SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-49800181
(Note: emphasis in original.)
Why is this important?
Mr Trump's most ardent critics accuse him of using the powers of the presidency to bully Ukraine into digging up damaging information on a political rival, Democrat Joe Biden.
Meanwhile, Mr Trump and his supporters the former vice-president abused his power to pressure Ukraine to back away from a criminal investigation that could implicate his son, Hunter.
Mr Biden is the front-runner for the Democratic nomination to take on Mr Trump next year.
In other words, it is nothing less than the White House at stake.
[...] What happened to the whistleblower's complaint?
After receiving the [whistleblower] complaint, the inspector general informed Joseph Maguire, the acting director of national intelligence, and said the matter was "urgent". The intelligence community whistleblower law says the director has seven days to pass the complaint along to congressional intelligence committees.
That didn't happen.
Instead, Mr Maguire spoke to a lawyer who told him the issue was not "urgent", at least according to legal standards, according to [T]he New York Times.
As a result, Mr Maguire decided that the members of the congressional oversight committees did not need to see it.
On 9 September, the inspector general informed Congress about the complaint's existence, but not the details. Democrats in Congress have since clamoured for more information - including a transcript of Mr Trump's call - but the administration has refused to co-operate.
And that's where things currently stand.
[...] Did Mr Trump commit an impeachable offence?
The constitutional process for handling a president who committed illegal and-or unethical acts is impeachment by a majority of the House of Representatives and conviction and removal by a two-thirds majority of the US Senate.
The US constitution outlines the grounds for impeachment as "treason, bribery, or other high crimes and misdemeanors". When it comes down to it, an "impeachable offense" is whatever a majority of the House says it is.
Inspector General of the Intelligence Community Letters to Congressional Intelligence Committees
(Score: 5, Insightful) by ElizabethGreene on Tuesday September 24 2019, @03:51AM (44 children)
Here are the key points as I've read them.
1. Former Vice president Biden used his position to and influence to negotiate lucrative deals for his son with the Ukrainian government during his term. Subsequently he threatened to withhold loan guarantees to Ukraine if a prosecutor investigating those deals was not removed.
2. Current President Trump asked the now-leader of Ukraine to investigate both Hunter Biden specifically and that firing generally in a July 25th phone call.
3. A whistleblower has filed a complaint that the President offered some kind of deal to Ukraine as consideration for investigating the matter.
Opinion:
The first point, if true, is the kind of corruption Trump has been accused of since before the election.
I'm disinclined to believe it because Trump said it, but Mr. Biden is allegedly on the record taking credit for it [youtube.com].
The second point is true, according to the president. He acknowledges having the conversation, but denies offering any consideration in exchange for the investigation.
Editorializing:
(Warm up your flamethrowers, here it comes.)
I'm inclined to believe Trump.
Here's why. I was ready to break out the pitchforks and torches over the Mueller report. I believed there would be a smoking gun of corruption there, and I needed that to justify FISA warrants against his campaign. I expected to see prosecutions and people in handcuffs over it.
<crickets.mp3/>
How many scandals-that-turned-out-not-to-be does that make now?
From where I'm sitting it's starting to look like the last administration used the Justice department to spy on their political opponents during the election and then weaponized that infrastructure against President Trump after the election. All the while our media, our journalist bastions of truth, have played along as willing jesters.
The list of things that would get me to vote for Trump is pretty damn short, but it is getting close.
(Score: 3, Interesting) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday September 24 2019, @04:14AM (5 children)
> How many scandals-that-turned-out-not-to-be-prosecuted-for-political-reasons does that make now?
FTFY
(Score: 2, Insightful) by khallow on Tuesday September 24 2019, @02:44PM (4 children)
(Score: -1, Troll) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday September 24 2019, @03:40PM (3 children)
Cause yer an idiot who can't read and doesn't want to admit he helped elect a Russian mob patsy to the mother fucking WHITE HOUSE? Khallow I had a sliver of respect for you when you were sticking to the alt-right handbook and trying to maintain an image of intellectual rigor, but I guess the pressure of maintaining a house of cards just got to you.
(Score: 1) by khallow on Wednesday September 25 2019, @02:18AM (1 child)
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday September 26 2019, @12:22AM
Aww khallow is triggered by reality again.
(Score: 1) by khallow on Wednesday September 25 2019, @03:50AM
Even if we suppose you're not lying your ass off here, what is your sliver of respect really worth? Sounds like you're bankrupt. Look, I don't care that you don't like Trump. I think there are good reasons for disliking Trump. But making up fantasy crimes isn't one of those good reasons.
