Congressional Investigations Into Trump White House

enlightenedbumenlightenedbum Registered User regular
edited July 2019 in Debate and/or Discourse
Who's got two thumbs and broad subpoena power?

104909894-GettyImages-171431287.530x298.jpg

This guy. Jerry Nadler (D-NY), the chairman of the House Judiciary Committee. Today he issued letters requesting documents and interviews from 81 people and organizations into allegations against the White House's and/or Trump campaign's:
  • Conspiring with foreign powers to win the 2016 election (Russia and a couple Gulf States, notably)
  • Campaign finance violations (paying off women, "catch and kill" partnership with the National Enquirer
  • Handling of security clearances
  • Obstruction of justice in covering up the above
  • Abuse of power in various ways (blocking the AT&T/Time Warner merger to punish CNN, for example)
  • Corruption

Among other things.

Prominent individuals, grouped roughly by category (here's the full list via TPM):

Trump Organization members (knowledge about tax evasion, campaign finance violations, fraud, corruption, abuse of power, collusion:
  • Alan Garten, Trump VP and chief legal officer
  • Allen Weisselberg, Trump CFO and dude who knows where all the bodies are buried
  • Donald J Trump Revocable Trust
  • Donald Trump Jr., idiot fail son #1
  • Eric Trump, idiot fail son #2
  • Jared Kushner, idiot fail son-in-law
  • Kushner Companies
  • Michael Cohen, Trump lawyer, fixer, and felon
  • Matthew Calamari, Trump COO
  • Ronald Lieberman, former Trump VP who Cohen says could confirm insurance fraud on the part of Trump
  • Rhona Graff, Trump's personal assistant
  • The Trump Foundation
  • The Trump Organization

Campaign Finance Violations
  • American Media Incorporate (National Enquirer parent)
  • David Pecker, chairman of AMI
  • Cohen again
  • Weisselberg again
  • Calamari again
  • Dylan Howard, AMI VP

Russia Stuff
...With the NRA!
  • The NRA!
  • Paul Erickson, Maria Butina's honeypot

...Focused on Ukraine stuff!
  • Paul Manafort
  • Cohen, again
  • Carter Page
  • Kushner, again
  • Erik Prince, mercenary leader and brother of Betsy DeVos
  • Frontier Services Group, Prince's company

...Focused on hacking!
  • Alexander Nix, Cambridge Analytica Founder
  • Julian David Whitlow, CEO of Cambridge Analytica
  • Brittany Kaiser, director at Cambridge Analytica in 2016
  • Cambridge Analytica
  • SCL Group Limited, parent company of Cambridge Analytica
  • Anatoli Samochornov, translator at the 2016 meeting at Trump Tower
  • Paul Manafort
  • Trump Jr.
  • Kushner
  • Erik Trump
  • Concord Management and Consulting, allegedly the financers of the hacking
  • Felix Sater, fixer, international felon
  • Jerome Corsi
  • The estate of Peter W. Smith, the GOP donor/operative who was searching for hacked Hillary e-mails
  • John Szobocsan, Smith's business associate
  • Matt Tait, aka @pwnallthethings, cyber security expert who initially told us about Peter W. Smith's role in all this nonsense
  • Julian Assange, head of Wikileaks
  • Wikileaks
  • Roger Stone, the alleged contact to Wikileaks via...
  • Randy Credico
  • Rob Goldstone, the guy who set up the Trump Tower meeting
  • Rinat Akhmetshin, attended the Trump Tower meeting
  • Irakly Kaveladze, attended the Trump Tower
  • George Papadapolous, Trump adviser
  • Steve Bannon, prince of darkness
  • Tony Fabrizio, GOP pollster

,,,Focused on Michael Flynn and the firing thereof
  • Like...everyone on the list, let's see...
  • Michael Flynn
  • Don McGann, former White House counsel
  • Annie Donaldson, McGann's chief of staff
  • Corey Lewandowski, campaign chair
  • Flynn Intel Group
  • Michael Flynn
  • Michael Flynn Jr.
  • Hope Hicks
  • KT McFarland, Flynn's deputy
  • Reince Priebus
  • Sean Spicer

Corruption
Honestly, I'm tired. There's a lot of corruption. Tom Barrack is on here, the General Services Administration. Rick Gates. The Trump Inaugural Committee.

Abuse of Power
McGann again, and all of his deputees. Among others.

Hey mods, what's on topic for this thread?

