Trump

Hank001 · Post by **Hank001** » Thu, 12. Apr 18, 17:38

OMG! Thanks for that guy. That made my day!

Grim Lock · Post by **Grim Lock** » Thu, 12. Apr 18, 18:30

I respect that people mock Trump and laugh about him, but really, it's all just so disheartening, he's just a deranged clown in a circus thats'pretty much a freak-show anyway. Everyday one goes, surely it can't get any more embarrasing than it already is, but hey even before one can finish such a thought, Trump already tweeted some BS that makes you go dear god, this guy is capable of falling through the bottom of a bottomless pit.

And the people still on his side just plain baffle me, what do you tell your kids? Now that a fine example of a good American!, i hope you grow up to be like him!..?

felter · Post by **felter** » Fri, 13. Apr 18, 04:45

Trump wrote:Never said when an attack on Syria would take place. Could be very soon or not so soon at all! In any event, the United States, under my Administration, has done a great job of ridding the region of ISIS. Where is our “Thank you America?”

He is one arrogant son of a B****. In his tiny little mind he probably thinks he personally fought them. I don't see him thanking all of those who put their lives on the line to actually oppose and fight them. To me it is probably one of the worst things he has said.

Hank001 · Post by **Hank001** » Fri, 13. Apr 18, 09:36

There's a likely debate going on at the "Syria" thread. I'll cut and paste my posts from there since they are about DJT:

The "Social Club" option.

Trump calls Putin (Or vise-versa) on their prvate lines. Things are degenerating and they have to do some somerhing besides the usual posturing. The plan to depopulate the country's major cities isn't progressing fast enough and forcing Russia's allies to use measures that are getting too much attention. Russia cut covert supply of standard chem agents, Assad's troops start using easily obtainable substances like bulk clorine instead. Plus their Navies are not playing nice, but simply aren't getting the bigger picture. Trump and Putin work out some incident that will allow them both to look strong, save face and got back to business as usual. They both think there are bigger issues to worry about.

About Trump, Putin and the whole mess:

The "Social Club" option.

Trump calls Putin (Or vise-versa) on their prvate lines. Things are degenerating and they have to do some somerhing besides the usual posturing. The plan to depopulate the country's major cities isn't progressing fast enough and forcing Russia's allies to use measures that are getting too much attention. Russia cut covert supply of standard chem agents, Assad's troops start using easily obtainable substances like bulk clorine instead. Plus their Navies are not playing nice, but simply aren't getting the bigger picture. Trump and Putin work out some incident that will allow them both to look strong, save face and got back to business as usual. They both think there are bigger issues to worry about.

About Trump and his "Military Advisors";

From what I've been getting from friends in D.C. Trump doesn't "get advice". He tells people what he's going to do or what they are going to do, if they are lucky. Usually they have absolutely no clue until it's either an order on their desk, tweeted to the entire world, or after the general officers drag back from an "emergency meeting" with their asses handed to them if they dare obect to anything. One commented that Trump has a low opinion of the Pentigon because they "Dont know how the game is played." Meaning they want to play by the rulebook. The new rule is, what Trump says goes. So the Joint Chiefs aren't seeing that much of the inside of the White House unless Trump needs a photo op with them.

I wish I didn't end up being such a shoulder to cry on for friends, old co-workers, subordinates and superiors now that they are at an age where they should be reaching their pinnacles. I suppose now I was very fortunate to go through my "Puzzle Palace" tours in the days of Reagan and the first George Bush.

Those days are long gone it seems and now most of the comments are summed up in, "The lunitics have taken over the asylum." The bottom line? Nobody in at the top listens to ANYBODY exept Trump. Because Trump listens to NOBODY.

felter · Post by **felter** » Sat, 14. Apr 18, 21:21

Pretty quiet day, everyone must have been blown away with Syria bombing.