(Score: 4, Informative) by sigterm on Tuesday September 24 2019, @04:53AM (3 children)
A small addendum/correction:
>3. A whistleblower has filed a complaint that the President
>offered some kind of deal to Ukraine as consideration for
>investigating the matter.
According to more detailed articles in various newsmedia, the term "whistleblower" is actually incorrect as the person in question:
a) had no direct knowledge of the matter s/he was reporting, and
b) did not learn of the alleged issue in the course of performing his/her duties
So, basically, somebody heard an unsubstantiated rumour, which wasn't investigated because there was no evidence and no whistleblower.
Independent (left-wing, if that matters) commentator/journalist Tim Pool has made two videos on the subject, arguing convincingly that this "scandal" is completely fake news, with plenty of sources:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PSt7iXWsoMI [youtube.com] (Title: Democrats DEMAND Trump Impeachment Over Ukraine Scandal, Story BACKFIRES On Democrats Instead)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_hlIbuJxrGg [youtube.com] (Title: Trump May Release Ukraine Transcript Causing Theories About "4D Chess," Was The Goal To Smear Biden?)
(Score: 2) by Webweasel on Tuesday September 24 2019, @10:40AM
I like Tim, but he rambles too much.
If he scripted his videos out, got his thoughts down on paper first, his content would be a lot better.
Priyom.org Number stations, Russian Military radio. "You are a bad, bad man. Do you have any other virtues?"-Runaway1956
(Score: 3, Interesting) by ElizabethGreene on Tuesday September 24 2019, @02:16PM (1 child)
I had read that the whistleblower's assertions were hearsay, but lacked any confirmation. That's the damning thing. There isn't a news organization I trust to report the facts and not try to push a narrative.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday September 24 2019, @08:21PM
Strange, I heard that the rumors that the whistleblower's allegations were based on hearsay was itself hearsay. I have never even heard of a Category Five Presidential corruption case. Only twice in my lifetime. Alabama better batter down!
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday September 24 2019, @05:09AM
https://www.nytimes.com/2019/09/22/opinion/trump-ukraine-whistle-blower.html [nytimes.com]
(Score: 2) by hemocyanin on Tuesday September 24 2019, @05:25AM (11 children)
I didn't vote for Trump and but for the last three years of unmitigated hate spew from MSM and DNC, I would never have considered voting for him this upcoming election (I've voted 3d party in the last three elections now, once Libertarian and twice Green). The weirdest thing has happened though -- he's getting underdog status and that has raised the chance I vote for him from zero to something higher than zero. I'd vote for Gabbard in a heartbeat but if the DNC picks someone like Kamala the dirty prosecutor, I absolutely would vote for Trump without hesitation. The rest of the bunch, I'd probably just vote 3d party again. Oh, and whatsername -- the sort of new agey religious one -- I'd vote for her just for the laughs. She's a sort of Trump "FU" vote but from the other side.
(Score: 4, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday September 24 2019, @06:14AM (8 children)
Lololol
You freaks pushing anything supportive of that criminal is just weird to see. Like, are people really this dumb?
(Score: 3, Insightful) by hemocyanin on Tuesday September 24 2019, @08:17AM (7 children)
Remember this old joke?
A car salesman is showing off a new car with a voice activated radio. He says "country" and country music channel comes on. Then he says to the customer, "you try it". So she says "rock" and a classics station comes on. A short time later, someone cuts her off, and she says "ASSHOLE!" ... and Rush Limbaugh comes on.
The MSM, it's become 100% DNC Rush.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday September 24 2019, @03:36PM (6 children)
And? MSM sucks but that isn't an excuse for Trump. Try again, maybe try just seeing the simple facts instead of deflecting blame so you can continue your propagandized version of reality?
(Score: 5, Insightful) by hemocyanin on Tuesday September 24 2019, @06:29PM (5 children)
The issue is that MSM/DNC spews so much hate toward him, it becomes impossible to identify anything true. It has also become apparent that it doesn't matter what he does, it will be spun in a negative light. Literally everything. So at this point, when I see media/politicians going on about how awful Trump is, I just roll my eyes. You lot let your hate get ahead of your good sense, kind of like racists do when they fall for the KKK or some shit.
If you win, it will be a frightening lesson about the coming authoritocracy and so you just might find that people who have been life-long left leaning, or those that are freedom and peace inclined, are not at all excited at what the Democrats have become (some kind of weird pro-war, pro-corporate, pro-wallstreet, sanctimonious scold that calls itself progressive and is willing to resort to ANY dirty trick to get its way). I want no part of that.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday September 24 2019, @10:13PM (4 children)
Ah, Fox news apprentice, got it.