This is evolving, but current rulings are:

1) If the House Judiciary Committee is doing it, it's on topic.
2) If a House Judiciary member talks about these things resulting in impeachment (it would start in this committee), that's on topic. If you're generally speculating about impeachment on your own, that's not.
3) There will be some overlap with Mueller thread, the Trump Organization thread, and various other threads. Mods say that's fine.

Not on topic:
1) Mueller things that House Judiciary does not yet seem interested in, those go in the Mueller thread.
2) Same deal with all the other threads.
3) Idle speculation about impeachment without a specific impetus from a member of House Judiciary.

Herbert Hoover got 40% of the vote in 1932. Friendly reminder.
Warren 2020
enlightenedbum on
MarathonJaysonFourmonikerCommander ZoomEncMetzger MeisterAbsalonCaptainPeacockAegisHonkGennenalyse RuebenMorganVTNTrooperMvrckXandarPolaritiejimb213ElvenshaeNiryaBullheadRMS OceanicCapt HowdyLord_AsmodeusMarty81Captain InertiaGONG-00FencingsaxGnome-InterruptusjdarksunLostNinjaElldrenDark Raven XStabbity StyleNightslyrshrykeknitdandurandal4532tynicCantideShadowfireRchanenMan in the MistsKristmas KthulhuboogedybooArdolZonugalkimeIncenjucarMatevLabelsilence1186KoopahTroopahBloodsheedDarkPrimusThawmusToxLegacyL Ron HowardmiscellaneousinsanityCormacMidniteDescendant XlonelyahavaHefflingHeirabotkinDesktop HippieTofystedethHacksawchrishallett83FawstGnizmoemp123CantidoDuke 2.0spool32RickRudevalhalla130zepherin
«13456775

Posts

  • XaquinXaquin Right behind you!Registered User regular
    I really want to hear what Don McGann has to say

  • joshofalltradesjoshofalltrades Class Traitor Smoke-filled roomRegistered User regular
    I will be interested to see if Ivanka shows up in the next round of requests

    That’s where Trump will blow a gasket, I think

    m!ttensjmcdonaldElvenshaeGennenalyse RuebenNightslyrJoolanderMild ConfusionMan in the MistsZonugalMatevCantido
  • MarathonMarathon Registered User regular
    I will be interested to see if Ivanka shows up in the next round of requests

    That’s where Trump will blow a gasket, I think

    Any investigation into the Trump Organization would need her to be a part of it, especially once they’ve sent letters to Eric and Don Jr. I will be shocked if she’s not part of the next round.

    ElvenshaeGennenalyse RuebenFencingsaxNightslyrKristmas KthulhuZonugalMidniteCantido
  • enlightenedbumenlightenedbum Registered User regular
    Also some of those categorizations might be slightly wrong, because I did not actually read all the requests. I skimmed some of them though!

    Herbert Hoover got 40% of the vote in 1932. Friendly reminder.
    Warren 2020
  • ArbitraryDescriptorArbitraryDescriptor Registered User regular
    I will be interested to see if Ivanka shows up in the next round of requests

    That’s where Trump will blow a gasket, I think

    "Ivanka Trump or her Business Interests" is named in a lot of the requests, so probably.

    Also, these requests see to be presently scoped to documents already produced for the SCO, SDNY, other committees, or civil litigation. So this seems to just be the committee getting up to speed; they haven't even begun to dig in.

  • HenroidHenroid Radio Demon Internet HellRegistered User regular
    I wasn't expecting the OP to have categorical breakdown of every person and group from that list, nice work.

    That said, mama mia this is going to take a long time.

    Nobody likes me but that's okay. I'm used to it.
    ElvenshaeVeagleCommunistCowHonkBullheadCapt HowdyGennenalyse RuebenMoridin889Lord_AsmodeusJaysonFourFencingsaxjdarksunLostNinjaElldrenStabbity StyleNightslyrshrykedurandal4532John C. TurbineCantideMan in the MistsKristmas Kthulhujimb213ZonugalMatevsilence1186ToxL Ron HowardCormacHeirabotkinBlameless ClericDesktop HippieTofystedethchrishallett83FawstHacksawemp123LoisLanespool32Fryvalhalla130Happy Little Machine
  • CommunistCowCommunistCow Registered User regular
    How does the HJC investigation fit in with the HIC and HOC investigations? Are they all going after the same information?

    No, I am not really communist. Yes, it is weird that I use this name.
  • monikermoniker Registered User regular
    How does the HJC investigation fit in with the HIC and HOC investigations? Are they all going after the same information?

