Trump 2019 - There are still children in detention separated from their parents

[Jinsai]

The Civil War is an extreme example (not fighting over slavery this time, but the concept of fighting over very different ideologies) but somewhere between where we are now and that. it truly can get that bad, especially if he's re-elected and keeps his shit up.

I am still incapable of realistically fathoming the Mad Max dystopia situation we will confront if he is re-elected and given a mandate... we’ll just cross that bridge when we write some “Man in the High Castle” revisionist “what if” fiction, because it’s just. Can’t. Happen.

it mustn’t.

[allegro]

Now, see, this looks to me just like Watergate.

That moment when the Republicans stopped covering for the President and demanded the tapes.

Then it all changed.

This is that Watergate moment.

They’d covered him after the break-in, after the Pentagon Papers vindictiveness, but they couldn’t cover him when news of recordings came out and Nixon refused to release them (then erased some of them).

[allegro]

Here’s a REALLY good article about what really happened re Biden and the Ukraine sacked prosecutor:

Reporters Should Stop Helping Donald Trump Spread Lies About Joe Biden and Ukraine


Here’s another in-depth investigation showing the Trump / Republican allegations aren’t true.

Joe Biden is actually looking like a foreign policy HERO in this deal.

[allegro]

News is that Trump tried to cut a deal with Nancy Pelosi this morning in a phone call.

https://www.businessinsider.com/trum...eclined-2019-9

[Mantra]

Now, see, this looks to me just like Watergate.

That moment when the Republicans stopped covering for the President and demanded the tapes.

Then it all changed.

This is that Watergate moment.

But why? Why now? They've supported Trump through everything else. This fucking Ukraine thing is the straw that broke the camel's back? Really? So fucking Mitch McConnel read about the Ukraine call and was like "Okay now THAT is where I draw the line!"???? This is a guy who's perfectly fine with gerrymandering and blatant voter suppression. Mitch McConnell is Realpolitik cynicism incarnate. Now we're supposed to believe he actually cares about Trump pressuring Ukraine for dirt on Biden?

I just don't get it.

[allegro]

Seriously?

Okay with Russia, Trump was dismissed as inexperienced and he thought Russians giving him dirt was “opposition research” so they chalked off some of it as newb shit and they were getting what they wanted with tax cuts, judges, etc.

But THIS is the very definition of “abuse of power.”

Using funds that were appropriated by Congress as aid in the defense against corruption in Ukraine are used BY the President and his private attorney to shake down the new head of a foreign government to press him - NINE TIMES - to provide dirt on a political opponent or Trump will not release the funds. THEN, Trump gives the Ukraine President $140 million EXTRA dollars, totally unexpected. Like “wink wink nudge nudge.”


This, after Trump had been DIRECTLY WARNED by intelligence that this was illegal. And Trump said - ON TELEVISION - that HIS OWN INTELLIGENCE DEPARTMENT WAS “WRONG.”

Thereby ignoring rules and laws, and being ABOVE THE LAW.

Giuliani and Trump were asked on TV why they did not go to the FBI or CIA with any suspicion of Biden misconduct; they both answered that they DIDN’T TRUST INTELLIGENCE.

Even these Republicans aren’t willing to throw the whole fucking Constitution out in favor of a guy and his attorney going rogue and running things by themselves without intelligence or Congress OR LAWS.

This says: If Trump is doing THIS, wtf ELSE is he doing?

Because we are approaching an election and it’s not going to stop and it’s never just one thing with Trump.

[Mantra]

Okay with Russia, Trump was dismissed as inexperienced and he thought Russians giving him dirt was “opposition research” so they chalked off some of it as newb shit and they were getting what they wanted with tax cuts, judges, etc.

Okay, see, I just don't understand why they wouldn't just apply this exact same logic to the Ukraine shit. Their entire philosophy throughout this whole thing has basically been "Yeah Trump's a crook, but he's OUR crook and he let's us get what we want, so just look the other way. Anyway, we're crooks too, so who cares." What's changed?

