most of the gripes against Trump have been political and stylistic, but not criminal, which really comes up short when pursuing an impeachment. I think the only place where Trump may be vulnerable is on the emoluments clause and even that would be difficult to prove (unless Trump's business handlers are so ridiculously inept that they would leave the equivalent of a bunch of oily rags lying around waiting to ignite; and that's a longshot).
Click to expand...

I think you are underestimating what a target rich environment Mueller and the relevant House committees will be working with
 
At the rate things are going whats the point of impeachment? He can only hide behind the Presidency for so long. Get a warrant ASAP after the inauguration and tell the secret service to drop his ass off at the local PD for booking. If only. Reality is he would spend less time in booking than Amber Guyger.
 
“What I think Mueller’s going to do if he’s smart is connect the open dots,” Dershowitz, who has defended clients in some of the most famous cases in modern history, told The Washington Post. “He’s going to lay out everything that relates to contacts between anyone in the campaign and the Russians, and the same thing with obstruction of justice. None of these things by themselves are compelling, but when you lay it out and see it all in one document, I think it will be on its face very critical of the president.”

https://www.washingtonpost.com/poli...t-will-be-devastating/?utm_term=.332da3c7cebc
 
I think the report is going to show awareness on the part of the campaign to some of the illegal activity, but probably with enough distance to avoid conspiracy charges. There’s a decent chance at some kind of potentially illegal quid-pro-quo in the Ukraine platform thing. I think we’ll find out that Trump was fully in the loop on the Trump Tower “dirt” meeting and other things that he’s disclaimed knowledge of. I think it will make a case that is suggestive of obstruction, but pass that particular buck to Congress.
 
Julio3000 said:
I think the report is going to show awareness on the part of the campaign to some of the illegal activity, but probably with enough distance to avoid conspiracy charges. There’s a decent chance at some kind of potentially illegal quid-pro-quo in the Ukraine platform thing. I think we’ll find out that Trump was fully in the loop on the Trump Tower “dirt” meeting and other things that he’s disclaimed knowledge of. I think it will make a case that is suggestive of obstruction, but pass that particular buck to Congress.
Click to expand...

And if the Dems are smart, they simply hold a very thorough set of hearings. Bring it all out for the public to see and draw its own conclusions. Conviction is a long shot given the composition of the Senate. But a form of water torture via very thorough public hearings will serve the public interest and coincidentally the party interest.
 
I wonder if there was a form of coordination involved between what Manafort was saying to Mueller and the written answers submitted by Trump last week
 
nsacpi said:
I wonder if there was a form of coordination involved between what Manafort was saying to Mueller and the written answers submitted by Trump last week
Click to expand...


With Trump’s tweet storm about Mueller today I also wonder if Whitaker tipped off Trump to Special Counsel’s findings before it hit the AP wire.
 
now Mueller has to show the judge evidence that Manafartov lied...this presentation will be very interesting
 
I’m really perplexed by this, but the simplest explanation is that he’s still hoping for a pardon and/or executive action to shut down the investigation and so is risking further jail time by lying about matters related to Trump/Russia. Maybe also taking one for the team by utterly shredding his credibility as a witness, too.
 
Julio3000 said:
I’m really perplexed by this, but the simplest explanation is that he’s still hoping for a pardon and/or executive action to shut down the investigation and so is risking further jail time by lying about matters related to Trump/Russia. Maybe also taking one for the team by utterly shredding his credibility as a witness, too.
Click to expand...

so did he lie about something big or something small...and what are the chances that Trump was also asked about whatever it was that Manafartov lied about
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top