    They're all mostly investigating the same crimes. But a few will likely focus on certain criminality more than others. Also, corrupt practices in particular Departments that are under their purview.

  • Knight_Knight_ Dead Dead Dead Registered User regular
    Well, I guess this explains why Judiciary took a little while to get started.

    aeNqQM9.jpg
    Fencingsax
  • MorganVMorganV Registered User regular
    I do like in Trump's response, the people he "at's".

    “There is no Collusion. All of these investigations are in search of a crime. Democrats have no evidence to impeach President Trump. Ridiculous!” @DevinNunes @FoxNews
    - Donald Trump, 7:17 AM · Mar 5, 2019

    Yeah, if you want to be taken seriously that there's no evidence, maybe don't @ the person responsible for covering for you on the HIC for the first two years, or the network that's been carrying your water for even longer. Pretty clear he only gives a crap about his 30%, and is hoping that apathy, tribal ignorance, and suppression will carry the day.

    ElvenshaeFencingsaxGnome-InterruptusEddyNightslyrCantideMan in the MistsLord_AsmodeusKoopahTroopahForarTicaldfjamTofystedethchrishallett83valhalla130
  • Captain InertiaCaptain Inertia Registered User regular
    Lots of overlap of investigations. I figured Judicial would focus on obstruction, Oversight on corruption and Intelligence on Russia, but apparently we’ll get all of it in Judicial at least.

    Can this committee investigate Nunes for obstruction?

  • Captain InertiaCaptain Inertia Registered User regular
    MorganV wrote: »
    I do like in Trump's response, the people he "at's".

    “There is no Collusion. All of these investigations are in search of a crime. Democrats have no evidence to impeach President Trump. Ridiculous!” @DevinNunes @FoxNews
    - Donald Trump, 7:17 AM · Mar 5, 2019

    Yeah, if you want to be taken seriously that there's no evidence, maybe don't @ the person responsible for covering for you on the HIC for the first two years, or the network that's been carrying your water for even longer. Pretty clear he only gives a crap about his 30%, and is hoping that apathy, tribal ignorance, and suppression will carry the day.

    One, how is he posting from the future

    Two, why does he think he needs to bat signal his minions from twitter

  • VeagleVeagle Registered User regular
    MorganV wrote: »
    I do like in Trump's response, the people he "at's".

    “There is no Collusion. All of these investigations are in search of a crime. Democrats have no evidence to impeach President Trump. Ridiculous!” @DevinNunes @FoxNews
    - Donald Trump, 7:17 AM · Mar 5, 2019

    Yeah, if you want to be taken seriously that there's no evidence, maybe don't @ the person responsible for covering for you on the HIC for the first two years, or the network that's been carrying your water for even longer. Pretty clear he only gives a crap about his 30%, and is hoping that apathy, tribal ignorance, and suppression will carry the day.

    Trump raises a good point. Nunes is not included in those requests.

    Should probably call him in to explain why he didn't think all the evidence he had access to was evidence.

    steam_sig.png
    ElvenshaeGennenalyse RuebenMorganVElldrenNightslyrshrykeRchanenKristmas KthulhuZonugalLord_AsmodeusBullheadToxMidniteTofystedethchrishallett83valhalla130
  • MuddBuddMuddBudd Registered User regular
    "All of these investigations are in search of a crime."

    Yes... that's what investigations are for.

    steam_sig.png
    PreacherGennenalyse RuebenmonikerJaysonFourFencingsaxArbitraryDescriptorYoutubeGnome-InterruptusjdarksunElvenshaeLostNinjaElldrenNightslyrshrykedurandal4532knitdanJoolanderCantideMild ConfusionDoctorArchCommander ZoomjoshofalltradesShortyMoridin889RchanenMan in the MistsKristmas KthulhuMr RayboogedybooNiryaArdolZonugalkimeLord_AsmodeusMatevKoopahTroopahThawmusToxL Ron HowardRozDacCormacMidniteHonklonelyahavaRhesus PositiveabotkinQuidDesktop HippieTofystedethchrishallett83Hacksawemp123KetBraRickRudeFryvalhalla130Happy Little Machine
  • enlightenedbumenlightenedbum Registered User regular
    Henroid wrote: »
    I wasn't expecting the OP to have categorical breakdown of every person and group from that list, nice work.

    That said, mama mia this is going to take a long time.

    I omitted some and obviously ran out of steam. The sheer breadth of this administration's villainy is breathtaking.

