More Shenanigans
Hopefully
I mean if suspending the election is the best way to flatten the curve, we gotta do it right?
Corrupt senile 73 year old vs corrupt senile 77 year old.
I'm so pumped.
If someone is a Bernie supporter, how are they not rioting in the streets right now?
I'm not a supporter but I am smart enough to see that he got absolutely fucked in 2016 and the left did him dry right in the ass again in 2020.
What's more likely - that what you wrote here is accurate
or
That the millions of people who think what you wrote here is true, who want to see the president out of office and have supported spending millions of taxpayer dollars/human hours of work trying to find evidence of this corruption and have failed are proof enough that while he's selfish, egotistical, and probably a crummy person, he's not actually all that corrupt?
---
I'm no bright shining fan of this or any other national leader, but your comment bears zero probability of accuracy. Does the guy have skeletons, sure, so did the last guy, so did this guy's opponent, etc. Is this guy any further corrupt than either of those two? No _evidence_ suggests it's true.
We're always being led by morons. Morons we hope make good decisions with the data presented to them. The fact that our country still shuffles along means they succeed more often than they don't.
The enemy is NOT the other political side, it is believing that the other political side is the enemy.
"He's not actually all that corrupt."
Sure, Boris.
He may be corrupt, but at least he's not a woman. That would make him totally unelectable.
Nikki Haley would get the Republican nomination without much trouble in '24. If she's running against a man would you vote for her just because of her plumbing?
I hope so, I think she'd do a hell of a job in the big chair.
March 23rd, 2020 at 12:16 PM ^
I wouldn't ever vote for Nikki Haley out of principle, but if I aligned with her policies, then absolutely.
A lot of Americans wouldn't, though.
compared to anyone else in Washington?
I'm not suggesting he's some paragon of morality, I'm suggesting that he is run-of-the-mill DC corrupt, not the walking pile of festering filth that short's "10 million" comment suggests.
I acknowledge that he's probably a selfish self-serving asshole. But then, I go in assuming that, and with regard to Washington, I'm right WAY more often than I'm wrong. On both sides. And no, neither side gets a "but they...". It's a shithole. The only way to reduce the shithole is to disperse the power so that no one shithead gets to wallow in their own crapulence so deeply that it screws up other people's lives too badly. Give more power to the 10th amendment, better, give more power to individual cities and counties, the same rules that work for LA or NYC suck festering donkey balls in rural CA or NY. But - a corrupt governor can do a lot less harm in the world than a corrupt POTUS can.
I might quibble a bit with your suggestion that people looking for evidence have failed.
I might also suggest that the enemy is the hypocrisy of politicians making different decisions based on very similar facts depending on how they are affected either politically or in this case financially.
I do however agree with your last statement.
ok, the people trying to convict have failed, and there's so many of them trying incredibly hard to do so, that I think that his actual "evil" is relatively tame. Despite that, yes, I assume he's self-serving, not against putting a nano-meter of distance between himself and illegal, and I would never seek an opportunity to sit and have a beer with him for any reason.
There are lots of enemies, and yours listed is a good one. Just so long as we all pause, understand that politics really is supposed to be about how to do the most good for our communities (even our national and (to an extent) global communities) - we may disagree on methods and precise directions, but I believe sincerely that (almost) all of our national leaders really do want the world to be a better place for everybody. And they're ok with getting a bigger piece of that pie for themselves along the way.
Trump’s peeing on your leg and you think it’s raining, his leadership is horrible which is why we’re having to suffer the consequences, he needs to go yesterday
In fact, he's insanely corrupt. No one had skeletons like this guy has, no one. Please, don't downplay it or excuse it.
There is plenty of evidence that he is corrupt: the Mueller Report is 448 pages of thorough investigation and measured analysis. It couldn't definitively establish that the campaign was coordinating with the Russians but it found they sure as hell were trying to. At one point his personal secretary sent a copy of his passport to Russian officials ahead of a meeting they were planning in Moscow (it ultimately never happened). Ultimately, Mueller determined the DOJ couldn't prosecute a sitting president despite finding 10 instances of obstruction.