So it turns out that Cohen wasn't/isn't really a lawyer or so they are saying, as he only had one client/customer and never actually practice law, you can guess who this client was. This has got all of Trumps allies not to mention Trump extremely worried, as if Cohen is not regarded as being a lawyer there is no attorney client privilege. Now when the F.B.I. raided his office and other places they have seized potently 1 million files dating back some 30 years, it also turns out Cohen recorded conversation with his only client. Not just that Trump was told not to get in touch with Cohen so what did Trump do, he phoned him which has made matters even worse.

They are now saying that the Mueller case is peanuts compared to the F.B.I. case against his so called lawyer, that if anything is going to take Trump down, it's Cohen.

The Judge in the Cohen case is also pissed as Cohen's lawyers could not answer her questions because Cohen kept well away from the court when his case was being discussed. His lawyers have now been told that they have to turn up at 2pm Monday with Cohen in tow and they better answer her questions. More than a few are expecting Cohen to plead the fifth to a lot of those questions, which is not going to really help him or his client in any way.

I wouldn't like to be Trump right now, not that I ever have done. But it's not looking good for him or his future.

Hank001 · Post by **Hank001** » Sun, 15. Apr 18, 02:06

All this confirms my suspicions that Cohen was simply Trump's "fixer". What's the penalty for practicing law without a license? What happens to NDA's now? Too many questions left unanswered in this. How this shakes down is the question. Is it possible Trump might shoot him a blanket pardon and tell everyone to take a hike?

felter · Post by **felter** » Sun, 15. Apr 18, 02:40

OH he has a licence but he has not been using it and that's the problem. I found out some other thing since I posted, one of the things he has to show to the court on Monday is his client list and the work he has done as a lawyer. The main thing that he did that was pretty darn stupid and if he had been doing the job of a lawyer he would have known, was not to piss the judge off that is on his case. Like sitting outside the court smoking cigars and laughing with friends, while the case was up in front of the Judge with a lawyer who couldn't answer the questions she was asking, which is what he did. Seemingly she is a pretty well known judge that you don't want to piss off, so not a good way to start the case on his part. As I said maybe if he had been acting like a lawyer he would have known this. Also not so good for his client either.

pjknibbs · Post by **pjknibbs** » Sun, 15. Apr 18, 07:55

felter wrote:As I said maybe if he had been acting like a lawyer he would have known this. Also not so good for his client either.

There are different types of lawyer, not all of which actually spend any time in court before a judge. OK, you might say that it's common sense not to annoy a judge, but common sense is so far something that's been conspicuously lacking from most things associated with his Donald-ness.

Hank001 · Post by **Hank001** » Mon, 16. Apr 18, 15:46

With the former director of the Federal Bureau of Investigations "publushing" (a term for a tell all) his book some things I'd thought I'd gotten about the Trump White House are starting to get a bit of cobiration. Firstly the thought that he's operating as a Mafia Don..
(Now isn't THAT something the media is late with figuring out. So I'll claim it first. Calliing Trump "Mafia Don") The book hasn't hit e-media yet, I don't really need to read it to get the gist, but it releases on April 17th. I have on pre-order for my kindle. That Trump operates like a Mafioso isn't that strange. They run businesses with an utter loyalty to boss who has total control. I suppose Trump's only regret there is he can't get rid of "problems" in the same manner. Then there's my thought that Putin has something on Trump. Though I think that has to me a bit more than "golden showers" I had it right that Trump would hit Moscow like a kid in a candy store. So having my "crysyal ball" synced, I'll go out on a limb here. Trump's in that category that won't go down without trying his all to take ANYTHING and EVERYTHING down with him. That old "scorched earth" senario.
And I have the feeling I'm not alone in this opinion. So If and When, expect it to quick when they move in on him. VERY quick. I just hope and pray this happens BEFORE Trump figures it out. That would be a BAD THING.

Morkonan · Post by **Morkonan** » Mon, 16. Apr 18, 16:30

Hank001 wrote:...And I have the feeling I'm not alone in this opinion. So If and When, expect it to quick when they move in on him. VERY quick. I just hope and pray this happens BEFORE Trump figures it out. That would be a BAD THING.

He's still the President. It's not befitting of the office to storm the White House like they're taking down a crack dealer...