    Herbert Hoover got 40% of the vote in 1932. Friendly reminder.
    Warren 2020
    monikerYoutubeshrykeMayabirdMan in the MistsKristmas KthulhuZonugalOrca
  • MorganVMorganV Registered User regular
    MorganV wrote: »
    I do like in Trump's response, the people he "at's".

    “There is no Collusion. All of these investigations are in search of a crime. Democrats have no evidence to impeach President Trump. Ridiculous!” @DevinNunes @FoxNews
    - Donald Trump, 7:17 AM · Mar 5, 2019

    Yeah, if you want to be taken seriously that there's no evidence, maybe don't @ the person responsible for covering for you on the HIC for the first two years, or the network that's been carrying your water for even longer. Pretty clear he only gives a crap about his 30%, and is hoping that apathy, tribal ignorance, and suppression will carry the day.

    One, how is he posting from the future

    Two, why does he think he needs to bat signal his minions from twitter

    One, yeah, sorry, apparently Twitter timestamps are based on location of reader, not location of sender.

    Two, who knows why he does anything. But it does bring up something the PodSaveAmerica boys say often. If the stuff Trump did was all behind closed doors, in secret meetings and phonecalls, it'd be clear to anyone that he was committing impeachable offences. But because he does it openly, flagrantly, and with no shame, some people appear to have a mental block that makes them think "If he's doing it in public, and in such a dumb way, there's no way it can be illegal". Some people can't wrap their head around the idea that the President could actually be that shameless, and that stupid.

    Elvenshaeshrykedurandal4532CommunistCowMan in the Mistsjimb213ThawmusTubularLuggagechrishallett83valhalla130
  • MarathonMarathon Registered User regular
    MorganV wrote: »
    I do like in Trump's response, the people he "at's".

    “There is no Collusion. All of these investigations are in search of a crime. Democrats have no evidence to impeach President Trump. Ridiculous!” @DevinNunes @FoxNews
    - Donald Trump, 7:17 AM · Mar 5, 2019

    Yeah, if you want to be taken seriously that there's no evidence, maybe don't @ the person responsible for covering for you on the HIC for the first two years, or the network that's been carrying your water for even longer. Pretty clear he only gives a crap about his 30%, and is hoping that apathy, tribal ignorance, and suppression will carry the day.

    I’m probably way off base because I never watch Fox News, but I always assumed when trump tweets one of those paragraphs surrounded by quotes, he’s just repeating something he saw on fox and he usually @‘s the person who said it.

    So when I saw this I just assumed it was Nunes on Fox saying those things and Trump is basically just retweeting a snippet from Fox News.

    ArbitraryDescriptorEddyBloodsheed
  • shrykeshryke Member of the Beast Registered User regular
    MorganV wrote: »
    MorganV wrote: »
    I do like in Trump's response, the people he "at's".

    “There is no Collusion. All of these investigations are in search of a crime. Democrats have no evidence to impeach President Trump. Ridiculous!” @DevinNunes @FoxNews
    - Donald Trump, 7:17 AM · Mar 5, 2019

    Yeah, if you want to be taken seriously that there's no evidence, maybe don't @ the person responsible for covering for you on the HIC for the first two years, or the network that's been carrying your water for even longer. Pretty clear he only gives a crap about his 30%, and is hoping that apathy, tribal ignorance, and suppression will carry the day.

    One, how is he posting from the future

    Two, why does he think he needs to bat signal his minions from twitter

    One, yeah, sorry, apparently Twitter timestamps are based on location of reader, not location of sender.

    Two, who knows why he does anything. But it does bring up something the PodSaveAmerica boys say often. If the stuff Trump did was all behind closed doors, in secret meetings and phonecalls, it'd be clear to anyone that he was committing impeachable offences. But because he does it openly, flagrantly, and with no shame, some people appear to have a mental block that makes them think "If he's doing it in public, and in such a dumb way, there's no way it can be illegal". Some people can't wrap their head around the idea that the President could actually be that shameless, and that stupid.

    It's more that our news media is simply not equipped for a slow-roll of blatant corruption and instead is always looking for the exciting scoop. And they especially don't know how to react when you point out "You did something wrong" and the people being accused just don't react. It's the lack of shame that really lets them keep rolling.

    Like a lot of these investigations, I suspect we're not gonna learn a ton of stuff we didn't already know about so much as we're gonna get a ton of proof and details of the crimes we've already known they committed and frankly, have probably forgotten about because there's just so many.

