The Trump thread: All things Donald

[Jed_]

There is no way I would date someone who supports a racist, misogynistic, homophobic, ablist, grifting, lying, traitor. 

#Resist

I haven’t seen her on since, but my feeling is we have to reach out to conservatives, if only to try and reason with them.  And I’m perfectly willing to give a girl a bright red stinging ass if it helps with that.

[Athos_131]

I wouldn't fuck a Trumper with a stolen dick or rented pussy.

#Resist

[Athos_131]

Mueller Has Dozens of Inquiries for Trump in Broad Quest on Russia Ties and Obstruction

#Resist

[Athos_131]

What Mueller Wants to Ask Trump About Obstruction, and What It Means

#Resist

[Athos_131]

Trump repaying the Stormy Daniels money doesn’t mean there were no campaign finance violations

During an interview with Fox News’ Sean Hannity on Wednesday, Giuliani volunteered a startling bit of information. That $130,000 that Trump’s attorney Michael Cohen admitted having paid to porn star Stormy Daniels? Trump had repaid it.

“That money was not campaign money, sorry. I’m giving you a fact now that you don’t know,” Giuliani said to Hannity, raising the subject on his own. “It’s not campaign money. No campaign finance violation.”

It’s not entirely clear what Giuliani is claiming happened. Over the course of the interview, he told Hannity that Trump repaid Cohen through a monthly $35,000 retainer over a series of months “when he was doing no work for the president,” an amount that Giuliani said included “a little profit and a little margin for paying taxes for Michael.” Later, he speculated that the money might have been paid out of “law firm funds.” Regardless, Giuliani said, it didn’t matter for legal purposes.

According to Lawrence Noble, senior director and general counsel at the Campaign Legal Center, that’s true: How the payment was made doesn’t affect the legality.

There was still almost certainly a campaign finance violation.

“We still have the same question: What was the purpose of this,” Noble said when we spoke by phone on Wednesday evening. We’ve noted in the past that the question of whether or not the payment was meant to aid Trump’s candidacy is central to campaign finance considerations — and that it’s hard to argue that this payment wasn’t related to the campaign.

“If the purpose of this was to stop [Daniels] from hurting the campaign,” Noble continued, “then what you have is Cohen made a loan to the campaign. And it was an excessive loan because lending the campaign money is a contribution. It was an excessive contribution until it’s repaid.”

Trump, he said, can make contributions of any size to his own campaign. (Giuliani alluded to this, too.) But the campaign can’t just take loans of any size from anyone without reporting them as long as Trump pays them back later. If that were legal, there would be no point in having campaign finance laws: Candidates could accept giant loans, not report them, and pay them back after the election had ended. (The Wall Street Journal reports that the repayment occurred after the campaign.) By not reporting a loan from Cohen meant to aid the election of Donald Trump, the campaign would have violated the law. Had Cohen not been repaid, the violation was his own, as an agent of the campaign making a contribution to it of that size.

When asked by reporters, Trump claimed not to be familiar with the payment to Daniels. Had Giuliani argued that Trump repaid Cohen only after he learned about it, it might bolster the argument that the payment had nothing to do with the campaign, Noble said. But Giuliani himself said that the repayment took place over months in the form of a payment for services not rendered.

What’s more, even if the loan didn’t have anything to do with the campaign — again, a questionable premise — Trump may have had to report the loan on his ethics forms as a federal officeholder.

All of that aside, there’s another issue. We learned from NBC in March that Cohen had finalized the payment to Daniels from his Trump Organization email address. In other words, he used corporate resources to engineer a contribution to Trump’s campaign — violating a prohibition against corporations “facilitating the making of contributions to candidates or political committees.”

It gets worse.

“Giuliani suggesting it was funneled through the firm as legal fees,” Noble said, “is evidence of an intent to hide the source, which could make it knowing and willful, which is criminal.” There could also be tax violations, he added.

There’s admittedly a vagueness to Giuliani’s assertions. At one point he claims that Trump “didn’t know the specifics” of the Daniels payment, perhaps giving Trump a bit of cover after the president denied knowing about it at all.