Also check out the the emoluments cases and all the shady characters and foreign regimes that have come to patronize his hotel to curry favor with him. The Saudis have dumped hundreds of thousands of dollars into his DC hotel.
I agree - we should never consider the other side the enemy. But, please, we have to agree on the facts and we should hold all of our presidents to the highest standard, no matter the party.
"no one" I just don't buy that. I've seen no evidence to suggest his closet is any more -or less- of a skeleton-filled-warehouse than Obama, Clinton (either), or for that matter Nixon or Johnson or Kennedy. I don't care what your opinions are - I want actual, honest-to-goodness FACTS.
Corruption orbits to power, and there is nothing more powerful than the US Government, which makes insiders to that system more likely than outsiders to be rife with corruption. Lots of people outside of government, especially in big business circles can also be corrupt, and as stated, I'm willing to assume the guy thinks he plays by a different set of rules. I'm not willing to assume he's playing on a whole new level of self-aggrandizement than Bill/Hillary, JFK, Johnson, Grant (more his cabinet, less so himself), or Harding
These aren't opinions they are the honest-to-goodness facts you're looking for. The fact that the Saudis have spent tons of money at his hotel (that he refused to divest himself from - another fact) is not an opinion or something I made up. Same with the anecdote about Russia. Same with the Ukraine scandal. These are irrefutable facts and we need everyone to accept them.
He IS playing on another level of greed and corruption that the others did not. Nixon, Clinton and some others were pretty shady but none of them RAN A HOTEL DOWN THE STREET FROM THE WHITE HOUSE. None of them put their kids to work in the WH. None of them had millions go missing from their inauguration funds. None of them made the Secret Service spend money at their own properties around the world. SHit, Jimmy Carter gave up his damn peanut farm when he became president. We are in a new era of unabashed corruption.
Look at how inept, incompetent and corrupt his entire cabinet has been as well. There have been numerous resignations for rather appalling ethical scandals: Michael Flynn, Alex Acosta, Tom Price, Ryan Zinke, the list goes on. This is not normal - other administrations didn't experience this much turnover.
Wake up man, it's right there.
March 21st, 2020 at 11:07 AM ^
Nothing here but conjecture. There are congresspeople saying, "we're going to impeach the ...." and they did impeach him. There are millions of people like you who think he's the most corrupt man ever to sit in the white house. And yet ... despite all these people, despite several news organizations who'd love to get the biggest story since Watergate - nope, this would be far more than Watergate, this would be active corruption from the POTUS, not just stupid reactions to subordinate activities - despite all this ... failed investigations and a failed impeachment. Either he's actually smarter than everyone else (something I don't buy), or our country has ended (it hasn't), or ...
You're wrong.
Nothing else fits the facts.
Honestly, if you don't see the corruption here I have to believe you're deliberately not looking.
How is this conjecture? These are certifiable, undeniable facts. If you want links and sources I would be happy to provide them.
What do you think when you read some of those stories about his misconduct? Do you process it and analyze it or just ignore it? Like, do you think its OK for him to run a hotel down the street from the WH and receive money from shady foreign governments? Is it OK for him to make the Secret Service spend taxpayer money at his properties? Do you think that is acceptable behavior? Or do you just think all of it is not true?
(Actually -here is a little bit of conjecture for you: do you think it's OK for him to not release his tax returns? All those other scandal-plagued presidents with just as many skeletons in their closets did so. He is fighting tooth and nail to keep them under wraps, likely because he has very shady, possibly illegal business connections and/or he has not paid a dime in taxes in decades. Anyway, back to the facts...)
These were not failed investigations or a failed impeachment: 1) Mueller Report, 448 pages, read it. It found plenty of damning evidence that this guy and his cronies were trying to work with the Russians and that he obstructed the investigation to hide the extent of it. The team couldn't indict because of a DOJ policy that essentially protects a sitting president. 2) the impeachment was also chock-full of facts as well as testimony from nonpartisan career diplomats, intelligence agents and military officials.The only reason he wasn't removed was because the Senate Republicans were too scared to do anything about it.