Why turn on him now and risk fucking up the election?

I just...I refuse to believe these people actually have a sense of ethics and principles. No way. There's a few earnest Republicans here and there, but not people like Mitch McConnell. That dude and his types are cynical strategists to their very core. There's no way they would risk their political power in the name of the law or the constitution or anything else. After three years of helplessly watching Trump and his congressional enablers, my mind just cannot accept that idea.

[allegro]

Okay, see, I just don't understand why they wouldn't just apply this exact same logic to the Ukraine shit. Their entire philosophy throughout this whole thing has basically been "Yeah Trump's a crook, but he's OUR crook and he let's us get what we want, so just look the other way. Anyway, we're crooks too, so who cares." What's changed?

Why turn on him now and risk fucking up the election?

I just...I refuse to believe these people actually have a sense of ethics and principles. No way. There's a few earnest Republicans here and there, but not people like Mitch McConnell. That dude and his types are cynical strategists to their very core. There's no way they would risk their political power in the name of the law or the constitution or anything else. After three years of helplessly watching Trump and his congressional enablers, my mind just cannot accept that idea.

No no I’m not saying it’s totally their ethics, but also their constituents’ expectations. There’s PRECEDENT. If THIS GUY does this ... shakes down foreign leaders for shit he wants using his own lawyer and his position of power ... and they don’t do anything, then they have ZERO say if or when a DEMOCRATIC President does it. It’s in plain view, the President has ADMITTED IT, his attorney has admitted it. There were no direct dots between Trump and Russia. With this, there are admissions of guilt on national television, the Ukraine President has confirmed it, and we have a whistleblower report that is implied could be EVEN WORSE THAN THIS! Precedent. They have been DENYING that Trump had ANYTHING to do with Russian interference, or benefitted from it. They deny that Trump obstructed. They simply CANNOT deny any of this, because Trump has been brazenly admitting it and claiming it’s okay. And now there is this Inspector General report.

[allegro]

LOL LOL

!

[allegro]

It’s important to remember that Nixon WASN’T impeached. He resigned before it happened. So I’ve seen one impeachment in my lifetime: Bill Clinton. But he wasn’t removed from office. It was still really weird.

[Mantra]

No no I’m not saying it’s totally their ethics, but also their constituents’ expectations.

Yeah but I don't think their constituents are gonna be too happy with them turning against Trump (if that's what this really is). Trump voters are a cult. They don't care about precedent, they care about clan loyalty. They like Mitch and any other Republican as long as they support their Daddy. They've always responded quite viciously towards any Republican who dared go against Trump. Anti-Trump Republicans have almost no base or movement behind them. Trump IS the Republican party. If congressional Republicans actually turned on Trump, there would be widespread rage and disillusionment among their voter base. There's no way this wouldn't completely fuck up the election for them.

They have been DENYING that Trump had ANYTHING to do with Russian interference, or benefitted from it. They deny that Trump obstructed.

They simply CANNOT deny any of this, because Trump has been brazenly admitting it and claiming it’s okay.

Yeah but Trump brazenly admitted things before. I mean he was on TV saying that "Russia if you're listening" shit and they still just denied it. They have no problem just blatantly denying objective facts of reality. They could just do like they always do and say "Nope, he's good, everything's fine here, fake news, move along."

I don't know, I just feel like there's something else going on.

[allegro]

Saying “Russia if you’re listening, give me Hillary’s deleted emails” (which never happened) isn’t this. The Mueller Report had insufficient evidence of conspiracy. There were 10 counts of obstruction, but it’s hard to prove obstruction. Trump’s base is 38%. Republicans aren’t solely afraid to go against Trump because of voters. They’ve been afraid to go against Trump because of Trump REVENGE. Have you seen how many Republicans are retiring / dropping out? I can only say that we saw the same thing happen with Nixon. It’s politics. Once there was real evidence against him, they started jumping ship. There’s a saying in Washington: If you want loyalty, get a dog.

