ADVERTISEMENT

Any of you Trump supporters starting to get nervous?

ticket2ride04

ticket2ride04

Hall of Famer
Gold Member
May 13, 2004
17,041
8,036
113
Please be honest and the lefties, please refrain from flaming and jerking your dingle.

For the most part, I’ve largely thought Trump was untouchable. But I’m starting to think it’s looking bad for him. Not impeachment bad. But bad enough for him to lose in 2020 or just not run.

- he’s on tape directing hush money payments to a porn star

- he continually lies about it

- it’s a campaign finance violation

- they’ve raided Cohen and his long-time money guy from the Trump Org

- more is sure to leak out

- he can’t get a COS

- Dems have the House

Why would he want to continue. The SDNY is going to pick up his finances. His kids might become targets. It can’t be comfortable right now.
 
heelbent said:
President Trump's legal/personal problems don't make me nervous. The thought of a Clinton in the WH made me nervous. As long as that doesn't happen I'm good.
Click to expand...
I totally get the never-Hilary voter.

Just curious from your POV what you are seeing play out.

I’m truly a moderate with both left and right leaning ideas. I think Trump played an important role and will change how candidates approach elections. But it’s time for an adult to come back into the room. I’m hoping he chooses not to seek re-election in 2020
 
  • Like
Reactions: Heelicious
I don’t care. I’ve said several times now that Trump has already done what he needed to do. So he could disappear tomorrow for all I care.

With that said, if I was a big Trump guy, no, I would not be nervous. The more that the left goes after Trump, the more ardent his supporters become. They’re of the mindset that if the left is going after him, he’s obviously done something right. Trump has conditioned his people to believe that. All the evidence in the world won’t change that. When Trump said he could shoot someone in the middle of Park Ave and his support wouldn’t change, he was right.

So while there may really be an unpleasant end to all this for Trump, his people aren’t “worried”. And as for me, I’m just happy with the tone that he has set and how he has emboldened the “anti-left” movement.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Hark_The_Sound_2010, Heelicious, heelbent and 1 other person
Terror Beard said:
I don’t care. I’ve said several times now that Trump has already done what he needed to do. So he could disappear tomorrow for all I care.

With that said, if I was a big Trump guy, no, I would not be nervous. The more that the left goes after Trump, the more ardent his supporters become. They’re of the mindset that if the left is going after him, he’s obviously done something right. Trump has conditioned his people to believe that. All the evidence in the world won’t change that. When Trump said he could shoot someone in the middle of Park Ave and his support wouldn’t change, he was right.

So while there may really be an unpleasant end to all this for Trump, his people aren’t “worried”. And as for me, I’m just happy with the tone that he has set and how he has emboldened the “anti-left” movement.
Click to expand...
Historically I wonder how much of an impact he will have regarding the emboldening of the far left. Obama had a similar effect on the religious right and I think over time, they were marginalized from the party. Many politicians stopped cowering before them.

I hope there is a similar phenomenon on the left where the safe space snowflakes are told to STFU. A strong social agenda was important for a long time but they’ve won. Everyone is equal. Let’s focus on the good and move forward. Not scream at an old man who is uncomfortable with the idea of Caitlin Jenner.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Hark_The_Sound_2010, Terror Beard, NoleSoup4U and 1 other person
I not an anyone supporter, but I'm still trying to figure out how this is a campaign finance violation. The only explanation I've heard is via Dershowitz, who has said that it isn't. The leftist media keeps screaming that it is, but they stop short of explaining why it is. Add that to that the tendency, on both sides of the media, to stretch the truth and outright lie (see Breitbart and Hillary), and I have a hard time believing much of what the media says anymore opinion wise.
 
  • Like
Reactions: UNC71-00 and heelbent
NoleSoup4U said:
I not an anyone supporter, but I'm still trying to figure out how this is a campaign finance violation. The only explanation I've heard is via Dershowitz, who has said that it isn't. The leftist media keeps screaming that it is, but they stop short of explaining why it is. Add that to that the tendency, on both sides of the media, to stretch the truth and outright lie (see Breitbart and Hillary), and I have a hard time believing much of what the media says anymore opinion wise.
Click to expand...
It’s pretty simple. Cohen made a payment on behalf of the campaign to protect Trump and the campaign. That’s perfectly legal.

If you report it.

The Trump team knew it would create a frenzy if it was reported, so they did it as discreetly as possible.

Now Trump has lied about it on numerous occasions. He just needs to own it and pay a fine. He’s moving in that direction with the ‘my attorney should have known better’ excuse.

