Donald Trump and US politics

I guess I should be a little more specific.

I think the witch-hunt is the drumming of the war drums by the media, and the infection of the American populace with the idea that he is already guilty before a single piece of damning evidence has been presented or a crime named.

Every president gets some sensible amount of vetting. It bothers me that the frenzy (of extremely questionable, worrying origin) has risen to the level of a special prosecutor, but Mueller is extremely trustworthy, bipartisan, and his findings will be desirably final.

I take umbrage with the argument of "if you've got nothing to hide, you've got nothing to fear". The argument itself has zero credibility and is used to promulgate broken ideas like mass surveillance. People "looking guilty" is how we end up with innocent people jailed -- justice should be blind.

---

Separately, if we want to require our presidents to release tax returns or divest of their businesses, why don't we just pass that requirement as a law? I'm for it, up to a certain point.

"

Aim_Deep wrote:

LOL to me MS media and socialists (or do I repeat myself) looks and acts guilty of a coup.
http://thefederalist.com/2017/05/19/watching-slow-motion-coup-detat/

Truths we cling to are from a certain POV. You're a socialist dem ofc you see "it" and probably all your deadbeat friends. Mine dont, See a man against the machine,

You didn't answer my question about who or what you would accept as a truthful source.

I will read your link later.

Who is "a man against a machine"? You? Trump

So I am a socialist democrat? You are actually wrong. I do tend to vote democratic, but have voted for both Ross Perot and Gary Johnson. I am socially liberal, but fiscally conservative. My work life has been as a senior manager or CEO of various small businesses (up to $30M in revenue) that I have either owned or run for absentee owners.

"

Aim_Deep wrote:

Smoking gun. Like Nixon tapes would suffice.

He said she said is bullshit especially with trillions of dollars on the line keeping Russia as enemy. Cui bono.

Would you accept "a smoking gun" from the FBI investigation?

Investigate for what? Show me any evidence or crime that warrants an investigation.. Please. This is a fishing expedition because TPTB dont like result. Probably been same if Bern got elected.

Well, at the moment there is an investigation whether you like it or not. The scope of it is pretty broad: election interference, campaign collusion with Russians, Michael Flynn, Trump and Kushner business dealings with Russia, obstruction of justice by Trump or others. Like investigations before it, it can follow new leads into new areas.

Board as in casting a wide net because they have fuck all. I dont even like Trump as I've made clear in this thread and others but its just obvious to me we have a Emperor Commodus moment in USAs history where the deep state is Praetorian Guards of our republic dont want ppls will and want status quo.

"

pneuma wrote:

I guess I should be a little more specific.

I think the witch-hunt is the drumming of the war drums by the media, and the infection of the American populace with the idea that he is already guilty before a single piece of damning evidence has been presented or a crime named.

Every president gets some sensible amount of vetting. It bothers me that the frenzy (of extremely questionable, worrying origin) has risen to the level of a special prosecutor, but Mueller is extremely trustworthy, bipartisan, and his findings will be desirably final.

I take umbrage with the argument of "if you've got nothing to hide, you've got nothing to fear". The argument itself has zero credibility and is used to promulgate broken ideas like mass surveillance. People "looking guilty" is how we end up with innocent people jailed -- justice should be blind.

---

Separately, if we want to require our presidents to release tax returns or divest of their businesses, why don't we just pass that requirement as a law? I'm for it, up to a certain point.

The media frenzy was a perfect storm after 18 months of unprecedented drama.

A dirty nasty campaign all around
A dooffus selected to run against an evil witch
An unhealed democratic party split
An unexpected outcome
Hints of Russian interference
A transition from Obama to Trump that was a failure
Michael Flynn
A Congress that was all Republican and still divided
An uncontrolled president who made policy through twitter
The appearance of a cover up
Ongoing failure of Trump to be president
Ongoing failure of Trump to not think himself more important than his job as president

What media wouldn't grab at the chance to exploit it? All they had to do was follow the bread crumbs everyone was laying down.

"

Aim_Deep wrote:

Board as in casting a wide net because they have fuck all. I dont even like Trump as I've made clear in this thread and others but its just obvious to me we have a Emperor Commodus moment in USAs history where the deep state is Praetorian Guards of our republic dont want ppls will and want status quo.

Do you have any actual evidence that the "deep state" exists beyond the imagination of the alt right? A smoking gun?

Bureaucracies tend to facilitate their own continued existence. It is their nature. Government agencies tend to want to continue what they are doing in familiar ways. That is not a deep state. It is people resisting change. If you want a target for your wrath against the machine, look towards the banks and global conglomerates. The Koch brothers and their ilk are a bigger problem than the federal bureaucrats.

"

ChanBalam wrote:

@DalaiLama:

You stated your positions very clearly. I will let your words speak for themselves.

what do you see as sources of truth?

There aren't any indisputable ones I can think of, and that's the worst part of this election debacle. Direct sources - original emails, tapes etc are possibly the only things we can rely on as not being altered. Other than that, we have to look at what is presented, and then keep looking back as new information develops and compare it to what our sources have told us before on the issue. Does a source hold up over time is a decent criterion.

"

ChanBalam wrote:

Who can be trusted to tell the truth? You have ruled out the FBI, CIA and NSA. Given all the forgetfulness and omissions by Trump campaign and WH staff, documents like tax forms may be the most honest information available. If the tax forms are not truthful, then you have just named Trump as guilty of tax fraud.

It's too easy to get caught on tax fraud if you are audited. I think if the media spelled out a list of reasonable things - including one or two tax returns from a specific year, and almost promised with a written contract (one with very severe penalties for breaking) to stop hounding Trump for Muh Russia or tax evasion or whatnot if the documents didn't show anything - then I think Trump would consider doing it.

Right now he knows there is no end to this loop, so there's no point in playing the game. He has already said he is willing to testify under oath about any Russian collusion. Sessions VOLUNTARILY testified today.

Compare that with the reluctant, pleading the fifth testimony, or no appearance at all by those on Obama/Clinton's team? If Sessions testified, Holder should have as well.

Now, if Mueller and Comey and Trump critics begin mysteriously dying, then we have a reason to dig deeper. Right now, all we have is MSM hatred of Trump. That's it.

"

Aim_Deep wrote:

Seem to forgot about Yellowcake from Niger and Iraqs WMDs lies b4. Or the roaming incubators.

The Yellowcake story didn't convince me (too small of a quantity) but combined with all those supposed aluminum tubes, it really looked like Iraq just needed some rocket fuel and they would be centrifuging Uranium Hexafluoride.