At this stage, I don’t implicitly trust anyone in, or with strong connections to, politics, but how much of what Cohen has to say re redactions should we immediately ignore without consideration and investigation?
2 Likes
I wish I could agree but that’s what people have been saying about countless scandals from the beginning of his campaign. The conventional wisdom about what constitutes a career-ending blow to an American politician simply doesn’t apply to Trump.
9 Likes
I’m saying listen to what he says, but never forget that he’s also a total scumbag even if he’s telling you what you want to hear.
1 Like
Considering we have no post presidential prosecutions and more than a little known and widely accepted illegal actions, I’m guessing somewhere near zero. It might be slightly higher because Trump seems like the type unwilling to stop his criminal activities even in the spotlight, so an OJ situation is possible. He avoids jail for the big things everyone else knows and walks right into another charge.
6 Likes
Another happy mutant, in another thread posited the only two things that could bring ⊥rump down:
- He is caught, in flagrante, with a guy.
- He makes serious moves toward enacting meaningful gun control.
4 Likes
He’s had a rather large, moneyed, and in control of the government group of people keeping the details quiet and denying reality on his behalf thus far.
If even a minority of those people stop doing so he’s a little bit toast. And lines like these:
" The conclusion that Congress may apply the obstruction laws to the President’s corrupt exercise of the powers of office accords with our constitutional system of checks and balances and the principle that no person is above the law."
The “exoneration” openly describes his behavior as a corrupt abuse of power.
Aren’t gonna help on that front.
It all depends on what else shakes out and how long/well the pre-coordinated GOP response holds up. Seems like the initial headlines and “breaking news” updates in the big news orgs we’re in line with what they’re pushing, but that also seems to be eroding fast as people read more of what’s there.
3 Likes
Well one would hope so, but again I can imagine the conventional wisdom two or three years ago would have been
“He’s had a lot of large, moneyed, well-connected group of people keeping the details of his sexual affairs with porn stars from going public and giving him public deniability. If even a minority of those people flip on him he’ll lose the evangelical vote for sure.”
4 Likes
He already approved the banning of bump stocks. Pre-presidential run, he made many calls for gun control (I mean, he was a NYC Democrat for the longest time.) There are many who already know deep down he’s not an actual 2nd Amendment supporter who voted for him anyway. Just like he isn’t actually a Christian. Nor does he follow the various traditional family values many of his supporters adhere to. He’s also a rich elite who hasn’t worked a hard day in his life. He is everything they hate, but he has the ability to blind them because he riles them up against the Democrats. I don’t see what one more naked truth would do to suddenly break the spell.
9 Likes
There are some crimes where a level of intent is needed to prove the crime. This prevents things like charging every sanitation worker with obstruction of justice for regular activities in the course of their jobs. In the Don Jr. case I’m guessing it hinges on whether they would be able to show Don Jr. would have known that information would constitute a “thing of value”.
1 Like
Conventional wisdom also says you sear a piece of meat to seal in the juices.
If you were paying close enough attention to not accept shit like “evengelicals are moral”, then you knew the undeniable shit that’s come out before has fuck all to do with what the right is genuinely concerned with.
Fact remains, a big chunk of the GOP apparatus is lined up behind Trump purely because they fear challenge from the right more than they fear loss to the Democrats. If enough of their voters blink, or turn on Trump they’ll reverse themselves pretty fucking quick.
The question is what does it take to do that.
" the President’s corrupt exercise of the powers of office"
Becoming the headline, sound bite description of this investigation over “no collusion” might have an impact on that.
If I had a clue on social media I’d be tweeting that section out and setting up bots and shit. That section of Mueller’s conclusions needs to come up every time the report does.
Everyone tattoo it on your fucking kids.
5 Likes
This is getting buried, but Trump’s lawyers got to preview the report:
If there was ever any doubt about Barr being Trump’s personal defense attorney, I hope it’s gone now.
14 Likes
True pretty much regardless of what he’s accused (or guilty) of, though. It’s the nature of US politics - it’s viewed as vindictive to prosecute a former president. But that’s only true on the federal level, at least in this case. On the state level, I think it’s quite likely we’ll be seeing some prosecutions, because of the unprecedented level of corruption and criminality in this administration. Some people realize that this can’t be allowed to go unchallenged if the country is to survive as a democracy.
5 Likes
Merciful heavens, it’s the Steve Martin defense.
5 Likes
Of course. (edit above)
I don’t think Trump is athletic enough for that.
I believe this to be true but there is only ONE way to test it. When or if Trump shoots someone in broad daylight on Fifth Avenue, we will know the answer.
1 Like
Oh thats a bit of bad design.
The conclusion that Congress may apply the obstruction laws to the president’s corrupt exercise of the powers of office accords with our constitutional system of checks and balances and the principle that no person is above the law.
Not that Congress will ever impeach, but damn that’s scathing.
3 Likes
Right. It’s pretty bad for Trump, but it’s just another thing on the “does it even matter” mountain. The Senate is never going to convict… and Democrats in the house should impeach but it might actually make things worse because it’s another Democrat “loss” for the president to goad about right in time for the election.
Would it be better to focus on trying to win the election? Is that even certain considering seemingly nothing has been done to avoid additional election interference?
1 Like
2 Likes