I see you are capable of independent thought, now TRY IT OUT! Seriously, your logic is that the MSM is too mean??? I thought MSM was full of shit and this not worth considering in any way? Hypocritical tribalism FTW!!!
(Score: 2) by hemocyanin on Tuesday September 24 2019, @11:44PM (3 children)
Not tribal -- I'm looking at what has been going on in the I5 corridor from Portland and northward, and it is clear to me that the Democrat types are engaging in economic warfare against anyone who dares express a contrary opinion. I don't see that happening on the GOP side. I don't see twitter mobs coming to destroy people's ability to make a living from the GOP side of the aisle -- I see it from the Democrat side only. That goes back to the reference I made earlier -- Democrats feel that they are 100% right all the time about all things and that anyone who opposes them are literal nazis. Literal nazis deserve death.
Maybe Democrats are more rational in other places of the country, I can't speak to that.
I'm not a republican either -- I'm pro-gay rights (lifelong), pro-abortion (lifelong), anti-imperialist wars (lifelong), pro-workers (lifelong), pro-freedom and privacy (BoR) (lifelong), pro-public healthcare. I'm an atheist, post-grad degree, jewish heritage, long time self-described lefty. I don't know what to call myself any more. The Democrats are going down a path of mob-based authoritarianism (metoo is a prime example), are unwilling to accept that other people can have different opinions and it doesn't make them "literal nazis". And yeah, if you go anywhere right wingers are, you'll hear "libtard" -- but it's an empty insult and nothing more. Make one wrong move with the Democrats, and you're a litteral nazi where it is fair game to assault you, economically destroy you, and I suspect in the near future, to literally kill you. Because Democrats have the moral high ground and everyone else should die. That's close to where we are at.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday September 25 2019, @12:20AM (2 children)
"Democrat types" and you share all the values ostensibly associated with Democrats, but here you are spreading FUD and victimhood without even a single reference. Waging economic warfare? Seriously bad projection you've got there. Or is that what you call boycotts?
HOW DARE THEY NOT SHOP WHERE I WANT??
Thanks for the FUD bub.
(Score: 2) by hemocyanin on Wednesday September 25 2019, @01:12AM (1 child)
I already linked to the recent Portland lynching of Ristretto Roasters: https://soylentnews.org/comments.pl?noupdate=1&sid=33767&page=1&cid=898261#commentwrap [soylentnews.org]
What is interesting is that they went after Nancy's spouse's business because of thoughts *Nancy* had, and did great damage. That's some woke feminism at work. /sarc
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday September 25 2019, @07:31PM
Ah, you're a nutter ok. Personally I file such stories under "crazies gotta crazy" like zealots who attack doctors and minorities. Go ahead, take the worst examples and apply them to everyone you don't like, it is the bigot's way!!
(Score: 2, Informative) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday September 24 2019, @08:35PM
I actually saw her at the courthouse in Downtown Sacramento. I don't remember the specifics of the conversation, but it was one of those fuck them hard until they pleabargain, they're all guilty of something conversations. Right out in the hallway in front of people awaiting jury selection or trials. Somebody had mentioned her status, but it wasn't until a few years later when I saw her wikipedia picture that I realized that is who it had been.
She got to congress the same way she rose the ranks of lawyerdom: By being a corrupt heartless asshole more concerned with her career than any of the values America is supposed to but doesn't actually stand for. Not unlike Trump, Biden, Obama, Clinton(s), etc all.
(Score: 1) by khallow on Wednesday September 25 2019, @03:59AM
(Score: 1, Troll) by jmichaelhudsondotnet on Tuesday September 24 2019, @08:48AM (3 children)
Interesting points, but voting for a fascist is always a bad idea. If both sides are so corrupt you can't hold your nose and vote, that is legitimate.
Why can't both sides be corrupt? Biden has a huge history of corruption and ruining the country, voting to get rid of glass steagal, voting for the 911 wars, I can't stand him and have never been able to. His even thinking he has leadership qualities outside of his looks is a real delusion.
Trump also believes his own lies, or rather I think believes nothing. I can't relate to him in any way, his mind is twisted and it shows, he can't complete sentences, he is incoherent unless he is reading from a script, just like Bush.
It's better to have a thousand sheep led by a wolf, than a thousand wolves led by sheep. The situation is bad, history books from the future would read pretty logically if this were the downfall of the entire country.