You seem to think that just because the law hasn't held him accountable (yet) that he therefore is not corrupt. But there's a lot more to it than that.
There is one other possibility here: he's incredibly lucky (he is).
And you could be right : our country hasn't ended but it could be getting close. This kind of behavior puts it further at risk.
1. since you're a blind partisan I will add in that his opponent would have taken my personal cake for most corrupt person to ever sit in the chair had she won. There's no doubt in my mind that her actions deserve an honest and impartial inspection, and what the Mueller report did prove to me is that not one thing that happened re: her actions was honest or impartial.
2. I'm willing to believe everything you posted is to some more or less degree true. I'm not willing to believe they were actually indictable, or again - all the MILLIONS UPON MILLIONS of people who want him gone, including Ms. Tear-up-the-SOU herself - would have seen him out of office before now. I'm not a lawyer, I'm not interested in being a lawyer. I am willing to believe that the amount of vitriol against this president is enough to get him out of office if any tiny shred of real, genuine corruption comes up.
3. The impeachment was nothing but a political hack. You thinking that all but one Republican (and that one an open and clear Trump-hater) voting against the impeachment were "afraid" of moving forward is at best blind on your part, and at worst overt lying. Well, actually I don't know which is better and worse, I think lying to yourself is worse than lying to others. *shrug*. Could he be impeached for something else and deserve it? Sure, and if those facts convince me, I'll agree he should be removed. The facts that led to this impeachment were so pathetic and irrelevant that I would be ashamed if I'd voted in favor. IF they were true (not proven), and IF they really honestly represented corrupt (not really or honestly) then every governmental leader down to most city mayors of any city larger than 100 people should probably be impeached. Yawn.
4. He was not convicted, it was a failed impeachment. That's objective fact. Saying anything else is just flat stupid. I'd like to think better of you.
Yep, he is lucky. I've said - repeatedly - I assume he is corrupt, but only normal Washington corrupt, not indictable corrupt.
There were a lot of normal, every day people who could believe that the last president might decide to do "something" that would let him pull an FDR. That's disconcerting to me. What's more disconcerting is that you can't see the world from anyone's perspective but the left. I get why you don't like this president, but I promise you - promise you - he's just another guy behind the desk. When his time is done, he'll move on, and you can complain about the next person.
Ah, pivoting to his opponent - a convenient and typical dodge. But his opponent had nothing to do with any of his behavior (to tell you the truth I'm not a big fan, but I digress...). You assume she would be the most corrupt (a lot of people say this based on an assumption , but if you want to talk about failed investigations that didn't get anywhere she's got those in spades, just ask Trey Gowdy.). How did the Mueller report prove to you anything about her?
You've said that there's no evidence of his corruption but also assume he's pretty corrupt while not really considering the abundance of evidence to suggest that he is. But, you also think that he has little to no skeletons in the closet. It seems a little confusing and contradictory.
The House impeached him and he will go down in history as one of the few presidents to actually get impeached and the first to go on trial in the Senate- nothing will change that. Again read the transcripts, watch the testimony: the facts are pretty troubling. Plus, there were other documents and testimony that the WH blocked that never even saw the light of day. And you really think the Senate was fair in the way they conducted the trial? They didn't even call witnesses. They basically did a little show trial and banged the gavel. Of course they were afraid - if any of them voted yea he would unleash his wrath upon them. Look at how Mitt Romney was treated after he voted yes on only one count.
And with this AG, its unlikely any of this conduct will ever come under serious investigation.
I am critical of this president for good reasons but it's not because he's the president from the other party. I like to think I arrive at my conclusions based on facts and evidence. Maybe this is all smoke and mirrors or misunderstandings or media frenzy or something and in the future we'll find out I was wrong, in which case, I'll buy you a beer. But, until then, I want all of our presidents held to the highest standard and I don't think anyone has come close to this guy in his ethical problems. He wants you to think he's just another pol. But, I promise you he is much much worse.