    EddyElldrenCommander ZoomMayabirdKristmas KthulhuSpoitVeagleGnome-InterruptusNightslyrTofystedethchrishallett83
  • PreacherPreacher Registered User regular
    Honestly I think it was years of Obama being accused of all kinds of things and it all being bullshit, the public has been conditioned that "when one side is not in power they allege the other is corrupt"

    I would like some money because these are artisanal nuggets of wisdom philistine.

    Http:// pleasepaypreacher.net
    shrykeGSMCaptain InertiajmcdonalddavidsdurionsJoolanderElldrenGennenalyse RuebenYoutubeJaysonFourCommunistCowmonikerKristmas KthulhuMvrckMr RayNiryaAistanZonugalThawmusDisruptedCapitalistL Ron HowardNightslyrjdarksunHefflingabotkinQuidGONG-00TofystedethHacksawemp123RickRudevalhalla130
  • ElJeffeElJeffe Moderator, ClubPA mod
    edited March 2019
    MuddBudd wrote: »
    "All of these investigations are in search of a crime."

    Yes... that's what investigations are for.

    The general opinion of the conservative mouthpieces is that all of these investigations are illegitimate, because you should only have an investigation in direct response to a specific crime you already know was committed.

    If, for example, you have something that is a possible campaign finance violation, it's not okay to investigate to see if it actually was, because that is just fishing for crimes. If it was a real crime, you would know just by looking at it. Presumably, a big siren goes off whenever a real crime is committed, I dunno.

    This is an actual argument they make.

    Don't bother trying to make sense of the GOP logic for opposing these investigations, because the logic is just "this affects our ability to maintain power."

    ElJeffe on
    Maddie: "I named my feet. The left one is flip and the right one is flop. Oh, and also I named my flip-flops."

    I make tweet.
    ElvenshaeFencingsaxCantideElldrenGennenalyse Ruebenmonikerdurandal4532RchanenMan in the MistsKristmas KthulhuMr RayboogedybooknitdanAtomikaZonugalMatevLord_AsmodeusBullheadDarkPrimusToxGnome-InterruptusNightslyrMidnitejdarksunabotkinQuidTofystedethchrishallett83Hacksawemp123KetBravalhalla130
  • AngelHedgieAngelHedgie Registered User regular
    Preacher wrote: »
    Honestly I think it was years of Obama being accused of all kinds of things and it all being bullshit, the public has been conditioned that "when one side is not in power they allege the other is corrupt"

    Guess what was an intentional GOP strategy? They wanted to delegitimize investigation.

    XBL: Nox Aeternum / PSN: NoxAeternum / NN:NoxAeternum / Steam: noxaeternum
    shrykeFencingsaxJoolanderEddyElldrenGennenalyse RuebenYoutubeA Kobold's KoboldJaysonFourmonikerMoridin889Man in the MistsTetraNitroCubaneKristmas KthulhuAridholAistanMetzger MeisterZonugalMatevLabelLord_AsmodeusThawmusL Ron HowardVeagleNightslyrjdarksunabotkinTofystedethchrishallett83Hacksawemp123valhalla130
  • shrykeshryke Member of the Beast Registered User regular
    edited March 2019
    Preacher wrote: »
    Honestly I think it was years of Obama being accused of all kinds of things and it all being bullshit, the public has been conditioned that "when one side is not in power they allege the other is corrupt"

    Guess what was an intentional GOP strategy? They wanted to delegitimize investigation.

    It's more playing to the media's already existing sensibility to cover the argument rather then the facts. Framing everything as a he-said/she-said means you never have to take a stand and never risk alienating anyone in the DC luncheon bubble.

    It is difficult to get real acceptance of the full on scope of what the Republican party and Trump administration have been up to because that would require admitting that, yeah, they are the problem and massive numbers of them should be going to jail.

    shryke on
    FencingsaxGennenalyse RuebenYoutubeKristmas KthulhuMr RayjmcdonaldThawmusA Kobold's KoboldL Ron HowardGnome-InterruptusNightslyrTubularLuggageMaijinamurovalhalla130
  • MayabirdMayabird Pecking at the keyboardRegistered User regular
    Henroid wrote: »
    I wasn't expecting the OP to have categorical breakdown of every person and group from that list, nice work.

    That said, mama mia this is going to take a long time.

    I omitted some and obviously ran out of steam. The sheer breadth of this administration's villainy is breathtaking.

    I mean, the villainy goes back decades. Trump is a johnny-come-lately that tried to steal all the attention and credit (as he does), but there's been a vast right wing conspiracy to take over the world since at least the 80s. Trump has only been a symptom, not a root cause of the rot. He just jumped in and took advantage of the web of corruption that already existed.

