The Trump Investigation(s) Thread

[malchior]

He sounded like a reasonable person again, even charming (as far as a turtle can be charming of course). Why? He got exactly what he (and the real, behind the scene R leaders I suspect) wanted. That and more. Judges at the highest court, and down through the system.

He needs Dem help to pass laws now so he is playing the nice guy. And he still gets to appoint all the judges he wants without pause for 2 more years at least. Even if Flake causes him to miss a step or two (at max).

[El Guapo]

He sounded like a reasonable person again, even charming (as far as a turtle can be charming of course). Why? He got exactly what he (and the real, behind the scene R leaders I suspect) wanted. That and more. Judges at the highest court, and down through the system.

He needs Dem help to pass laws now so he is playing the nice guy. And he still gets to appoint all the judges he wants without pause for 2 more years at least. Even if Flake causes him to miss a step or two (at max).

He just wants a few "McConnell Calls For Bipartisanship" headlines ahead of the new Congress, so that he can then later sadly lament how said outreach was rejected by the radical leftists in the House.

[LordMortis]

Sot that he can unilaterally reject a "bipartisan" call to protect Mueller?

[malchior]

He sounded like a reasonable person again, even charming (as far as a turtle can be charming of course). Why? He got exactly what he (and the real, behind the scene R leaders I suspect) wanted. That and more. Judges at the highest court, and down through the system.

He needs Dem help to pass laws now so he is playing the nice guy. And he still gets to appoint all the judges he wants without pause for 2 more years at least. Even if Flake causes him to miss a step or two (at max).

He just wants a few "McConnell Calls For Bipartisanship" headlines ahead of the new Congress, so that he can then later sadly lament how said outreach was rejected by the radical leftists in the House.

That's definitely part of it too. Especially when some right-wing populist flotsam inevitably flops out of Trump's dumb fucking mouth. Then McConnell will pretend to move it along so he and Trump can bash the Dems for obstruction.

[LordMortis]

He sounded like a reasonable person again, even charming (as far as a turtle can be charming of course). Why? He got exactly what he (and the real, behind the scene R leaders I suspect) wanted. That and more. Judges at the highest court, and down through the system.

He needs Dem help to pass laws now so he is playing the nice guy. And he still gets to appoint all the judges he wants without pause for 2 more years at least. Even if Flake causes him to miss a step or two (at max).

He just wants a few "McConnell Calls For Bipartisanship" headlines ahead of the new Congress, so that he can then later sadly lament how said outreach was rejected by the radical leftists in the House.

That's definitely part of it too. Especially when some right-wing populist flotsam inevitably flops out of Trump's dumb fucking mouth. Then McConnell will pretend to move it along so he and Trump can bash the Dems for obstruction.

I can't speak for McConnells effect on perception but the people I have been forced to sit through believe the Democrats are unreasonably partisan without examining the GOP unified front. The salesmanship works on them.

[LawBeefaroni]

There has never been a better time to be alive, if your bucket list includes seeing textbook examples of psychological projection on a daily basis.

So absolutely true.

[LordMortis]

And there it is there is the "bipartisan" appeall that the worst American is rejecting so the Gaslighter in Chief can appeal to the Senate while we collectively wait for the House to change away from Nunez and his ilk while warning us what discontent means.

Twitter:

Universities will someday study what highly conflicted (and NOT Senate approved) Bob Mueller and his gang of Democrat thugs have done to destroy people. Why is he protecting Crooked Hillary, Comey, McCabe, Lisa Page & her lover, Peter S, and all of his friends on the other side?

His expression with Tucker Carlson's media outlet (I refuse to link to them)

These people, like the Antifa you’re talking about, the Antifa — they better hope that the opposition to Antifa decides not to mobilize. Because if they do, they’re much tougher. Much stronger. Potentially much more violent. And Antifa’s going to be in big trouble. But so far they haven’t done that, and that’s a good thing.

But they better hope that the other side doesn’t mobilize, you understand what I’m saying. Because if you look, the other side is the military, it’s the police, it’s a lot of very strong, a lot of very tough people. Tougher than them. And smarter than them. And they’re sitting back and watching and they’re getting angrier and angrier.