[thelastdisciple]

[ltrandazzo]

The GOP's forthcoming actions around this will be based on poll numbers and constituent temperature. So far, they've sat on their hands and done nothing because while Trump polls horribly, Trumpism is thriving in many of their districts and states. When does that change? When Trumpism goes cold with their voters. If Trumpism remains strong, this will be likely voted on partisan lines in both the House and Senate, meaning that he'll be impeached by one chamber and found not guilty by the other.

The likely outcome doesn't mean that this shouldn't happen. Bill Clinton was doing well in his polling numbers until he was impeached. After that, he became toxic to both parties with the Democrats telling him to stay off the campaign trail in 2000. The gamble is that the same could happen to Trump in 2020, though nothing is certain. Again, political strategy aside, impeachment is the right thing to do here from a moral standpoint. This man and his party have jeopardized this country's integrity by allowing him to continue to run freely without any restrictions.

[elevenism]

Picture this, though, and this is my fear: a Republican controlled Senate isn't going to find trump guilty.

Trump calls this "TOTAL EXONERATION!" again, and tens of millions of people think that's what it means.

So, all this winds up doing is galvanizing republicans and trump supporters, and, the whole thing winds up HELPING him in 2020.

There's obviously an ethical and legal obligation to impeach, but, unless I'm missing something, there's a good chance that it could backfire, politically.

Edit: annnnnd, yeah. @ltrandazzo pretty much just illustrated that. My bad.

[october_midnight]

Ukraine call transcript.

[kdrcraig]

Some of the Ukranian President's responses sound like bots in Trump's twitter feed

Edit: Apparently that's not actually a transcript? A "best recollection" by people that heard it or some shit? So what good is it?

[theimage13]

Ukraine call transcript.

Annnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnd get fucked, Donald.

There's a lot of talk about Biden's son,that Biden stopped the prosecution and a lot of people want to find out about that so whatever you can do with the Attorney General would be great. Biden went around bragging that he stopped the prosecution so if you can look into it ... It sounds horrible to me

However, the DOJ has already said "nah, he's fine." Regarding withholding anything in return for this "favor":

“A "thing of value" has to be in some way quantifiable, and the Justice Department couldn't find that here, officials said”

Hundreds of millions of dollars in aid isn't a thing of value, huh?

[allegro]

Ukraine call transcript.

That’s not a transcript; that’s a Memo. There’s OBVIOUSLY missing data. The White House has Bill Barr’d it. And it still makes Trump look like an idiot. But Congress STILL wants the full whistleblower report. And Congress is going to want the sworn testimony of anyone who heard the President during those conversations with the Ukraine President. The “Biden fired the prosecutor to protect Hunter” will come out as being the OPPOSITE: The Ukraine prosecutor, Shokin, was NOT investigating Burisma Holdings, despite repeated demands to do so. Where did Hunter Biden work? Burisma Holdings.

[allegro]

Giuliani is blaming GEORGE SOROS for this whole thing. Yeah, let’s throw in anti Semitism while we’re at it.Really, read this article. Rudy is on Fox News blathering about Soros and Antifa.

[allegro]

Picture this, though, and this is my fear: a Republican controlled Senate isn't going to find trump guilty.

Trump calls this "TOTAL EXONERATION!" again, and tens of millions of people think that's what it means.

So, all this winds up doing is galvanizing republicans and trump supporters, and, the whole thing winds up HELPING him in 2020.

The bigger supposition, now, is that the Republican Senate will definitely lose 4 Republican seats and perhaps more than 6. After Clinton, Gore narrowly lost to Bush and the Democrats lost the House. Polls already have Trump being beat by burnt toast.

Edit: God, Lindsey Graham has no shame.