But to Giuliani’s central thesis — that the repayment meant that no campaign finance laws were broken — the law is fairly clear. If Cohen loaned Trump $130,000 by making the payment to Stormy Daniels so that her story wouldn’t come out before the election, that loan would have had to have been reported.

And it would have been reported before Election Day.

Rudy Giuliani is not helping his client.

#Resist

[Athos_131]

President Trump’s repeated claim that Comey ‘leaked classified information’

The president may have grounds to complain about Comey’s handling of the memos or whether Comey should have given four of them to his legal team, at least one with classified information.

But Trump cannot say that the memo regarding the Feb. 14 meeting — the one memo Comey specifically hoped would reach the news media — contained classified information. For whatever reason, Comey wrote it specifically so it would not be considered classified — and the FBI released it without a single redaction. Ergo, it is not classified. The president further tips this into Four Pinocchio territory by accusing Comey of committing a crime by releasing an unclassified memo.

Four Pinocchios

#Resist

[Athos_131]

Better Call Cohen: The Shady Cases of a Trump Lawyer's Personal Injury Practice

#Resist

[Athos_131]

Firm Tied to Russian Oligarch Made Payments to Michael Cohen

#Resist

[Lois]

Trump has pulled us out of the treaty with Iran designed to prevent Iran from developing nuclear weapons.

This is not a good precedent. It tells the world we will break treaties and deals whenever a new president comes along that did not like what was done under the previous president.

Now Iran can move full speed ahead with it's nuclear weapon's program.

As for Neteyahu, he revealed old intel we had since 2003. We knew all along that Iran was lying. That is what made the deal so important. Furthermore, the deal included a robust verification regimen. But hey, Trump can't let the facts stand in his way, eh?

https://www.haaretz.com/middle-east-news/iran/mattis-says-iran-nuclear-deal-includes-robust-verification-1.6032581

Expect the possibility of a war against Iran now.

[joan1984]

Had the Iran Deal been a Treaty, likely it would not have been exactly as it was, and the 'secret' knowledge about Iran seeking weapons would not have been kept so secret from the American people, or our Allies, had the 'deal' been subjected to the rigorous debate in the U.S. Senate required to attain agreement, and a Treaty.

It was not a Treaty. It was a political agreement by a U.S. President/Admin, and as such, is subject to review/revision/repeal, as are such political "deals" when another U.S. President/Admin believes it to be in the best interest of the United States. Nothing new, no surprises, on that front. Not a Treaty, Not so Binding for the future. Kind of like Jimmy Carter's 55 mph Speed Limit, which actually was more binding than this "deal".

The videos last night of the Parliament of Iran chanting "Death to America" is kind of a clue about why making deals with such folks is not in the interests of the United States of America, without ironclad, U.S. Military inspections, more.

This is a good time for such withdrawal. It is the time required, or close to it, by the terms of the agreement as negotiated by the Obama Administration, and is being viewed with interest, one trusts, by all Korea entities, China, and other interested parties who will soon further discuss nuclear disarmament and other subjects with a goal toward a peaceful end to PRNK belligerence there.

MAGA

Trump has pulled us out of the treaty with Iran designed to prevent Iran from developing nuclear weapons.

This is not a good precedent. It tells the world we will break treaties and deals whenever a new president comes along that did not like what was done under the previous president.

Now Iran can move full speed ahead with it's nuclear weapon's program.

As for Neteyahu, he revealed old intel we had since 2003. We knew all along that Iran was lying. That is what made the deal so important. Furthermore, the deal included a robust verification regimen. But hey, Trump can't let the facts stand in his way, eh?

https://www.haaretz.com/middle-east-news/iran/mattis-says-iran-nuclear-deal-includes-robust-verification-1.6032581

Expect the possibility of a war against Iran now.

[IdleBoast]

Regarding "MAGA"...

This presumably means two things;

1. You think America is not "great" at the moment

2. At some point in the past, America was in a condition that you would consider "great".

So, I'm curious; on what was America last "great", what made it so, and what event caused the transition  from "great" to "not great"?

[joan1984]

  Thank you for asking, IB.

