The Trump Presidency 13: The (James) Baker's Dozen

[Skeptic Ginger]

Nothing wrong with the re-election campaign of the President of the United States sending out letters trying to intimidate public media outlets from interviewing elected Federal officials.

Nope. Nothing at all.

Can you imagine what would happen if this fascist dictator wannabe actually got his way?

 

[Skeptic Ginger]

From the memo.


Sure. Why not?
Provided the exact same standard be applied to President Trump and every one of his apologists, advocators, and justifiers.

One standard for everyone.
...

Trump is oblivious to his own behavior.

 

[smartcooky]

I want to ask a question of people who are more up with the finer intricacies of the US political system, by suggesting a scenaro.

In 2020

Trump is fired by the American people, and a Democrat POTUS is elected
The Senate is flipped to Democrat
The House remains Democrat

On taking office, the new POTUS fires the AG Bill Barr, and taking a leaf out of Trump's book, appoints a new Acting AG

The new Acting AG immediately orders the release of the Mueller report in full (with ongoing investigation information redacted)

Could this happen?

 

[Delphic Oracle]

I want to ask a question of people who are more up with the finer intricacies of the US political system, by suggesting a scenaro.



In 2020



Trump is fired by the American people, and a Democrat POTUS is elected

The Senate is flipped to Democrat

The House remains Democrat



On taking office, the new POTUS fires the AG Bill Barr, and taking a leaf out of Trump's book, appoints a new Acting AG



The new Acting AG immediately orders the release of the Mueller report in full (with ongoing investigation information redacted)



Could this happen?

Rollover of personnel and exact timing might be subject to certain variables, but generally yes.

ETA: House Oversight and White House Counsel/DOJ in contentious hearings over subpoenas for every obscure piece of paper floating around for months makes for way better ratings, however.

 

[smartcooky]

Rollover of personnel and exact timing might be subject to certain variables, but generally yes.

ETA: House Oversight and White House Counsel/DOJ in contentious hearings over subpoenas for every obscure piece of paper floating around for months makes for way better ratings, however.

So, by my count, you've had five (R) presidents and three (D) presidents since Nixon. Why did it take 40 years to find out some of the stuff in Watergate?

 

[cmikes]

I want to ask a question of people who are more up with the finer intricacies of the US political system, by suggesting a scenaro.

In 2020

Trump is fired by the American people, and a Democrat POTUS is elected
The Senate is flipped to Democrat
The House remains Democrat

On taking office, the new POTUS fires the AG Bill Barr, and taking a leaf out of Trump's book, appoints a new Acting AG

The new Acting AG immediately orders the release of the Mueller report in full (with ongoing investigation information redacted)

Could this happen?

You question is moot. The report will be out well before the 2020 election. Barr has already stated the report will be released as soon as the legally necessary redactions are finished. Do you really expect those redactions to take two years to accomplish?

 

[thaiboxerken]

You question is moot. The report will be out well before the 2020 election. Barr has already stated the report will be released as soon as the legally necessary redactions are finished. Do you really expect those redactions to take two years to accomplish?

Yes, but Barr is a lying piece of garbage.

 

[Aridas]

This is a thread about Trump. He was part of this from the start.

The bit that started this little line of conversation was about Kushner, specifically. You substituting Trump for Kushner was of exactly no value, unless your direct intent was to attack a point that wasn't made by me in the first place.

And again, so I'm not misunderstood, saying that someone is using a consistent standard doesn't mean that they're using a good standard.

It's true! With that said... that actually has quite a bit of relevance to the thing that you actually decided to take issue with.

That's not exactly something you should be proud of.

Since Trump is harming the U.S. because of his mishandling of security (and doing so more than Clinton ever did), the proper response is not to pat him on the back and say "good job... since what you're doing is legal". The proper course of action is to say "what you're doing is illegal and you should stop", regardless of how legal his actions are.

The fact that you're willing to give him a pass based on a very slim technicality speaks volumes about your true concerns about the U.S.

On this... I'm going to have to disagree with you a little. Lying is a bad strategy in the long run. Elaborating on the consequences, on the other hand, is valid. Given Trump, though, it's not certain that there's any actually good strategy other than removal, and that will obviously cause a bunch of other problems.

Could this happen?

The parts legal to show could be unredacted in full, yes? It's fairly likely that more of them could be shown then than will be now, of course.

 

[cmikes]

Yes, but Barr is a lying piece of garbage.

Yes, that's always the progressive reaction, either reality conforms to your fervent wishes, or more investigation is needed. The possibility you might be wrong must be rejected because of your infallibility.

"I reject your reality, and substitute my own!"-- Adam Savage by way of Paul Bradford.

 

[Craig4]

I note we've not heard anything about conspiracy or collusion with Wikileaks yet. That is the basis of the Stone indictment.

 

[thaiboxerken]

Yes, that's always the progressive reaction, either reality conforms to your fervent wishes, or more investigation is needed. The possibility you might be wrong must be rejected because of your infallibility.