March 22nd, 2020 at 11:58 AM ^
Wasn't a dodge, I just spent a few days hobby-time looking up presidential scandals and corruption during the 2016 campaign because I was (and am) worried about both of the candidates. At the time I worried we had two awful candidates. I like taking jabs at the opponent because I don't think the investigation there was in any way real or anything but a whitewash - and if we hold our presidents to the highest standards, we should hold our candidates to that office to equally high standards. I think the Mueller investigation was both real, biased in favor of indictment, and ultimately didn't give enough evidence to indict. You disagree, but ultimately, the courts decide this, not opinion.
I'll try to clarify. I think all of DC is a cesspool of corruption. I believe the current president is very willing to wallow in that corruption. I have not seen evidence of indictable corruption. So one can be corrupt and not be indictable, because the rules loopholes and/or the game lets certain amounts of low level "back-scratching" go on. You say that there's evidence. You've read reports and seen things. I believe you hold your convictions honestly. I believe that the amount of vitriol in this country is such that if indictable evidence existed, it would have long since come out and this president would have been gone a long time ago. That he is still working tells me that the evidence you're reading is overblown or there are things going on in the background we'll never know about.
I'm critical of all of DC. It saddens me that I can remember every moment when I've seen evidence of real leadership coming from our nation's capital, because I've been around for seven presidents, and one really should hope we'd have moments every year, not a handful over a lifetime.
Again - I'm perfectly willing to believe there's at least some truth to everything you believe. I'm not a lawyer, I haven't made any judgments on the evidence because I'm not qualified to tell you if the evidence should cause the president to be indicted. I do know that this president has plenty of enemies who would love to see him gone. That they've failed to accomplish this either means that his corruption does not rise to the level you seem to believe, or that he's so supremely good at avoiding his enemies it borders on unfathomable. I side with the more likely of those two thought processes.
"Ultimately, Mueller determined the DOJ couldn't prosecute a sitting president despite finding 10 instances of obstruction" . . . . This is wrong. Even these biased prosecutors said they couldn't make a determination whether obstruction of justice occurred. Mueller was specifically asked whether they reached that conclusion because of the OLC opinion that a sitting President can't be indicted and he said that was not the basis of their finding. When unbiased professionals reviewed the facts they concluded that there was insufficient evidence to indict.
Part of the reason he couldn't reach that conclusion was because of the obstruction that went on, specifically by Stone and Manafort (who had very real connections to Russians). Most legal scholars believe that any other person on Earth gets indicted in this situation - but there's one person who doesn't - the president. He didn't write a 448 page report saying 'yeah we couldn't find anything and there's nothing to see here.' And these were not 'biased prosecutors'- they were some of the best legal professionals in the DOJ, some of the best in the world.
The campaign said repeatedly that they had no contacts with any Russians, at all, ever. But the Mueller report details numerous meetings and communications with Russians, including a meeting at Trump Tower. The investigation had very specific things it was looking for but couldn't establish that the campaign had a deal with the Russians. But, as I pointed out - they were certainly trying to work with them. And ultimately, he left it up to Congress to determine if they should impeach or not, which they declined.
The prosecutors were partisan hacks who contributed exclusively to Democrats and interacted with the Clinton campaign. Congress did impeach Trump but the Senate refused to convict him.
First of all, they weren't prosecutors - this wasn't a criminal trial - they were FBI agents and lawyers and investigators in the DOJ. And how could they be biased when they were overly fair to the president and ultimately didn't prosecute/indict him? Shit, they let the guy take a goddamn take home test that his lawyers did for him (which still had plenty of inconsistencies). I guess these are the same deep state officials that had a nefarious conspiracy to keep him out of the White House by...letting him win the election? Yeah, makes sense.
The impeachment did not stem from the Russia investigation, remember. It came out of a totally different act of corruption- the Ukraine call in which he abused his power and the U.S.'s diplomatic relations with another country to try to get an investigation of his chief political rival. The facts were there - but there were too many weak, scared Republicans who decided to protect him (and their election chances) rather than administer justice.
March 20th, 2020 at 12:42 PM ^
END WELL, this will not
March 20th, 2020 at 12:48 PM ^
Yeah, I guess we aren't doing NO POLITICS! anymore... the virus has now officially destroyed everything I hold dear!
