Nah . . . he's doing the best he can with the hand he's been dealt. He's OK . . . .
NYT: Trump asked Comey to shut down Flynn investigation
- Thread starter UncleMark
- Start date
Nah . . . he's doing the best he can with the hand he's been dealt. He's OK . . . .
Gotta know when to hold 'em, and know when to fold 'em...
No. I was very critical of the way Holder and Obama cooked up prosecutorial discretion as a way to change the law. I even cited some ethics rules that Holder violated and suggested he should receive professional discipline.
Trump is a little different. Isn't bound by lawyer ethics like Holder was. Trump is exerting influence which apparently had no affect on Comey. This needs to play out a little, but on the surface it doesn't look good. The only defense is that Trump is a buffoon and doesn't know what he did was improper. He also doesn't know how to give himself plausible deniability--which is how these things usually work.
Thanks, but I don't need your sympathy. I'm not thrashing about either. If you are sad, that's okay. You seem to assume I am a Trump supporter or defender or something. I definitely am not, even though I find some things that Trump has done and is doing which are very good. Most of the time I am making fun of the exploding heads over nothingburgers about anything Trump does. That is a target rich environment you know.
If you have something to say directly to me I hope you feel confident enough to say it. I think I have established that I respond to most points made about my points.
Point of Anal Retentiveness:
Since impeachment is a political process, not a criminal one, there is no due process that Trump deserves. The concept simply isn't applicable.
However, as removing an elected official isn't small potatoes, no matter the reason, there is a somewhat analogous need: a need for deliberation and a high level of confidence that the action is only taken as a last resort. The difference is that this would not be an enforceable right held personally by Trump, but rather a political necessity to protect the integrity of our constitutional government and respect for the decision of voters.
https://lawfareblog.com/another-bom...s-trump-asking-comey-kill-flynn-investigation
A very comprehensive and measured discussion of obstruction of justice. the key point being at the very end:
A very comprehensive and measured discussion of obstruction of justice. the key point being at the very end:
The critical point is that impeachment for obstruction of justice is ultimately not just a legal question; it’s also a political question, albeit a political question highly inflected by the law and often discussed in the language of the law. The boundaries of the impeachable offense are not coextensive with the boundaries of the criminal law. There are things that are not criminal that are certainly impeachable, and there are crimes that are generally regarded as too trivial to trigger the Constitution’s standard in Article II § 4 of “Treason, Bribery, and other high Crimes and Misdemeanors.” The great constitutional scholar Charles Black, in an excellent volume entitled, Impeachment: A Handbook written during the Watergate era, describes this point in vivid detail.
So the real question boils down to this: Does the pattern of conduct that is emerging, in the view of a majority of the House of Representatives and a two-thirds majority of the Senate, constitute an obstruction of justice of a type that is grounds for impeachment and removal?
So the real question boils down to this: Does the pattern of conduct that is emerging, in the view of a majority of the House of Representatives and a two-thirds majority of the Senate, constitute an obstruction of justice of a type that is grounds for impeachment and removal?
Perhaps Mark is suggesting it would be refreshing if you were capable of discussing an ethical lapse by Trump without the need to force an analogy to a previous Democratic administration. Obama and Holder have no bearing on this. Why not just stick to the topic at hand?
What would occur should a president be diagnosed with a serious physical illness? (i.e. stroke) I believe we are long past that point, except this illness is a mental one. Congress can't afford to wait.
25th Amendment. But any mental defect Trump suffers from was clear for all to see before he was elected, so trying to take power from him on those grounds would be hard to justify. That would essentially be the cabinet telling the public, "We know what you need better than you do."
That would essentially be a palace coup. Might sound good, but it would require Pence and the Cabinet be all-in and 2/3rds of both Houses to concur. It would also end our system of government as we know it. The 25th was intended for use in the event of a stroke or some similar disability (see Wilson), not as a substitute for impeachment. The "mental disability" application would be true banana republic stuff. Or Stalinesque. Take your pick.
Yes he's not running again. Though doubt his political career is over for good. If he wants to run state wide in Utah, going after Trump could be beneficial. Trump was not very popular there for such a deep red state.
I think the "pattern of conduct" is a legitimate point. To take out a duly elected POTUS for conduct that is essentially a one-off would be a heavy political burden. The country deliberately elected a disrupter knowing there will be an element of buffoonery.
Fair point. I made some exceptions for unserious snarks like most of your posts.
His campaign committee recently registered various Chaffetz2028 domain names, too. He's not done. His big problem was trying to figure out how to make the oversight chair politically valuable in a GOP administration. It appears Trump's ineptitude has helped him resolve that dilemma.
We're thinking along the same lines. He could run for governor as a "principled Republican" who wouldn't bow to the apostate Trump.
I think Trump has been uniquely surprised to learn that the President doesn't just get to tell everybody what to do.
I remember John Y. BRown ran as a business outsider who wanted to reform government ere. He did a good job.
When Wallace Wilkinson tried it, everybody wound up in jail.
Politics is a bitch.
They will find out very quickly that combat isnt like what it is on PS2 or XBox.
They were ready if he lost the election, so I'm sure they will be plotting it now. This is going to be really ugly, no matter what.
Late night comedy can't even keep up with Trump. Colbert tonight starts with , "And in the latest news" and continues talking about yesterday's Trump leaks. Both it and the Daily Show had taped pieces on the leaks, and already it feels like old news. Whiplash.
I'd guess the vast majority of those are either bots, paid Russian trolls from a troll farm, or alt-right Internet troll keyboard warriors.
I've got to tell you I'm not comfortable with language telling posters the board would be better if they are dead. Don't stoop to that. You are better than that. And don't take his posts seriously. If you read the posts purely from a comedy perspective it's easy to laugh and ignore them.
dont think so. Ive been reading breitbart a lot recently + comments. They certainly aren't russian because the writing is too coherent. Mybigges fear is should trump be impeached he will call on his supporters to arrive armed at the whitehouse lawn. Don't kid yourself, a significant minority of the republican party idolizes trump.
well right now i much prefer that option to, the risk of having a mentally ill narcissist in command of the armed forces. The longer this drags on, the higher the likelihood trump does something catastrophic. Get the ugly stuff over with now.
yea i didn't want to get involved in that thread. Just telling you semi-privately since i cant pm.
There was a letter sent to Trump supporters yesterday that talked about being in the fight of their lives, etc. I'm sure that's normal language, but people have taken it and run with it, saying they are armed and ready to fight for their country, etc.
Similar threads