[YellowKing]

I'm still amazed that 40% of Americans think that "angry, deranged shouting on Twitter" is A-OK behavior for the President of the United States.

If my boss did that ONCE, much less multiple times a day, he'd be out the door.

[Holman]

Trump just pulled another Lester Holt interview, this time with The Daily Caller:

[LordMortis]

That is a line he must not cross. It will ruin my relationship with family and friends probably forever. While I'm impotent to do anything about his presidency my resistance becomes more active. I will end up terminating all communication with any one who deigns to support an openly criminal presidency demanding to be its own watchman for any reason. I really don't want to turn my back on family. My daily anxiety just went from 3 to 8 reading that.

[Sepiche]

I always love reading the first response from the interviewers after Drumpf goes off the rails and admits to criminal acts. It's always so short and abrupt, but filled with meaning and unspoken shock.

[Unagi]

I'm not sure I'm reading where he puts his foot in his mouth legally there.

[Unagi]

I mean, I totally get why we all know what he is saying and how it is what it is...

I just mean, this isn't as direct as the Lester Holt interview.

In this case... He just sorta starts trash-talking the investigation... which he does all the time.

[GreenGoo]

That is a line he must not cross. It will ruin my relationship with family and friends probably forever. While I'm impotent to do anything about his presidency my resistance becomes more active. I will end up terminating all communication with any one who deigns to support an openly criminal presidency demanding to be its own watchman for any reason. I really don't want to turn my back on family. My daily anxiety just went from 3 to 8 reading that.

I can't help you with drumpf. He's almost certainly going to try by the end, because he's busy chipping away at it and has been every time he opens his mouth.

That said, there is no reason to believe that your friends and family won't see reason when the time comes. So take heart.

[GreenGoo]

I'm not sure I'm reading where he puts his foot in his mouth legally there.

I didn't check out the entire interview, but the tweet above does nothing different than what he does every day, so I'm with you there.

[Unagi]

I know it won't happen... But it would be epic-hysterical if Whitaker ended up recusing himself from the Mueller investigation.

[GreenGoo]

I know it won't happen... But it would be epic-hysterical if Whitaker ended up recusing himself from the Mueller investigation.

I think the chance is low, but I don't think it's zero. And yes, that would be just the best thing ever. Prepare to be publicly smeared by the president of the USofA non-stop for the next 2 years, or until he replaces you, which would be soon.

Isn't he temporary anyway? The whole rant about senate confirmed from drumpf is because Whitaker is not, and drumpf doesn't understand where senate confirmed applies or doesn't apply. You're hitting him with a club, so the only think he can think of is using a club.

[YellowKing]

My understanding is that he is temporary, but can keep the position for something like 270 days. For Trump's purposes, that's plenty long enough.

[Pyperkub]

My understanding is that he is temporary, but can keep the position for something like 270 days. For Trump's purposes, that's plenty long enough.

Unless of course he is forced to recuse himself, which is quite possible given his Sam Clovis connection, as well as his previous statements.

If he doesn't recuse himself, I can also see a strong case to conceivably be made that he would be indicted for Obstruction of Justice down the road too.

I also expect a (very successful ) Go Fund Me if he tries to starve the investigation of money.

[Sepiche]

I mean, I totally get why we all know what he is saying and how it is what it is...

I just mean, this isn't as direct as the Lester Holt interview.

In this case... He just sorta starts trash-talking the investigation... which he does all the time.

Sure, it's not an cut and dry as the Holt interview, but when asked about who his permanent choice for AG is, he immediately launches unprompted into "The Russia investigation is a hoax". It shows that for all the BS being peddled by legions of Republican pundits, Russia was the first thing that popped into Drumpf's tiny brain when they mentioned the new AG.

Sorta like Sessions during his confirmation hearings... he was asked if anyone in the campaign had any inappropriate contacts with foreign powers, and Sessions immediately started babbling about not having any contact with the Russians.

When someone mentions something unprompted like that, it means they are inextricably linked in their mind.

[Holman]

I mean, I totally get why we all know what he is saying and how it is what it is...