    SpoitYoutubeDarkPrimusL Ron HowardMidniteMrVyngaardchrishallett83valhalla130
  • monikermoniker Registered User regular
    ElJeffe wrote: »
    MuddBudd wrote: »
    "All of these investigations are in search of a crime."

    Yes... that's what investigations are for.

    The general opinion of the conservative mouthpieces is that all of these investigations are illegitimate, because you should only have an investigation in direct response to a specific crime you already know was committed.

    If, for example, you have something that is a possible campaign finance violation, it's not okay to investigate to see if it actually was, because that is just fishing for crimes. If it was a real crime, you would know just by looking at it. Presumably, a big siren goes off whenever a real crime is committed, I dunno.

    This is an actual argument they make.

    Don't bother trying to make sense of the GOP logic for opposing these investigations, because the logic is just "this affects our ability to maintain power."

    Yep! It's in the basement of this pizza parlor.

    ElvenshaeFencingsaxElJeffeArdolDarkPrimusL Ron HowardShadowfireNightslyrMidniteabotkinchrishallett83
  • PantsBPantsB Registered User regular
    Xaquin wrote: »
    I really want to hear what Don McGann has to say

    He's going to argue executive privilege and attorney client privilege and things will be tied up for quite a while I'd think.

    The exasperating thing is going to be when the Trump kids claim executive privilege

    11793-1.png
    day9gosu.png
    QEDMF xbl: PantsB G+
  • LostNinjaLostNinja Registered User regular
    PantsB wrote: »
    Xaquin wrote: »
    I really want to hear what Don McGann has to say

    He's going to argue executive privilege and attorney client privilege and things will be tied up for quite a while I'd think.

    The exasperating thing is going to be when the Trump kids claim executive privilege

    Idk about this one. Didn’t McGann cooperate with Mueller secretly for months and only announce his resignation after that came to light (and after getting one last embarrassment on the Supreme Court)? I don’t think he’s willing to put his neck out for this administration.

  • AtomikaAtomika Gay Mergirl Registered User regular
    I just want them in jail. All of them. All the republicans. I wish I was being hyperbolic.

    KetBraChomp-ChompJaysonFourAistanElldrenYoutubeshrykeStabbity StyleLabelWhittledownDarkPrimusBullheadTetraNitroCubanedurandal4532SquigieToxL Ron HowardShadowfireGorkTNTrooperBigJoeMNightslyrTubularLuggageCommunistCowMidniteTicaldfjamDescendant XMrVyngaardA Kobold's KoboldjdarksunKristmas KthulhuabotkinGONG-00YamiB.Maijinamurochrishallett83brynhrtmnHacksawMagelldestroyah87Mr Rayvalhalla130
  • SpoitSpoit *twitch twitch* Registered User regular
    shryke wrote: »
    MorganV wrote: »
    MorganV wrote: »
    I do like in Trump's response, the people he "at's".

    “There is no Collusion. All of these investigations are in search of a crime. Democrats have no evidence to impeach President Trump. Ridiculous!” @DevinNunes @FoxNews
    - Donald Trump, 7:17 AM · Mar 5, 2019

    Yeah, if you want to be taken seriously that there's no evidence, maybe don't @ the person responsible for covering for you on the HIC for the first two years, or the network that's been carrying your water for even longer. Pretty clear he only gives a crap about his 30%, and is hoping that apathy, tribal ignorance, and suppression will carry the day.

    One, how is he posting from the future

    Two, why does he think he needs to bat signal his minions from twitter

    One, yeah, sorry, apparently Twitter timestamps are based on location of reader, not location of sender.

    Two, who knows why he does anything. But it does bring up something the PodSaveAmerica boys say often. If the stuff Trump did was all behind closed doors, in secret meetings and phonecalls, it'd be clear to anyone that he was committing impeachable offences. But because he does it openly, flagrantly, and with no shame, some people appear to have a mental block that makes them think "If he's doing it in public, and in such a dumb way, there's no way it can be illegal". Some people can't wrap their head around the idea that the President could actually be that shameless, and that stupid.

    It's more that our news media is simply not equipped for a slow-roll of blatant corruption and instead is always looking for the exciting scoop. And they especially don't know how to react when you point out "You did something wrong" and the people being accused just don't react. It's the lack of shame that really lets them keep rolling.

    Like a lot of these investigations, I suspect we're not gonna learn a ton of stuff we didn't already know about so much as we're gonna get a ton of proof and details of the crimes we've already known they committed and frankly, have probably forgotten about because there's just so many.