  America is what you want it to be, and gets better as it better matches your goals and beliefs about what makes your Nation better, as much as practical and possible.

  Each has their own view. We are looking forward, with an eye to history and experience to draw from our collective experiences, as to who has the best of interests for our United States in mind, and who's interests may be suspect in that regard.

  Lots to work on as we progress, and some items require a fresh beginning at times to help us get better along with our Allies, or independent of our Allies.

We shall see how the future unfolds, and proceed with best intentions forward.

[Athos_131]

Welcome back, racist child rape supporter.

#Resist

[Athos_131]

Regarding "MAGA"...

This presumably means two things;

1. You think America is not "great" at the moment

2. At some point in the past, America was in a condition that you would consider "great".

So, I'm curious; on what was America last "great", what made it so, and what event caused the transition  from "great" to "not great"?

"MAGA" is racist term for doing anything in America that hurts non-whites.

#Resist

[Lois]

MAGA clearly refers to when America did not stand by her treaties and agreements.  Just ask Native Americans an the numerous treaties regarding their lands until they were pushed off the best lands and left only small pieces the whites did not want.

The Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action was an agreement including the US, UK, France, China, Russia and Germany.  Trump's removing the US from this international agreement does not set a good precedent.  It not only proves the United States will not stand by its agreements, but that it also does not trust some of our closest allies.

And yet Trump claims that when he makes promises he keeps them (except when they include being faithful to his wives or representing the American people). The majority of Americans wanted to stay in the deal.

But Trump is in deep trouble with porn stars and concerns that Mueller will prove collusion, so he needs a war and now he has Iran. A war with Iran would cause gas prices to skyrocket, a win-win for oil companies and Saudi Arabia, but it would not be good for our young people who will be asked to die for the cause.

Trump claims that Iran is a leading sponsor of terrorism, and yet Iran is fighting against Daesh (ISIS) and Al Qaeda.  Not a single terrorist attack on US soil has been traced to Iran, but most of the 9-11 terrorists were from Saudi Arabia and others were linked to the terrorist organizations that Iran is fighting.

[Katiebee]

Had the Iran Deal been a Treaty, likely it would not have been exactly as it was, and the 'secret' knowledge about Iran seeking weapons would not have been kept so secret from the American people, or our Allies, had the 'deal' been subjected to the rigorous debate in the U.S. Senate required to attain agreement, and a Treaty.

It was not a Treaty. It was a political agreement by a U.S. President/Admin, and as such, is subject to review/revision/repeal, as are such political "deals" when another U.S. President/Admin believes it to be in the best interest of the United States. Nothing new, no surprises, on that front. Not a Treaty, Not so Binding for the future. Kind of like Jimmy Carter's 55 mph Speed Limit, which actually was more binding than this "deal".

The videos last night of the Parliament of Iran chanting "Death to America" is kind of a clue about why making deals with such folks is not in the interests of the United States of America, without ironclad, U.S. Military inspections, more.

This is a good time for such withdrawal. It is the time required, or close to it, by the terms of the agreement as negotiated by the Obama Administration, and is being viewed with interest, one trusts, by all Korea entities, China, and other interested parties who will soon further discuss nuclear disarmament and other subjects with a goal toward a peaceful end to PRNK belligerence there.

MAGA

Trump has pulled us out of the treaty with Iran designed to prevent Iran from developing nuclear weapons.

This is not a good precedent. It tells the world we will break treaties and deals whenever a new president comes along that did not like what was done under the previous president.

Now Iran can move full speed ahead with it's nuclear weapon's program.

As for Neteyahu, he revealed old intel we had since 2003. We knew all along that Iran was lying. That is what made the deal so important. Furthermore, the deal included a robust verification regimen. But hey, Trump can't let the facts stand in his way, eh?

https://www.haaretz.com/middle-east-news/iran/mattis-says-iran-nuclear-deal-includes-robust-verification-1.6032581

Expect the possibility of a war against Iran now.

More right-wing fuzzy thinking.

[Athos_131]

#Resist

[Athos_131]

#Resist

[Athos_131]

#Resist

[Athos_131]

#Resist