Trump MAGAThread IV: Twixt Scylla & Some Bad Hombres

[Geilinor]

Leaks of scientific information?

Leaks of anything.

What Michael Flynn did was far more serious and pressing than the leaks.

[Kravanica]

Nothing happens unless he actually commits a crime.

"Breach of the public trust" need not entail actual crime. The Watergate hearings set that precedent.

Nixon did more than that.

[Kravanica]

Leaks of anything.

What Michael Flynn did was far more serious and pressing than the leaks.

Yeah, he possibly broke a law that no one has ever been convicted under and gets broken all the time.

[Fartsniffage]

That's because you didn't do it well. There's a skill to it, a skill that those in the civil service have learned.

-slides money towards Fart-

Learned it working in a multi-national corp. I'm one of the business types.

[Fartsniffage]

Sorry.

Said Bannon.

Just relax, Fart.

Nah. This is my Raygun. But this time there's a president who has no idea about government and his cabinet are lunatics.

[Neutraligon]

http://www.workplacefairness.org/retali ... mployees#3

Right, so if Trump has shady dealings and some faceless bureaucrat speaks out its protected.

But that's not what's happening.

They're just trying to undermine him because they don't like him.

Or they believe this is important information that the public needs to know (whistle blowing)

[Lilinia]

Leaks of scientific information?

Leaks of anything.

Not a big fan of transparency and accountability, are ya?

[Novoserbistan]

Nothing happens unless he actually commits a crime.

"Breach of the public trust" need not entail actual crime. The Watergate hearings set that precedent.

But wait, how can there be a precedent when Nixon has never been officially impeached? He resigned before the impeachment started, so since the actual "trial" did not even take place, there is no precedent in the US common law.

[Dahon]

But wait, how can there be a precedent when Nixon has never been officially impeached? He resigned before the impeachment started, so since the actual "trial" did not even take place, there is no precedent in the US common law.

Well, there's that too.

O kami, this just keeps getting grimmer and grimmer every day --

[Neutraligon]

"Breach of the public trust" need not entail actual crime. The Watergate hearings set that precedent.

But wait, how can there be a precedent when Nixon has never been officially impeached? He resigned before the impeachment started, so since the actual "trial" did not even take place, there is no precedent in the US common law.

Impeachment does not man being removed from office. Bill Clinton was impeached, even if he was not removed from office

[Novoserbistan]

But wait, how can there be a precedent when Nixon has never been officially impeached? He resigned before the impeachment started, so since the actual "trial" did not even take place, there is no precedent in the US common law.

Impeachment does not man being removed from office. Bill Clinton was impeached, even if he was not removed from office

That's what I am saying. Unlike Bill Clinton, Richard Nixon was never officially impeached because he resigned before anything could start. As far as I know, only 2 Presidents were impeached (for now): Andrew Jackson & Bill Clinton,amd none of them were removed.

[NeoLiberia]

Ok. So why are you arguing that the petro-state (Russia) should get a free pass to fuck over everyone within their "sphere of influence?"

Should? Who cares about should? Power projection, national security, mutually assured destruction. That's what's important.

Forget that other post. I was being angry when I wrote it.

You're making a normative argument anyway. "We shouldn't support or wish for American action anywhere because that would cause nuclear war and nuclear war is bad" is a normative argument.

An important question to ask is how Russia appears to have endless limits in your analogy. Russia is a comparatively weak, defeated power, and this year it's going to have to use austerity or take from its pension fund to keep spending as it is. But you say "bullies need to realise the limits of their strength" in reference to America, when it clearly is the Russian side that's being ignorant about its capabilities. Shouldn't the burden fall on them? According to your logic we should be making Russia realize its limits, because otherwise they will destabilize everything. We can afford to teach a lesson to a state like Russia, either through deterrence or economic pressure. And they're not going to nuke us.

[Novoserbistan]

From Wikipedia:

Andrew Johnson and Bill Clinton are the only two presidents to have been successfully impeached by the House of Representatives, and both were later acquitted by the Senate. The impeachment process against Richard Nixon was technically unsuccessful, as Nixon resigned his office before the vote of the full House for impeachment, but successful in the broader sense of leading to Nixon's departure. To date, no U.S. President has been removed from office by impeachment and conviction.

Ergo, Richard Nixon was not impeached.

[Neutraligon]

From Wikipedia:

Andrew Johnson and Bill Clinton are the only two presidents to have been successfully impeached by the House of Representatives, and both were later acquitted by the Senate. The impeachment process against Richard Nixon was technically unsuccessful, as Nixon resigned his office before the vote of the full House for impeachment, but successful in the broader sense of leading to Nixon's departure. To date, no U.S. President has been removed from office by impeachment and conviction.

Ergo, Richard Nixon was not impeached.

OK, conceded.

[Great Franconia and Verana]

What Michael Flynn did was far more serious and pressing than the leaks.

Yeah, he possibly broke a law that no one has ever been convicted under and gets broken all the time.

You don't see an issue with what he did?
He undermined an incumbent administration, then lied about it to the Vice President, and the DOJ said he was at risk of being blackmailed by the Russians.