    Are you talking about the administration or the media in the bolded?

    steam_sig.png
    Man in the MistsLabel
  • ZekZek Registered User regular
    So it seems like the House is becoming increasingly bold in their attacks on Trump by the day - what's the end game here? Impeachment won't pass the Senate with the information we have right now. Are the Dems just putting it out there early to warm the public up to the idea? Are they sure they really want to trade Trump for Pence? Or is all of this really just posturing for 2020?

    TetraNitroCubane
  • monikermoniker Registered User regular
    Zek wrote: »
    So it seems like the House is becoming increasingly bold in their attacks on Trump by the day - what's the end game here? Impeachment won't pass the Senate with the information we have right now. Are the Dems just putting it out there early to warm the public up to the idea? Are they sure they really want to trade Trump for Pence? Or is all of this really just posturing for 2020?

    Prosecuting criminal activity through their Constitutionally mandated oversight of the Executive.

    FencingsaxAngelHedgieI ZimbraSyphonBlue38thDoeDarkPrimusMorganVSurfpossumYoutubeshrykeCaptain InertiaElvenshaeZonugalL Ron HowarddavidsdurionsShadowfireCommander ZoomGnome-InterruptusElldreniTunesIsEvilKetBrajmcdonaldBrodyNightslyrMan in the MistsMidniteGennenalyse RuebenLabelLostNinjaMrVyngaardA Kobold's KoboldMoridin889jdarksunjoshofalltradeslonelyahavaJoolanderKristmas Kthulhuboogedybooabotkindispatch.oLord_AsmodeusMild ConfusionRchanenTofystedethchrishallett83emp123MagellMr Ray
  • DarkPrimusDarkPrimus premium Registered User regular
    The thing is, pursuing all this and getting people all charged to the fullest extent would not result in trading Trump for Pence. It would result in basically going down the chain of succession until you hit either a Democrat or a Republican who was not involved in the 2016 election in any way.

    dt3GeqU.png
    Gamertag: PrimusD | Rock Band DLC | GW:OttW - arrcd | WLD - Thortar
    ElvenshaeShortyMidniteGennenalyse RuebenFencingsaxBullheadJoolanderKristmas KthulhuMild Confusionchrishallett83Hacksaw
  • PolaritiePolaritie Sleepy Registered User regular
    DarkPrimus wrote: »
    The thing is, pursuing all this and getting people all charged to the fullest extent would not result in trading Trump for Pence. It would result in basically going down the chain of succession until you hit either a Democrat or a Republican who was not involved in the 2016 election in any way.

    Pelosi would be POTUS if both Trump and Pence were impeached. Speaker of the House follows VP in succession.

    Steam: Polaritie
    3DS: 0473-8507-2652
    Switch: SW-5185-4991-5118
    PSN: AbEntropy
    DoodmannmonikerElldrenBrodyMan in the MistsGennenalyse RuebenFencingsaxA Kobold's KoboldMoridin889jdarksunKristmas KthulhuLord_AsmodeusHacksawemp123
  • CelestialBadgerCelestialBadger Registered User regular
    Polaritie wrote: »
    DarkPrimus wrote: »
    The thing is, pursuing all this and getting people all charged to the fullest extent would not result in trading Trump for Pence. It would result in basically going down the chain of succession until you hit either a Democrat or a Republican who was not involved in the 2016 election in any way.

    Pelosi would be POTUS if both Trump and Pence were impeached. Speaker of the House follows VP in succession.

    Which pretty much guarantees they won't both be impeached, since they need Republican Senate votes!

    PolaritieShortyTetraNitroCubanekimeAistanYoutubeFencingsaxKristmas KthulhuOrcaHacksaw
  • MarathonMarathon Registered User regular
    Zek wrote: »
    So it seems like the House is becoming increasingly bold in their attacks on Trump by the day - what's the end game here? Impeachment won't pass the Senate with the information we have right now. Are the Dems just putting it out there early to warm the public up to the idea? Are they sure they really want to trade Trump for Pence? Or is all of this really just posturing for 2020?

    They’re doing what they should. Even if the Senate will never vote to remove Trump, they can perform their duty to provide oversight and make public all of the shit Trump has been up to.