March 20th, 2020 at 12:52 PM ^
It's not exactly insider trading when everybody in the world can predict the stock market is about to tank, is it? I think they were stupid for selling, when it was about to bottom out and be the best market to buy in.
You must not have read it. They sold their shares in advance of the market tanking (and bought stocks that would benefit from a pandemic) right after they received classified briefings that the virus was worse than expected and while they are telling America that this was overblown and Trump had it very under control.
March 20th, 2020 at 12:53 PM ^
Somewhere, Justin Feagin is laughing#
#At the OP title
March 20th, 2020 at 12:55 PM ^
Husslin' husslin' GOP up to somethin' WOOO!
I'm assuming some democrats pulled this little stunt too. Hopefully everyone gets exposed. Trump loves himself some corruption (just look at the people who he's pardoned/had sentences commuted). So doubt these party dudes get anything but a slap on the wrist. Just write down their names today, so you don't in November.
Read the rest of the comments and saw Dems did the same, eh?
You need stop and tell yourself - out loud in the mirror - that you're a grown adult who believes the members of party X are corrupt, while the members of party Y - happens to be your party - are not.
It is just as bad to say that because there is some corruption in the system, I can do whatever the hell ai want. Or to say that because the other side has some corruption that excuses me from looking at the corruption on my side.
it seems logical that we should all be against corruption and that in minimizing that corruption we should start with the worst of it, regardless of party.
You should look into Harry Reid’s shenanigans! Self-dealing knows no party!
"Protect the swamp"
Rules are for thee, not for me.
All these "shelter-in-place" and "closing of non-essential business" edicts coming down over the last 24 hours. They never apply to government, of course, they ARE essential!
I also love how everyone stands right next to each other in their press conferences. Not exactly 6 feet apart.
All stunts like this do is increase the likelihood of some civil unrest in upcoming weeks.
Many government agencies are working from home, most of those still have some essential personnel coming in.
From a military perspective I can tell you most units are reduced staffing but still have to maintain a level of readiness (continued flight operations, etc). You can't shut the doors and completely stop for an indefinite period.
I don't care what party you're in, its BS that members of congress can use their position to basically insider trade, collection 'campaign contributions' from their favorite companies, accept foreign donations, etc. Too many people out to improve their pocketbooks rather than improve the country
When I was at Michigan, I spent a summer interning for my local Congressperson. I was shocked to learn that the two national parties require all representatives and senators to raise a huge amount of money and to spend a certain percentage (can't recall but it was significant) on fundraising efforts for the party.
They are literally assigned quotas like they're in sales orgs. It's absolutely insane. Washington's farewell address went right out the window pretty quick...
I've only recently ran into guillotine twitter, and it's something else alright. People freaking LOVE a guillotine.
I won't stand for shenanigans or tomfoolery. I always stand for urinals.
We need term limits. These people are supposed to serve the people, not themselves, no matter what their political leanings.
Term limits won't fix a damn thing.
It's a band aid (the kind that doesn't stick) to make up for a fat, lazy, slovenly, blissfully unaware, spoiled, electorate.
All term limits would do is ensure the people insider trading only have less than 8 years in DC instead of 20.
Just like Thomas Jefferson said. We are their bosses not the other way around.
But instead 90% of the people vote for what they see in 30 second spots on TV or pull the lever for their party.
Don’t say our senate doesn’t work across party lines to accomplish things!
If you think these are the only members of Congress doing this you are naive. I can come up with countless examples of insider trading, self-serving, and influence peddling. If you are a politician, there is a good chance you are corrupt. There is a reason why so many retire from Congress multimillionaires. It is sick and wrong and this stuff needs to be cracked down on.
Italy just had 627 deaths from covid-19 in the last 24 hours. In proportional terms, this is equivalent to 9/11 (3,000 deaths in the U.S.) for them. Unfortunately they will have many more 9/11 equivalents in the days/weeks to come.
One month ago, Italy had four (!) confirmed cases. Now this.
This is not the flu, folks. Take this seriously.