The founding fathers(sic) warned about 'entangling foreign alliances' and this is why, no one can get the facts straight 5000 miles away, full stop. The functioning of government should not be hinging on the word of a spy, that's not how any of this works.
Biden's connections to Ukraine and Trumps cajoling of a foreign leader to dig up things that will hurt him are BOTH conspiracies, they are BOTH crimes, they are BOTH covert actions we could not understand without either our own spy agencies or direct access to the data.
Like Biden, Mueller has a huge history of coverups and they look tied to israel. As soon as Trump moved the Jerusalem Embassy and said Israel can have a bunch of land it wanted for 50 years, scandal went away. Israel wants 4 more years and they are going to use every trick in the book to get this, becasue they don't care if america burns so long as they get more land. That's who we are dealing with and that is why Flint can't get water, a foreign country controls the american government primarily for their purposes.
The evidence that Trump is not just connected to the Russian and Jewish mafias, but in them, and not even as a boss, is mountaintous. Roy Cohn, the money laundering property sales, his pal epstein, the situation is bad. It's on the surface, it's treason, either the constitution goes or trump goes. You have to take your pick, and that is a bigger question than Biden.
You will also notice how this gives Biden a bunch of publicity on the same day he actually stopped being the front runner to warren, so from a media manipulation standpoint, this is actually going to help Biden, the perceived victim, and obviously the candidate that Trump and co would prefer because he is not intelligent and maybe more of a buffoon than trump. He would lose horrrribly, most democrats hate him and rightfully so.
Moral of the story, a country cannot be run by spies, cults and mafias or the country is just food for same. Any time you hear 17 'intelligence' agencies agree with 'curveball' or some such, you should grab your wallet and watch your ass.
And please help me change the definition of intelligence back to how it was. I'd like to write a browser plugin that rewrites the page every time the word spy is replaced with intelligence, this is the primary key of their tactic.
17 spies and another spy say Sadasam Hussein is RIGHT AROUND THE CORNER ABOUT TO KILL YOU
No one woulld believe that and it sounds stupid. We have to strike at the roots of how these people maintain their dominance and are turning our government into a mob that might get us all killed, and this is one of their key tactics. They want to make everything just rumor, no one has any facts, and sway the entire country based on pure wind.
I hope this sheds some light. The entire concept of having a civilian society and civilian government is being attacked, and it may be too late.
thesesystemsarefailing.net
(Score: 1, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday September 24 2019, @12:57PM (2 children)
Facist? So he’s rounding up all his political opponents and centralizing power? What? He’s cutting regulations and not arresting anyone, but we have a staffer who heard this rumor near the water cooler? Huh. You must be in your own reality...
(Score: 2) by DeathMonkey on Tuesday September 24 2019, @05:35PM
You're right, he's not arresting people. He's locking them up in concentration camps along the border while ignoring silly little due process things like arresting and charging them first.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday September 24 2019, @10:31PM
Yes, that is precisely what this article is about!!!
Sweet jesus your brains just switch right off when it comes to Trump huh?
(Score: 5, Informative) by All Your Lawn Are Belong To Us on Tuesday September 24 2019, @01:24PM (11 children)
Not flamethrower, I hope, but the way I see it:
1. Biden is a political rival. Any such requests for investigation should be handled through normal channels. It is not normal for a President to get into the details of a specific investigation. Even if the allegations are true (by the way, something alleged and not proven by any legal authority), is this affair really such a national priority that the President of the United States needs to make it a point in a call to the President of Ukraine? Is it really that serious? Or should Trump have not left that to the State Department to clearly communicate to both give himself arm's length separation on a political rival and the appropriate use of influence to what the problem is?
1A. What did Biden do that was unlawful? Unethical, yes if it actually happened that way. But unlawful?
2. Trump benefits politically directly from any positive fruits such an investigation entails and loses nothing if nothing comes of it. It takes no brainpower at all to realize that Trump benefits from this as surely as he does when he himself, government workers, or the G8 would stay at a resort he has failed to divest himself of.
3. Trump therefore used the Presidency to benefit himself politically. Not the country. Not his children. Himself. That's impeachable even if this was the first time he's used the Presidency for himself and not the country - but it isn't. This, all by itself, goes well past what they had on Nixon.
As to the Mueller report: What Mueller hinted at, in the broadest terms possible, is that Trump did in fact obstruct the investigation of himself and thus obstructed justice. Regardless of his guilt or innocence on the issue at hand, he willingly did what he could to quash that investigation. Only Mueller felt that he could not prosecute a sitting President for that. Why? Because that's why we have impeachment.