    That way, even if he can’t be removed Trump will hopefully be radioactive as a candidate in 2020 to everyone but his hardcore base.

    monikerGnome-InterruptusLord PalingtonMan in the MistsElvenshaeGennenalyse RuebenA Kobold's KoboldMilljdarksunBullheadHefflingKristmas KthulhuArdolLord_Asmodeusemp123Mr Ray
  • [Expletive deleted][Expletive deleted] The mediocre doctor NorwayRegistered User regular
    Polaritie wrote: »
    DarkPrimus wrote: »
    The thing is, pursuing all this and getting people all charged to the fullest extent would not result in trading Trump for Pence. It would result in basically going down the chain of succession until you hit either a Democrat or a Republican who was not involved in the 2016 election in any way.

    Pelosi would be POTUS if both Trump and Pence were impeached. Speaker of the House follows VP in succession.

    Which pretty much guarantees they won't both be impeached, since they need Republican Senate votes!

    She could temporarily step down in favor of a suitable R. Didn't something like that happen with Nixon?

    Sic transit gloria mundi.
  • SchadenfreudeSchadenfreude Mean Mister Mustard Registered User regular
    What happens if Pence were to be impeached and forced to step down, but not Trump? Obviously it'd never happen, but in such a scenario would Speaker of the House fill the spot of VP?

    Contemplate this on the Tree of Woe
  • bowenbowen How you doin'? Registered User regular
    ElJeffe wrote: »
    MuddBudd wrote: »
    "All of these investigations are in search of a crime."

    Yes... that's what investigations are for.

    The general opinion of the conservative mouthpieces is that all of these investigations are illegitimate, because you should only have an investigation in direct response to a specific crime you already know was committed.

    If, for example, you have something that is a possible campaign finance violation, it's not okay to investigate to see if it actually was, because that is just fishing for crimes. If it was a real crime, you would know just by looking at it. Presumably, a big siren goes off whenever a real crime is committed, I dunno.

    This is an actual argument they make.

    Don't bother trying to make sense of the GOP logic for opposing these investigations, because the logic is just "this affects our ability to maintain power."

    A lot of it is projection.

    It's literally what they do and did, so they assume that that is what is happening right now. Or that Obama got away with the crimes they think he committed if he did actually do it and that Trump should also have that same privilege.

    Not, you know, Obama being innocent and Trump most likely being guilty as fuck. But that's what these things are there to determine. It just rubs them the wrong way because they know they're guilty and they don't want to be caught with their hands in the cookie jar on top of their previous projection shit. It's also probably 1 part worried about the other stuff that isn't hyper visible like all of this.

    not a doctor, not a lawyer, examples I use may not be fully researched so don't take out of context plz, don't @ me
    FencingsaxMrVyngaardKristmas KthulhuProhass
  • MorganVMorganV Registered User regular
    Polaritie wrote: »
    DarkPrimus wrote: »
    The thing is, pursuing all this and getting people all charged to the fullest extent would not result in trading Trump for Pence. It would result in basically going down the chain of succession until you hit either a Democrat or a Republican who was not involved in the 2016 election in any way.

    Pelosi would be POTUS if both Trump and Pence were impeached. Speaker of the House follows VP in succession.

    Which pretty much guarantees they won't both be impeached, since they need Republican Senate votes!

    She could temporarily step down in favor of a suitable R. Didn't something like that happen with Nixon?

    No way they'd let that happen. Most likely scenario if Trump and Pence are proven complicit to the point not even most Republicans can carry that water, is to impeach Trump, Pence as President nominates a milquetoast Republican (Hey Mitt!) as VP, gets him confirmed, and then have Pence resign.

    I mean it could happen with the VP going first, but that leaves Trump to do the right thing by Republicans, and well... Trump falling on his sword is about as likely as... I honestly can't think of something less likely. Riding a unicorn to the moon and back? Still more likely than Trump not being a complete douche.

  • monikermoniker Registered User regular
    What happens if Pence were to be impeached and forced to step down, but not Trump? Obviously it'd never happen, but in such a scenario would Speaker of the House fill the spot of VP?

    A new Veep would be appointed with the approval of the Congress. That's how Nixon got Ford after Agnew resigned. And how we got a President who never received a vote at the top of the ticket.

    Gnome-InterruptusSchadenfreudeA Kobold's Kobold
  • ShortyShorty JUDGE BROSEF Registered User regular
    What happens if Pence were to be impeached and forced to step down, but not Trump? Obviously it'd never happen, but in such a scenario would Speaker of the House fill the spot of VP?

    no

    replacement vice presidents are sort of like cabinet-level and supreme court appointments

    the president selects someone, who then must receive approval of both the House and the Senate

Sign In or Register to comment.