It's our prerogative to talk smack about our President. We can even revile him, throw poo at his picture, tell snarky jokes and make fun of his tiny, itsy-bitsy, really small, hands. BUT, our branches of government have to continue to uphold the dignity of the office, no matter what comes to pass.

Nixon wasn't run out of town on a mule. Congress had their way with Clinton, up to a point, without anyone throwing cuffs on him. Congresspersons can whine and scream, but when it comes down to "official suffs" decorum must be maintained. (All about the image of stability and control by the government.)

IMO, unless there is solid proof of direct and ongoing collusion with a foreign power, Trump will get a courtesy call and a request to "answer some questions." That's before the subpoena and search of his private quarters. (I don't know if they can actually search... places. It seems they'd need some intel chaperones or something. Wouldn't do to accidentally lay a folder on the Big Red Button or dump out all those pics of Roswell on the Oval Office floor.

)

Hank001 · Post by **Hank001** » Mon, 16. Apr 18, 16:51

All said under the past assumtions that the personage in office was as in the past, "chugging away on all cylinders",
"had all his marbles" and was "playing by the rules".
Mork what if, as I suspect, Trump's campain practices fell under the RICO act?
Is what we're looking at is a "continuing criminal enterprise?"
Now think of what this means? How do you as the FBI or Mueller's investigation proceed from there?
Can the FBI rush into the Oval Office with a supena?
No I hold no illusions of a coup-de-tat.
What I do forsee is the lesgislative and judicial branches
looking for avenues whereby this problem with the executive
can be resolved within a constitutional framework.
I do think that is happening and that they know they are walking on eggshells. Or walking through a minefield.
My and your right to scuff aside, what if... Ask yourself, is this guy what you'd call stable?

Morkonan · Post by **Morkonan** » Mon, 16. Apr 18, 17:07

Hank001 wrote:...Mork what if, as I suspect, Trump's campain practices fell under the RICO act?
Is what we're looking at is a "continuing criminal enterprise?"
Now think of what this means? How do you as the FBI or Mueller's investigation proceed from there?

RICO is a tool. It's not a specific crime, but a way to lump a lot of different people together, especially those who may have directed, but had no direct participation in, a crime. Even if Trump knew and directed the acts, second-hand, I don't think they would dare introduce RICO. It's just too dirty... And, what who would they use as the basis for that and what "crime" would Trump have directed someone else to commit? I think it's too far removed from what they would need. IF Trump was guilty of something, it has to be direct, unassailable and positive proof, not some RICO rigging. Anything else won't suffice and any RICO shenanigans, even if they would be applicable in another case, will get people hanged. The uproar would be a cry of "framing" and attempts to stretch whatever they did have to places where it shouldn't go. Mueller would probably be indicted by somebody and anything he had on the table that was legit would probably get flushed.

It's just too much and too easily used by others for political gain. It would be like adding gasoline to a fire. Even Trump opponents would likely speak out against it, since it would imply there is no evidence of crime being committed with a direct connection to Trump.

Can the FBI rush into the Oval Office with a supena?
No I hold no illusions of a coup-de-tat.
What I do forsee is the lesgislative and judicial branches
looking for avenues whereby this problem with the executive
can be resolved within a constitutional framework.
I do think that is happening and that they know they are walking on eggshells. Or walking through a minefield.
My and your right to scuff aside, what if... Ask yourself, is this guy what you'd call stable?

I think Trump is stable when he is in his own little world. He's off to Mara Lago, today. Retreating to his "comfort zone" perhaps. As long as he's in his own world, he's "stable." He's probably mentally stable outside of it, but not comfortable and certainly prone to emotional outbursts, especially when he feels threatened or insulted. Those things aren't in "his world" and he's just never had to deal with them on a level like this.

Stable? Mostly, sure. But, have him walk across a football field by himself, without anyone beside him, with people on the sidelines jeering and catcalling him and I'd place a bet on how far down that field he'd be able to go before he broke down.

Then again, I don't know the man. I could be completely wrong. But, the impression I have of him right now leads me to the above conclusions.