"I reject your reality, and substitute my own!"-- Adam Savage by way of Paul Bradford.

Many years and investigations on Benghazi, emails, and whitewater prove that you're simply projecting. It is the GOP that has weaponized investigations.

The reality is that Barr is a lying piece of garbage. He is scum whose mission is to protect criminal presidents. He helped Bush Sr get out of trouble for Bush's criminal activity in the Iran/Contra scandals. Now he is trying to help Trump get out of criminal charges for obstruction of justice and conspiracy with Russia.

Barr's "summary" of the reportonly quotes 19 words. He takes it upon himself to be the arbiter of criminal proceedings. He is breaking precedent, because it is Congress that should be making the calls.
The only way we will know the truth is if Mueller's report is released to the public.

 

[Venom]

I think there's a little too much grasping at straws. You'd could say Barr is withholding a bunch of embarrassing evidence, but only at great political peril.

 

[Foolmewunz]

I think there's a little too much grasping at straws. You'd could say Barr is withholding a bunch of embarrassing evidence, but only at great political peril.

Exactly what "peril"? Barr is being toasted and lauded in the best GOP salons in Washington and around the country. He gives Trump and the Great Right Wing Noise Machine several weeks' head start to get the repetition-drones firing on all cylinders. "No collusion! Completely exonerated!"

It'll keep his myopic base happy and that's all he cares about. He's in Phase I of the 2020 primaries - Avoid Being Primaried. This will tide him over, regardless what the actual report reads. Remember, this clown still insists he had better turnout than Obama at his inauguration, in spite of reams of evidence to the contrary. And, even with a blue ribbon panel of devoted sycophants, they unceremoniously closed down their fact-finding mission on illegal voters. He still thinks he won the popular vote.

 

[ponderingturtle]

If he didn't formally declassify top secret documents before handing them over to hostile powers even the inane argument "sure he endangered US security, but it wasn't technically illegal!" is wrong.

If only clinton had used Whatsap for all her secure communications she would be president now, but no she had to use a secure email server.

 

[ponderingturtle]

I want to ask a question of people who are more up with the finer intricacies of the US political system, by suggesting a scenaro.

In 2020

Trump is fired by the American people, and a Democrat POTUS is elected
The Senate is flipped to Democrat
The House remains Democrat

On taking office, the new POTUS fires the AG Bill Barr, and taking a leaf out of Trump's book, appoints a new Acting AG

The new Acting AG immediately orders the release of the Mueller report in full (with ongoing investigation information redacted)

Could this happen?

Oh the full report will get out eventually, probably why it is so important for McConnal to block voting on having it released, so that republican senators don't have to record a view on it.

 

[Aridas]

Here's another bit of... unsurprising Trump Administration news. If only it were actually surprising.

Trump administration changes position to back judge’s ruling that would kill Obamacare

Pressed by Senate Democrats at his January confirmation hearing, Attorney General Bill Barr pledged to reconsider the Justice Department's stance on the lawsuit. But legal experts hadn't expected Barr to stake out a more aggressive position than his predecessor Jeff Sessions, who told career Justice Department lawyers to drop their defense of the law — a near-unprecedented decision that led three lawyers to remove their names from the government’s brief and prompted the senior attorney, Joel McElvain, to resign.

"Barr inherited an indefensible legal position. But instead of backing down, he's embraced a downright crazy one" said Nick Bagley, a University of Michigan law professor who's criticized O'Connor's ruling.

Barr, showing off his character again.

 

[ponderingturtle]

Here's another bit of... unsurprising Trump Administration news. If only it were actually surprising.

Trump administration changes position to back judge’s ruling that would kill Obamacare



Barr, showing off his character again.

Good we can finally see Trump live up to his campaign promise of stripping the sick of their health care like republicans demand.

 

[phiwum]

Yes, that's always the progressive reaction, either reality conforms to your fervent wishes, or more investigation is needed. The possibility you might be wrong must be rejected because of your infallibility.

"I reject your reality, and substitute my own!"-- Adam Savage by way of Paul Bradford.

We can always wait and see what happens and then we'll know whether what you say is correct or he is closer to the truth. See, it's not nice to say he's delusional when both of you are looking at evidence and speculating.

I tend to think the report will be released reasonably soon, but I am concerned that the redactions are likely to include passages that are merely embarrassing or shameful. It will be tough to know whether that's the case when we see the release.

 

[phiwum]

I think there's a little too much grasping at straws. You'd could say Barr is withholding a bunch of embarrassing evidence, but only at great political peril.

What is the peril? First, it will be difficult to prove he's withholding embarrassing information and second, he says his career in politics will end after this appointment.

 

[Andy_Ross]

Trump Tweets

WSJ: Obama Admin Must Account for ‘Abuse of Surveillance Powers’ https://www.breitbart.com/politics/...oric-abuse-of-government-surveillance-powers/ … via @BreitbartNews