[Jinsai]

I’m just shocked by how flagrantly broken our general system is... “oh, well yeah, that’s naturally immoral, maybe even evil, but it’s so uniquely self absorbed in its dealing that I guess we never saw it coming so there’s no law against it! I mean sure you can even sell out your own country to a hostile foreign power and that’s ok as long as we aren’t technically at war with them, cuz...”

[Sarah K]

Fucking LMAO at that first response from the Ukraine President. Literally nobody is going to believe that shit.

I got to here:

CAUTION: A Memorandum of a Telephone Conversation.· (TELCON) is not a verbatim transcript of adiscussion. The text in this document records the notes and recollections of Situation Room Duty"Officers and-NSC policy staff assigned t_o listen.and memorialize the conversation in written formas the conversation takes place. A numper of factors can affect 'the accuracy of the reco�d,including poor telecommunications connections and variations in accent and/or interpretation.The word "inaudible" is used to indifate portions of a conversation that the notetaker was unableto hear.

and stopped.

[Jinsai]

Even if this summary is actually intentionally leaving out aspects (and I’m sure it does), does the Trump team think this is really exonerating? Fuck a transcript, I want to hear a recording. It’s a formal call from POTUS to a world leader, it’s 2019, there has to be a recording unless it was requested to be scrubbed.

And thats the thing. Why should we ever be satisfied with less than full disclosure? Why did Barr ever think we’d be satisfied with his quick summary of the Mueller report (which we still need to see unredacted). Why do we have to fight for transparency when it comes to issues this serious?

[allegro]

Good points. I tell you one thing, Twitter has never been this fascinating LOL. And I’ve been glued to MSNBC for days, EVEN IN THE CAR. The AUDACITY of Trump and Giuliani spinning this like Biden was deliberately shutting down an investigation is PLAIN SIGHT for CASH is just NUTS.

[Jinsai]

can we all just join hands though, and agree, that given what's on the table here, Barr MUST recuse himself from ANYTHING related to this situation?

[cdm]

Fuck a transcript, I want to hear a recording. It’s a formal call from POTUS to a world leader, it’s 2019, there has to be a recording unless it was requested to be scrubbed.

Here is a thread regarding the possibility of recordings:

As senior director of the WH Situation Room, I managed POTUS head-of-state calls. So, what light can I shed on the Trump-promised phone transcript? /1

First off: unless this administration has changed procedures in place for many years, there are no WH tapes of this phone call. As I used to say, the WH became averse to taping Presidential phone calls in about 1974. /2

Could there be recordings made by the foreign head-of-state's government or a foreign intelligence service? Sure, particularly when the call is made over a non-secure phone. /3

Could there be recordings made by the US Intelligence Community? No. Law, regulation, and practice forbids such collection of USG officials. Besides, there's no foreign intelligence value in doing so, as the US official is aware of the call's contents. /4

Emphasis: mine. This was posted yesterday before the memo was released. I'd recommend clicking over to the thread as there are 11 tweets in total and mostly informative.

[Jinsai]

This was posted yesterday before the memo was released. I'd recommend clicking over to the thread as there are 11 tweets in total and mostly informative.

I think it should be law. It is SO easy to make official audio recordings of all official phone conversations with foreign leaders. These should be catalogued in a non-partisan way, in a database, and only released when obviously necessary... like now.

[allegro]

I think it should be law. It is SO easy to make official audio recordings of all official phone conversations with foreign leaders. These should be catalogued in a non-partisan way, in a database, and only released when obviously necessary... like now.

Foreign leaders are totally against this, though.

[cdm]

I think it should be law.

The laws are working as designed. There are many people involved in the processes (some partisan, others not) and if they see / hear something improper they can memorialize it (at best) or file a whistleblower complaint (at worst). The failing here is we have a DOJ carrying water for a corrupt president and stonewalling the lawful release of the WB memo to congress. Having a recording archived somewhere would be no different.