Hank001 · Post by **Hank001** » Mon, 16. Apr 18, 17:25

Good conclusions. A nice analogy with the football field too. It's the "high pillar" he's comfortable on and works to keep himself on. When something rocks that pillar? It's fight or flight. He's adept at fight and holds flight as weakness. The thought that his position is really standing at the same level as everyone else might not occur to him, or if it did would get rejected. With the powers of the Presidency jacking up that pillar then those that feel the need to rock it do so at their peril. So what happens if they have need to push him off that pillar? Hence my analogy of walking through a minefield.

Morkonan · Post by **Morkonan** » Mon, 16. Apr 18, 17:32

Hank001 wrote:... He's adept at fight and holds flight as weakness...

He just "advances in another direction"...

Never "flight." Never "retreat." It's always the other guy that runs away, never him. And, that's why he can now do it so easily. He just attacks in a different direction and wonders why everyone is still pointing at that "old objective." "Don't they know that's "fake news," now?"

Gaslight, change the subject, new objective, attack! If everyone follows him, even his enemies, he's happy. If people are still trying to fight that old battle he just left? Oh, well, they're just fake news, old news, "the battle has already been one, else why did I leave it?"

Hank001 · Post by **Hank001** » Mon, 16. Apr 18, 17:53

Well there is that. And as you said, baffled when our collective attention spans outdo his own.

felter · Post by **felter** » Mon, 16. Apr 18, 23:50

So Cohen is in court and admits to having 3 Clients in the past year. First of course is the master criminal (lol) Donald Trump. The second was a Republican fund raiser who admitted to paying a playboy bunny off he had got pregnant, to shut her up. And the third he refused to name, as the client wouldn't give him permission to be named but the judge eventually forced Cohen's lawyer to name them, turns out it was Hanity off of fox news. Here's the fun part, as soon as Hanity heard he was the third client he was denying it, saying he had talked to Cohen but had never used him as a lawyer. So either Hanity is telling lies which he never does (lol) or Cohen and his lawyers just committed perjury.

Rapier · Post by **Rapier** » Tue, 17. Apr 18, 00:21

Hannity first said he'd never retained Cohen as a lawyer or had him represent him - implication is he's not a client but in reality he still could be. Later he said he'd asked him legal questions and had asked for that to be attorney-client privilege (and suggested he may have given him 'ten bucks' to make that official). My understanding is, though it varies from state to state, you can be a 'client' of a lawyer if you ask for advice and they give it - no money has to change hands and nothing more need come of the conversation. The conversation (and any records of it) would be subject to A-C privilege*. Mostly what I've seen from the US legal twitter feed I follow is what I was thinking anyway - Hannity should just shut-up and get a lawyer! He does appear to be making things worse (legally) for himself and mostly the legal teams arguing for Cohen and Trump.

Also: Not just Hannity off of Fox News, but Hannity who went on a massive rant about the raid on Cohen's office etc. Legally, there's not much here, but in relation to journalistic integrity of Hannity and Fox News ... it's probably a good thing they didn't have much to start with!

* Except of course where you're commissioning a crime, which is how we got here in the first place.

Edit: corrected spellings of 'Hannity'.

felter · Post by **felter** » Tue, 17. Apr 18, 01:19

It's funny that as soon as you type or say anything, by the time you have finished the story has changed. It's not the never ending story, it''s the forever changing story.

RegisterMe · Post by **RegisterMe** » Tue, 17. Apr 18, 02:12

Hanity might be caught up in this? Oh that's just.... even more amusing

.

EDIT: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-43791164

Cohen sure has a lot of money to throw around off his own back for somebody who only represents 2(/3) clients, one of whom denies he's a client, and one of whom denies he had anything to do with a payment.

I want Michael Lewis to write the book.

felter · Post by **felter** » Tue, 17. Apr 18, 02:55

I don't blame Hanity not wanting to be recognised as he is a married man and all I have heard that Cohen does, is pay women off to keep them quiet about illicit affairs or unwanted pregnancies.

egosoft.com

egosoft.com

Trump