I just mean, this isn't as direct as the Lester Holt interview.

In this case... He just sorta starts trash-talking the investigation... which he does all the time.

Nah, it's all right there.

INTERVIEWER: Are you considering Whitaker for the actual AG post, Mr. President Sir?

TRUMP: Whitaker is great! Everybody respects him! I never knew him before, though. And, you know, the Mueller investigation is totally illegal and never should have happened.

(The "I never knew him" line has come up a couple of times before now. It's Trump's line for denying that he ever talked to Whitaker about Mueller.)

[Unagi]

I mean, I totally get why we all know what he is saying and how it is what it is...

I just mean, this isn't as direct as the Lester Holt interview.

In this case... He just sorta starts trash-talking the investigation... which he does all the time.

Nah, it's all right there.

INTERVIEWER: Are you considering Whitaker for the actual AG post, Mr. President Sir?

TRUMP: Whitaker is great! Everybody respects him! I never knew him before, though. And, you know, the Mueller investigation is totally illegal and never should have happened.

(The "I never knew him" line has come up a couple of times before now. It's Trump's line for denying that he ever talked to Whitaker about Mueller.)

But you are totally paraphrasing - - and I didn't read in The Above interview him saying "I never knew him before" -- did I miss that, or ?? He actually said he "only knew him as he pertained to Jeff Sessions".... which is likely true. (him only knowing him as to how he pertained to Jeff Sessions is exactly the scope of Trump's brain). That is NOT the same as he previous quotes of saying he 'didn't know him'.

[GreenGoo]

What are we talking about? The words drumpf spoke or what we know he actually means by saying them?

He's weazelmouthed his way through some pretty heinous shit. This is no different.

Because we really don't need for him to say anything at all for us to know Whitaker is there to "do something" about the Mueller investigation. But he doesn't actually state that Whitaker is going to handle the Mueller thing for me, even though much can be inferred from his words.

[Holman]

I mean, I totally get why we all know what he is saying and how it is what it is...

I just mean, this isn't as direct as the Lester Holt interview.

In this case... He just sorta starts trash-talking the investigation... which he does all the time.

Nah, it's all right there.

INTERVIEWER: Are you considering Whitaker for the actual AG post, Mr. President Sir?

TRUMP: Whitaker is great! Everybody respects him! I never knew him before, though. And, you know, the Mueller investigation is totally illegal and never should have happened.

(The "I never knew him" line has come up a couple of times before now. It's Trump's line for denying that he ever talked to Whitaker about Mueller.)

But you are totally paraphrasing - - and I didn't read in The Above interview him saying "I never knew him before" -- did I miss that, or ?? He actually said he "only knew him as he pertained to Jeff Sessions".... which is likely true. (him only knowing him as to how he pertained to Jeff Sessions is exactly the scope of Trump's brain). That is NOT the same as he previous quotes of saying he 'didn't know him'.

Yes, I'm paraphrasing.

Earlier in the week, Trump claimed that he never spoke to Whitaker about Mueller and that he really never knew of him at all except in some connection with Jeff Sessions (b/c Whitaker was Sessions' aide). And I believe he repeated this again when asked again in another context. It was Trump's way of denying that he picked Whitaker for his frequent anti-Mueller appearances on Fox and of claiming that he never spoke to him about it.

So saying he "only knew him as he pertained to Jeff Sessions" here is just a shorthand reference to those earlier denials. And to go straight from that to declaring Mueller "illegal" is not a random leap.

[Unagi]

I'm just trying to keep a lid on my own excitement that Trump may have actually put himself in legal jeopardy. And as far as the Daily Caller interview.... that lid isn't having any trouble keeping shut. That's all I'm talking about.

[Daehawk]

Did the serial tweeter stick his foot in his mouth?

[LordMortis]

I wish I felt your excitement, where you see potential good. I see the Jenga piece that collapses the Great Experiment. I hope I'm fucked up over sensitive to this administration and Congress at this point and you are rightfully excited.

[Carpet_pissr]

I don't understand the "very good, 20 page decision" comment. What the hell is he rambling about, there?