And lest we forget: 8 Americans, 25 Russians (including 12 intelligence officers), three Russian companies, and two others have been charged with various crimes as a result of Mueller. (and if this number is wrong please correct - I didn't fact check the site I got those from). But this includes guilty pleas from his campaign manager, his campaign manager's chief aide, and his personal lawyer. Those are the sorts of people Trump surrounds himself with and feels like they should take care of his political and personal affairs. And the story did indeed involve Ukraine and people connected to Trump previously (Gates). And the Presidency is actually far more about the people he gets to do the jobs than himself, only we've been quite effectively blinded to that. What do his personnel choices say about him as a manager? (And we haven't even gotten to asking that in the case of Omarosa Manigault Newman...)
Trump has literally said that even though he isn't guilty of taking foreign political help to become President, *he would do so anyway*, and believes that is legal. It is exactly equivalent to saying, "I didn't murder anyone but if I pulled out a gun and did it that would be OK anyway." That is virually a paraphrase of something Trump actually said, as well. And this is the person who is OK to judge if his own actions are corrupt? Really?
I do agree with you that I would rather not see Biden as President. I do not want a gun-grabber as President. But it's still not enough to dissuade me from, "Anyone But Trump." Just my .02.
This sig for rent.
(Score: 3, Interesting) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday September 24 2019, @01:52PM (10 children)
Gun grabber? You make very good and reasoned arguments and statements and you end with "gun grabber"? Under what makeup of the Government can you make any reasonable argument that any guns are going to be grabbed? You'd need a democrat in the whitehouse, and well over 60 democrats in the senate, and even then, you'd need 60 far liberal democrats at that as a bluedog democrat would never support a position like that. So let's say that SOMEHOW all of that happens (because that democrat president would have had to win a general election on a "gun grabbing" platform, which would never happen), the NRA has spent decades redefining the second amendment to be about personal ownership of firearms, so anything that a president and/or congress ever passed to "grab guns" would never pass the courts anyway.
It astounds me how people so easily get scared into the "THEY'RE COMING FOR YOUR GUNS!" histrionics that LaPierre has been spouting for decades. That chicken little routine still scares people and I can't understand why.
(Score: 2, Insightful) by khallow on Tuesday September 24 2019, @02:56PM (7 children)
History is a good guide here. It's not like we don't have half a century of bad gun control law, some backed by Biden, to look at.
Just because someone hasn't been able to crack down on a right, doesn't mean you shouldn't be concerned about their capabilities in the future, particularly, if they're running for US President which greatly increases their ability to do such crackdowns.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday September 24 2019, @04:11PM (6 children)
But that's the problem, ever since the NRA turned itself into a congressional lobbying corporation they (LaPierre specifically) cry the same "they're coming for you!!!!!" because it seems to be a good fund raiser. History is a great guide and it tells you that it never happens, so if you want to go with history, look there, not to the shrill cries. The blood is never even cleaned up after a mass shooting and they're out with "they're going to use this as an excuse to TAKE YOUR GUNS AWAY!" and there's a run on assault weapons, in particular. When their membership drops, "they're coming for your guns!" When they need to purchase a $6M house, "they're going to kick in your doors and take your guns!"
(Score: 3, Insightful) by hemocyanin on Tuesday September 24 2019, @07:43PM (4 children)
They are coming for them. Right now the idea is Red Flag laws -- laws which turn due process on its ear and require people to prove before elected judges that they aren't a danger after someone with an axe to grind rats them out. Good fucking luck. It's pretty crazy how Democrats are willing gut the 1A (*), 4A, 5A, 6A, and 8A at least, just to wage a culture war.
And yeah, blah blah blah, 40k dead (2/3 suicides though) and no useful purpose right? Well potable alcohol kills 88k per year and lets be honest, it has no useful purpose at all. It might be fun (like guns), but it can't hunt nor can it defend you (Obama's CDC research found hundreds of thousands to millions of defensive gun uses per year (most involve no shooting)). They're all calling for alcohol prohibition right (**)? Of course not, alcohol is part of their culture so its safe, despite being far more dangerous and deadly than guns are, and despite the fact that there is no constitutional right to drink (just mere silence on the topic).
https://www.cdc.gov/alcohol/fact-sheets/alcohol-use.htm [cdc.gov]
* file sharing
** Because that never had worse unintended consequences now did it? /sarc
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday September 25 2019, @12:22AM (3 children)
I guess you need a reminder that Trump literally said to take their guns and worry about due process later. You idiots prop up the very nightmare you lose sleep over.
