Michael Cohen plea

[Belsnickel]

(08-23-2018, 09:20 AM)Bengalzona Wrote: Somewhere in Russia, Putin watches Trump on U.S. news reports, chuckles, nudges the bodyguard next to, and says the Russian equivalent of, "Can you believe this guy we found!".

The funny sad thing to me about all of this is they have been eyeing Trump for this since the '80s! It was known back then that they were supportive of him running, and now we're still arguing over whether they are supportive of him.

[Bengalzona]

(08-23-2018, 09:23 AM)Belsnickel Wrote: The funny sad thing to me about all of this is they have been eyeing Trump for this since the '80s! It was known back then that they were supportive of him running, and now we're still arguing over whether they are supportive of him.

Trump reminds me of the barfly at the bar who has had a few too many and is now going to tell you how he would run the country if he were in charge.

[GMDino]

The silence from leaders on the right is deafening.

Nothing from McConnell, Ryan, Pence.

And the first two have posted things on online and made statements on other things.

These are your leaders folks.  You must be so proud of their fortitude....to defend their seats and protest their party over everything else.

[*michaelsean*]

(08-23-2018, 09:38 AM)Bengalzona Wrote: Trump reminds me of the barfly at the bar who has had a few too many and is now going to tell you how he would run the country if he were in charge.

If someone would have listened to me 25 years ago we'd be in a lot better shape.  

[Benton]

(08-23-2018, 09:20 AM)Bengalzona Wrote: Somewhere in Russia, Putin watches Trump on U.S. news reports, chuckles, nudges the bodyguard next to, and says the Russian equivalent of, "Can you believe this guy we found!".

Trump is an example of why you don’t buy Russian made products. They only last half as long as the ones made by Americans.

[GMDino]

(08-23-2018, 09:52 AM)Benton Wrote: Trump is an example of why you don’t buy Russian made products. They only last half as long as the ones made by Americans.

Does that include products made with the backing of Russian Banks?

[jj22]

The "Law and Order" President (according to Trump and his supporters). Is now pushing against allowing prosecutors to cut deals.... Wonder why?

https://www.politico.com/story/2018/08/23/trump-michael-cohen-flipping-outlawed-794329

[*michaelsean*]

(08-23-2018, 10:54 AM)jj22 Wrote: The "Law and Order" President (according to Trump and his supporters). Is now pushing against allowing prosecutors to cut deals.... Wonder why?

https://www.politico.com/story/2018/08/23/trump-michael-cohen-flipping-outlawed-794329

Well it was only the main reason the mob was pretty much dismantled.  

[Sociopathicsteelerfan]

(08-23-2018, 09:23 AM)Belsnickel Wrote: The funny sad thing to me about all of this is they have been eyeing Trump for this since the '80s! It was known back then that they were supportive of him running, and now we're still arguing over whether they are supportive of him.

This I have never understood.  Of course Russia preferred Trump over Clinton.  If for no other reason than Putin loathes Hillary.  I don't care at all if a foreign power has a preference, I don't even care much if they express said preference.  Direct interference is something else, but even in that scenario the candidate who benefits doesn't have to be involved in the actions nor are they to blame for the actions.  I've said from the beginning, Russia helped Trump win but that doesn't mean Trump colluded with Russia to win.

[Au165]

(08-23-2018, 10:54 AM)jj22 Wrote: The "Law and Order" President (according to Trump and his supporters). Is now pushing against allowing prosecutors to cut deals.... Wonder why?

https://www.politico.com/story/2018/08/23/trump-michael-cohen-flipping-outlawed-794329

"He makes a better deal when he uses me. Like everybody else," Trump said. "In all fairness to him, most people are going to do that. And I have seen it many times. I have had many friends involved in this stuff. It's called flipping and it almost ought to be illegal."


So he has a lot of criminal friends...

[Dill]

(08-23-2018, 01:17 AM)Millhouse Wrote: Someone more racist than Trump?

Back when most every white person was racist except FDR's wife?  Might as well add that Washington and Jefferson were racist too--rather better presidents than Trump, though.

Not clear that FDR was "more racist" or just worried about keeping the Southern vote at times.  He condemned lynching, with implying there were bad people on "both sides" of the issue.

[*bfine32*]

(08-23-2018, 12:27 AM)Benton Wrote: Fear of losing guns and hatemongering over false religious persecution?

Yeah, no doubt if the GOP won, it was because of bad stuff

[Belsnickel]

(08-23-2018, 11:32 AM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: This I have never understood.  Of course Russia preferred Trump over Clinton.  If for no other reason than Putin loathes Hillary.  I don't care at all if a foreign power has a preference, I don't even care much if they express said preference.  Direct interference is something else, but even in that scenario the candidate who benefits doesn't have to be involved in the actions nor are they to blame for the actions.  I've said from the beginning, Russia helped Trump win but that doesn't mean Trump colluded with Russia to win.

I have yet to say definitively that there was collusion because I don't know. I'm not one that has been jumping the gun on that, especially on Trump himself. I just get baffled at the people who try to say Russia didn't prefer Trump, because there are plenty out there.