[GreenGoo]

I don't understand the "very good, 20 page decision" comment. What the hell is he rambling about, there?

I literally have no effing clue and I'm too tired to care. It's probably not too hard to find out, but I ain't doing it.

[El Guapo]

I don't understand the "very good, 20 page decision" comment. What the hell is he rambling about, there?

I literally have no effing clue and I'm too tired to care. It's probably not too hard to find out, but I ain't doing it.

I read that as "he just obtained a favorable court opinion in a case that he argued / was involved in", especially since it's part of establishing that he's very qualified. Who knows the extent to which that's true.

[LordMortis]

I don't understand the "very good, 20 page decision" comment. What the hell is he rambling about, there?

That the investigation is illegal because the Senate. You know McConnell...

Nov 15, 2018 09:59:28 AM The only “Collusion” is that of the Democrats with Russia and many others. Why didn’t the FBI take the Server from the DNC? They still don’t have it. Check out how biased Facebook, Google and Twitter are in favor of the Democrats. That’s the real Collusion! [Twitter for iPhone]
Nov 15, 2018 09:49:28 AM Universities will someday study what highly conflicted (and NOT Senate approved) Bob Mueller and his gang of Democrat thugs have done to destroy people. Why is he protecting Crooked Hillary, Comey, McCabe, Lisa Page & her lover, Peter S, and all of his friends on the other side? [Twitter for iPhone]
Nov 15, 2018 07:32:03 AM ....care how many lives the ruin. These are Angry People, including the highly conflicted Bob Mueller, who worked for Obama for 8 years. They won’t even look at all of the bad acts and crimes on the other side. A TOTAL WITCH HUNT LIKE NO OTHER IN AMERICAN HISTORY! [Twitter for iPhone]
Nov 15, 2018 07:14:37 AM The inner workings of the Mueller investigation are a total mess. They have found no collusion and have gone absolutely nuts. They are screaming and shouting at people, horribly threatening them to come up with the answers they want. They are a disgrace to our Nation and don’t... [Twitter for iPhone]

highly conflicted (and NOT Senate approved) Bob Mueller and his gang of Democrat thugs have done to destroy people.

[YellowKing]

I thought it was referring to the recent DOJ decision that Whitaker's appointment was constitutional.

[LordMortis]

I thought it was referring to the recent DOJ decision that Whitaker's appointment was constitutional.

Oh god, thank you. After his tweet this morning, I didn't even put that together.

[Carpet_pissr]

I don't understand the "very good, 20 page decision" comment. What the hell is he rambling about, there?

I literally have no effing clue and I'm too tired to care. It's probably not too hard to find out, but I ain't doing it.

I hear ya. Been there for almost 2 years, now. It's not worth parsing anything he says deeply, really. Beyond just the macro, broad strokes of meaning that he has a real problem conveying, it's just BS anyway. VERY similar to my Mom, unfortunately. My siblings get so worked up trying to talk with her, and she plays them very well. Very manipulative, to say the least.

We will have groups chats in which my brother and sister get in a huge tizzy because she said this or that, or said something to one of us and something completely different to the other. I finally told them to just ignore most of what she says. Take the very top level stuff, and even with that, be wary of meaning or intent. All the rest is to be discarded (when discussing certain issues we are having with her) because it's either half truths or intentional deception or ambiguity.

She's not as bad as Trump (is ANYbody? Now that, i would believe, he is the "best" at), but I see a lot of similar patterns in their behavior when "cornered".

I think you mentioned it previously, GG, that it's just not worth poring through his words trying to find kernels of meaning, which is basically what the press has been trying to do since he took office. It astounds me that most outlets are STILL trying to show some kind of semblance of normalcy with this idiot, basically helping him by inferring meaning. "Well he SAID this, but we have a panel of experts that think he REALLY means this...let's dig into that assumed meaning further..." Crazy.

I would LOVE just once, in the morning, while listening to NPR (horribly guilty of doing what I just mentioned), that someone would just say "Trump tweeted more lies last night, this time...".

Or, "Trump was patently lying during a press conference in which he said..."