If this is what conservatives want as their government, then they need to drop the pretense of actually caring about government.
The same goes for Bannon, Miller, and Trump himself.

[Great Franconia and Verana]

http://www.cnn.com/2017/02/14/politics/ ... index.html

Great, just great.

(CNN)High-level advisers close to then-presidential nominee Donald Trump were in constant communication during the campaign with Russians known to US intelligence, multiple current and former intelligence, law enforcement and administration officials tell CNN.

President-elect Trump and then-President Barack Obama were both briefed on details of the extensive communications between suspected Russian operatives and people associated with the Trump campaign and the Trump business, according to US officials familiar with the matter.
Both the frequency of the communications and the proximity to Trump of those involved "raised a red flag" with US intelligence and law enforcement, according to these officials. The communications were intercepted during routine intelligence collection targeting Russian officials and other Russian nationals known to US intelligence.

What was this about the GOP being the Party of national security and defense? Where are the Russia hawks now? When will the GOP realize the incredible hypocrisy?

The next four years are going to be so tiring.

[Northern Davincia]

Yeah, he possibly broke a law that no one has ever been convicted under and gets broken all the time.

You don't see an issue with what he did?
He undermined an incumbent administration, then lied about it to the Vice President, and the DOJ said he was at risk of being blackmailed by the Russians.

If this is what conservatives want as their government, then they need to drop the pretense of actually caring about government.
The same goes for Bannon, Miller, and Trump himself.

Conservatives care very little for the principles of government. The 80's should have been proof enough of this.

[Kravanica]

Yeah, he possibly broke a law that no one has ever been convicted under and gets broken all the time.

You don't see an issue with what he did?
He undermined an incumbent administration, then lied about it to the Vice President, and the DOJ said he was at risk of being blackmailed by the Russians.

If this is what conservatives want as their government, then they need to drop the pretense of actually caring about government.
The same goes for Bannon, Miller, and Trump himself.

He spoke with the Russians and said relations would get better under Trump. Truly terrible.

[Neutraligon]

You don't see an issue with what he did?
He undermined an incumbent administration, then lied about it to the Vice President, and the DOJ said he was at risk of being blackmailed by the Russians.

If this is what conservatives want as their government, then they need to drop the pretense of actually caring about government.
The same goes for Bannon, Miller, and Trump himself.

He spoke with the Russians and said relations would get better under Trump. Truly terrible.

No he spoke to them to tell them not to worry about restrictions placed on Russia, thus undermining the current presidential policy.

[Kravanica]

Right, so if Trump has shady dealings and some faceless bureaucrat speaks out its protected.

But that's not what's happening.

They're just trying to undermine him because they don't like him.

Or they believe this is important information that the public needs to know (whistle blowing)

Yeah, "whistle blowers" have severely damaged US national security in the past. More reason to keep a hold on things.

[Kravanica]

He spoke with the Russians and said relations would get better under Trump. Truly terrible.

No he spoke to them to tell them not to worry about restrictions placed on Russia, thus undermining the current presidential policy.

He spoke for an incoming US administration. The current administration was on the way out.

[Great Franconia and Verana]

You don't see an issue with what he did?
He undermined an incumbent administration, then lied about it to the Vice President, and the DOJ said he was at risk of being blackmailed by the Russians.

If this is what conservatives want as their government, then they need to drop the pretense of actually caring about government.
The same goes for Bannon, Miller, and Trump himself.

He spoke with the Russians and said relations would get better under Trump. Truly terrible.

No, he didn't.
He spoke to the Russians about specific policy that was being undertaken by an incumbent administration, and directly told them to disregard said policy.
If a Democrat did this, or even a single thing Trump has ever done, his head would be on a spike and the GOP would have put it there.

[Kravanica]

Leaks of anything.

Not a big fan of transparency and accountability, are ya?

I don't think leaks are inherently good.

[Great Franconia and Verana]

No he spoke to them to tell them not to worry about restrictions placed on Russia, thus undermining the current presidential policy.

He spoke for an incoming US administration. The current administration was on the way out.

That doesn't matter. It's still a violation of the law, and undermines the United States government.

[Northern Davincia]

http://www.cnn.com/2017/02/14/politics/donald-trump-aides-russians-campaign/index.html

Great, just great.

(CNN)High-level advisers close to then-presidential nominee Donald Trump were in constant communication during the campaign with Russians known to US intelligence, multiple current and former intelligence, law enforcement and administration officials tell CNN.

President-elect Trump and then-President Barack Obama were both briefed on details of the extensive communications between suspected Russian operatives and people associated with the Trump campaign and the Trump business, according to US officials familiar with the matter.
Both the frequency of the communications and the proximity to Trump of those involved "raised a red flag" with US intelligence and law enforcement, according to these officials. The communications were intercepted during routine intelligence collection targeting Russian officials and other Russian nationals known to US intelligence.

What was this about the GOP being the Party of national security and defense? Where are the Russia hawks now? When will the GOP realize the incredible hypocrisy?

The next four years are going to be so tiring.

Keep in mind, hypocrisy should not be mistaken for the internal civil war the GOP is enduring as we speak.