Sorry, shouldn't call you idiots. Informationally challenged.
(Score: 2) by hemocyanin on Wednesday September 25 2019, @01:23AM (2 children)
You seem under the misimpression I like Trump. I do feel sympathy for him based on the unrelenting unprecedented level of hate spewed at him by the media, but let us not forget, he was originally a NY Democrat. It is thus unsurprising he has a warped view of the 2A or 5A.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday September 25 2019, @07:33PM (1 child)
You spew propaganda and try to mitigate. Trump is a criminal and a traitor, so having any sympathy for him makes you not look good to put it mildly. Sorry reality has you so turned around, drop your political filters and wake up.
(Score: 2) by hemocyanin on Thursday September 26 2019, @07:08PM
The problem with Dems today is that they can't respect honest differences of opinion. When you treat everyone with derision, and browbeat or bully to get your way, you remove the only peaceful means of resolving differences available to us (compromise) and set us up for more than a war of words in the future. Terribly short sighted.
(Score: 1) by khallow on Wednesday September 25 2019, @03:18AM
A great counterexample to that was the Washington, DC ban on handguns from 1975 or 1976 which was one of the crises that created the present political focus of the NRA.
(Score: 3, Insightful) by All Your Lawn Are Belong To Us on Tuesday September 24 2019, @05:31PM
Is Beto O'Rourke still a running candidate for President? [huffpost.com] Then there you are.
Until the last three years I would have soundly agreed with you that it was all Chicken Little. And I really do not object to some of the ideas suggested as common sense measures to address gun violence, just as there are some that I don't feel are common sense or would solve it (but that is a debate for another day). I thought the previous "assault weapons ban" came dangerously close to that. But for things to reach a point where a viable Presidential candidate is openly advocating confiscation or mandatory buyback? Well, the epithet is deserved and every candidate can declare themselves to which side they now stand on because one has certainly drawn his line in the sand. I don't worry about what's happening next November nearly as much as where we will be five years from now.
But I could be wrong.
This sig for rent.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday September 27 2019, @05:10PM
That's some crazy-ass logic there. I don't believe that Biden is actually a gun-grabber, but if he was it doesn't matter what the makeup of the government is, he would still be a gun-grabber. The makeup of the government would only affect his ability to actually grab guns, and as anyone with more brain cells than you have would know, that can easily change in a 4 year term.
(Score: 5, Informative) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday September 24 2019, @01:57PM (4 children)
Do you actually know what's in the Mueller report? It's blatantly in the report that the president obstructed justice, both by having people in the administration refuse testify as well as offering prosecution immunity and other support to those who didn't cave. He fired people (on the week before their retirement age) and did everything he could to stop the thing.
There is a reason the report explicitly said that it was not in its mandate, and it did not have the authority, to prosecute the president. It's the exact same thing as saying to the police, "Well, Joe is my friend, so I'm not going to tell you that his cocaine is in his dresser under his socks."
As for the other non-scandals, are you actually observing things with your own eyes? I don't want to rant because that turns everybody off, but between China fashion deals, the travel-ban on Muslim countries which somehow doesn't include those he has a hotel in, sharing classified intelligence with foreign leaders, and so many other things, do you really think this is all just fake-news? Compare the credibility of the sources when you think about that, and how many times Trump has just "pulled out a Sharpie and edited the map."
As for why their are crickets... that's on politics and the Democrats preferring to try to win the next election. (Which is not unlike the Republicans preferring to win an election over stopping Trump... unfortunately.)
(Score: 1, Informative) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday September 24 2019, @03:54PM (3 children)
Not only that, ElzabethGreene has conveniently forgotten or ignored the fact that there actually are people prosecuted and serving jail time over these matters. And I'm sure there are more prosecutions to come. I wonder why she forgot about those?
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday September 24 2019, @10:15PM (2 children)
That user is just another sock puppet. It would be hilarious to find out who was running these crazy accounts, but respect for privacy > lulz. Just the name! Probably a combo of taking Warren's 1st name and the "green" movement, but that is just amusing speculation.
(Score: 2) by ElizabethGreene on Wednesday September 25 2019, @02:45AM (1 child)
The irony of anonymous suggesting I am a sock puppet is not lost on me.
Coward.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday September 25 2019, @07:36PM
Supporter of evil :P
Called out by one of Satan's minions! How ever will my ego recover?