[hollodero]

(08-23-2018, 11:32 AM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: This I have never understood.  Of course Russia preferred Trump over Clinton.  If for no other reason than Putin loathes Hillary.  I don't care at all if a foreign power has a preference, I don't even care much if they express said preference.  Direct interference is something else, but even in that scenario the candidate who benefits doesn't have to be involved in the actions nor are they to blame for the actions.  I've said from the beginning, Russia helped Trump win but that doesn't mean Trump colluded with Russia to win.

That's fair.

It doesn't help though that Trump denies any influence on his behalf and calls media outlets that state the obvious the real enemy of the people.

Also, that Trump opooses the findings of his own intelligence agencies and asks the world to believe Putin's strong denial over them.

Also, that campaign members met with all kinds of shady or sanctioned Russians all the time, not just that one time in Trump Tower.

Also, that he doesn't stand up for American democracy against Putin.

Also, that there was a dossier alleging all kinds of ties that never was debunked at all, and in parts confirmed.

Also, that Trump lied all the time about his own (business + private) ties to Russia and Putin.

Also, that Congress had to force his hand regarding sanctions.

Also, that he always meets with Putin/Lawrow in relative secrecy.

Also, that Roger Stone had contacts with the responsible hacker and with wikileaks, who Trump referenced in length.

Also, that Deutsche Bank, famous for Russian money laundering operations, gave Trump money when no one else would.

Also, that Manafort obviously offered a Russian oligarch he owed money information about the Trump campaign, that he worked with for free despite having all kinds of financial trouble.

Also, that Putin obviously can make Trump make decisions like stopping joint troop exercises with Korea.

Also, that he calls the Russia investigation a witch hunt that needs to be stopped.

Also, that Papadopoulos bragged about having access to Russian hacked emails.


So... for me, the case against Trump consists of more than "Putin helped Trump, so obviously collusion". You're right, that probably was to be expected in any case. Was Trump really involved in Russian operations, that I don't know. His character isn't exculpatory though. 

[jj22]

And let's not forget someone worked with the Russians (Stone, who knew about the Russian hacks in June of 2016 and said they would come out in due time) to save Trump by releasing the Podesta emails less than 30 minutes after the Access Hollywood tape surfaced which should have ended his Candidacy but didn't because the supposedly pro Hillary media flipped to discuss Podesta email dump every day thereafter for the month of October - Nov 6th.

I have no doubt Trump colluded. The only question is did he know what he was doing was wrong? That's a fair question. But any "Pro America" "America Fist" Candidate wouldn't or shouldn't have been so reliant on a enemy state to help defeat a fellow American. So that's no excuse in my book given his "Pro America" stance.

[fredtoast]

(08-23-2018, 11:32 AM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote:   I've said from the beginning, Russia helped Trump win but that doesn't mean Trump colluded with Russia to win.

If Russia was going to interfere in the election they would have been sure to let Trump know all about it.  They would want favors in return.


I have never heard of a lobbyist that has given support to a candidate's attempt to get elected but kept it a secret from the candidate.  Anyone who goes to the trouble of influencing an election will want something in return.

[*michaelsean*]

(08-23-2018, 01:34 PM)fredtoast Wrote: If Russia was going to interfere in the election they would have been sure to let Trump know all about it.  They would want favors in return.


I have never heard of a lobbyist that has given support to a candidate's attempt to get elected but kept it a secret from the candidate.  Anyone who goes to the trouble of influencing an election will want something in return.

That's pretty much made up.  They prefer one over the other because they think he's better for them.  It doesn't have to be a direct quid pro quo for them to attempt to help him.  

[fredtoast]

(08-23-2018, 01:45 PM)michaelsean Wrote: That's pretty much made up. 

No it isn't.

I have never once heard of any person or organization who took major steps to help a candidate get elected without letting the candidate know about those steps.

People who go to the cost and/or trouble of influencing an election always want something in return.  So they are going to be 100% sure the candidate knows he is beholden to them for the help.

[hollodero]

(08-23-2018, 02:09 PM)fredtoast Wrote: No it isn't.

I have never once heard of any person or organization who took major steps to help a candidate get elected without letting the candidate know about those steps.

People who go to the cost and/or trouble of influencing an election always want something in return.  So they are going to be 100% sure the candidate knows he is beholden to them for the help.

I'm not so sure about that. With some candidates, having them in office and being corrosive there might be rewarding enough for Putin.

Brexit is an example. Russia wanted Brexit and supported the Brexit movement because of that. There was little to nothing to gain from these folks beyond Brexit.

[*PhilHos*]

(08-23-2018, 02:09 PM)fredtoast Wrote: No it isn't.

I have never once heard of any person or organization who took major steps to help a candidate get elected without letting the candidate know about those steps.

People who go to the cost and/or trouble of influencing an election always want something in return.  So they are going to be 100% sure the candidate knows he is beholden to them for the help.

You're forgetting that this presumes that someone like Trump would think he needed the Russians help to get elected. I'm fairly confident Trump thought he could win the presidency and win it doing it HIS way. Sure, he would take help where he could get it, but to think he thought he needed it to the point he needed to return the favor? I don't see it; not with Trump.