Or "As most everyone in the country knows by now, Trump lies more than he tells the truth, so we are discounting this latest comment as we have data to prove the opposite is true."

I mean, grow some balls, call his shit out for what it obviously is. I know, they're scared of being seen as even more partisan than they already have been accused, but it is TIRING. Some of the anchors are much worse than others. Giles Snyder is definitely one of the ones that acts as if the Emperor TOTALLY has all his ill-fitting clothes on.

[Carpet_pissr]

I thought it was referring to the recent DOJ decision that Whitaker's appointment was constitutional.

Ah, ok, I forgot about that. I'm sure that's it.

If he would use his big boy words and use complete sentences instead of the Palinesque verbal diarrhea technique, it would be so much easier.

[El Guapo]

I thought it was referring to the recent DOJ decision that Whitaker's appointment was constitutional.

I don't think so. That DOJ decision was over a week ago, before Trump named Whitaker as acting AG. I think the interview was just a couple days ago.

[malchior]

I thought it was referring to the recent DOJ decision that Whitaker's appointment was constitutional.

I don't think so. That DOJ decision was over a week ago, before Trump named Whitaker as acting AG. I think the interview was just a couple days ago.

It was written before he was appointed but only released yesterday. It is almost certainly what he was referring to.

DOJ releases 20-page memo in defense of Matt Whitaker’s appointment as acting attorney general

[GreenGoo]

I read that as "he just obtained a favorable court opinion in a case that he argued / was involved in", especially since it's part of establishing that he's very qualified. Who knows the extent to which that's true.

But...that would imply that both drumpf (ok, sure) and Conway (really?) believe that the number of pages in an opinion is an indicator of it's quality (or something?).

I...there's just no way.

Ok, read the rest of the thread.

Who wrote the memo? Does it matter? Actually I don't care. If the DOJ thinks he's good enough, great. The moment he starts burning Mueller, fun time begins.

[GreenGoo]

I think you mentioned it previously, GG, that it's just not worth poring through his words trying to find kernels of meaning, which is basically what the press has been trying to do since he took office. It astounds me that most outlets are STILL trying to show some kind of semblance of normalcy with this idiot, basically helping him by inferring meaning. "Well he SAID this, but we have a panel of experts that think he REALLY means this...let's dig into that assumed meaning further..." Crazy.

Your point is valid and applies to what I said, but that's not precisely what I was trying to say. In retrospect, they are basically the same thing, but what I was saying is that it's not worth trying to "disprove" his excuse about the weather/helicopter by looking at the weather, because literally any amount of rain is not enough rain to excuse his behaviour. Let the Foxes of the world talk about how many fractions of inches of rain fell that day and how that's significant. Focus on the fact that the President did not honor America's dead, with no other president, rain or shine, has been so easily deterred.

If you get into a Fox says "1 inch is enough to ground the helicopter" and everyone else says "only a 1/4 inch of rain fell, so the helicopter shouldn't have been grounded) the discussion becomes about the weather and/or the helicopter, not what a horrific president did to dishonor the dead by not doing what so many other presidents have done, Democrat AND Republican, some in worse weather.

But yes, going over his words with a fine toothed comb is not how you're going to take this guy down. In the past you could use a president's words to show the american people who they had as president. Enough people literally do not care what drumpf says that you can't do that with him. Trying is just wasted effort. I'm not saying don't report what he says. I'm saying report what he says, a short note on why it's a lie, then move onto something more productive.

When a kid does something wrong, you might spend time discussing his excuses and explaining why it's wrong and hopefully reasoning with him as well as punishment/reward motivation. By the 5th time you don't spend any time explaining anything to him. You just ignore his excuses and go straight to "No, because I said so" as he's obviously not listening to you anyway.

That's how I view reporting on drumpf's every word and searching it for meaning. We're long past that. Quote him. Call him a liar. Because short obvious bullet point reasons. Next.

[naednek]

I'm still amazed that 40% of Americans think that "angry, deranged shouting on Twitter" is A-OK behavior for the President of the United States.

If my boss did that ONCE, much less multiple times a day, he'd be out the door.

Just ask Elon Musk