What will be interesting is a). What other tapes does Cohen have of Trump and b). Will the tapes or documents seized in two raids implicate Trump? I.e. did he lie to feds? If so, the call for impeachment will be strong. See Clinton, Bill.
 
ticket2ride04 said:
It’s pretty simple. Cohen made a payment on behalf of the campaign to protect Trump and the campaign. That’s perfectly legal.

If you report it.

The Trump team knew it would create a frenzy if it was reported, so they did it as discreetly as possible.

Now Trump has lied about it on numerous occasions. He just needs to own it and pay a fine. He’s moving in that direction with the ‘my attorney should have known better’ excuse.

What will be interesting is a). What other tapes does Cohen have of Trump and b). Will the tapes or documents seized in two raids implicate Trump? I.e. did he lie to feds? If so, the call for impeachment will be strong. See Clinton, Bill.
Click to expand...

I don't think Trump has made any statements to the Feds, except the letter he responded to Mueller, right? Or am I missing something here?
 
NoleSoup4U said:
I don't think Trump has made any statements to the Feds, except the letter he responded to Mueller, right? Or am I missing something here?
Click to expand...
Yes. The questions he answered that took 2 weeks. I’m not saying they are problematic. But they might be. You have to assume there are more tapes out there.
 
ticket2ride04 said:
Yes. The questions he answered that took 2 weeks. I’m not saying they are problematic. But they might be. You have to assume there are more tapes out there.
Click to expand...

I mean, if they messed that up, Trump needs to fire his lawyers. It's possible I guess, but I wouldn't think it to be very probable. I'm guessing Trump has "only the best" lawyers. :D
 
NoleSoup4U said:
I mean, if they messed that up, Trump needs to fire his lawyers. It's possible I guess, but I wouldn't think it to be very probable. I'm guessing Trump has "only the best" lawyers. :D
Click to expand...
Rudy is his top lawyer. Cohen was before. Lol at them.

It was reported Trump demanded to answer them on his own. Again, I don’t know if anything will come of it. Just pointing out how this all can hurt him.

Do you understand with my summation of the campaign finance violation or do you still disagree he didn’t break the rules.
 
ticket2ride04 said:
Rudy is his top lawyer. Cohen was before. Lol at them.

It was reported Trump demanded to answer them on his own. Again, I don’t know if anything will come of it. Just pointing out how this all can hurt him.

Do you understand with my summation of the campaign finance violation or do you still disagree he didn’t break the rules.
Click to expand...

I mean, your accusal seems to be based on him lying to the feds, which we don't know if he did or not, so it's hard to answer that question. I don't think it's going to matter in the end either way. I rather doubt the Senate votes for removal, and I think we all know that Bill's impeachment didn't hurt his bid for reelection. If that circus didn't hurt Clinton, then I rather doubt this insane circus will hurt Trump. To be honest, it'll probably come down to how the economy is doing.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Heelicious
ticket2ride04 said:
I hope there is a similar phenomenon on the left where the safe space snowflakes are told to STFU. A strong social agenda was important for a long time but they’ve won. Everyone is equal. Let’s focus on the good and move forward. Not scream at an old man who is uncomfortable with the idea of Caitlin Jenner.
Click to expand...

raw
 
  • Like
Reactions: Hark_The_Sound_2010, heelbent, NoleSoup4U and 1 other person
NoleSoup4U said:
I mean, your accusal seems to be based on him lying to the feds, which we don't know if he did or not, so it's hard to answer that question. I don't think it's going to matter in the end either way. I rather doubt the Senate votes for removal, and I think we all know that Bill's impeachment didn't hurt his bid for reelection. If that circus didn't hurt Clinton, then I rather doubt this insane circus will hurt Trump. To be honest, it'll probably come down to how the economy is doing.
Click to expand...
Bill's impeachment took place from 1998-1999, in the back half of his second term, so he wasn't eligible for reelection.
 
  • Like
Reactions: HEELS1984 and ticket2ride04
NoleSoup4U said:
I mean, your accusal seems to be based on him lying to the feds, which we don't know if he did or not, so it's hard to answer that question. I don't think it's going to matter in the end either way. I rather doubt the Senate votes for removal, and I think we all know that Bill's impeachment didn't hurt his bid for reelection. If that circus didn't hurt Clinton, then I rather doubt this insane circus will hurt Trump. To be honest, it'll probably come down to how the economy is doing.
Click to expand...
I’m not accusing him of anything. Just stating it could be problematic if he lied to the feds.

But he absolutely did commit a campaign finance violation. Do you disagree?

As for the Starr investigation, no one really knew much of anything until after the 96’ election.
 
ticket2ride04 said:
I think Trump played an important role and will change how candidates approach elections. But it’s time for an adult to come back into the room. I’m hoping he chooses not to seek re-election in 2020
Click to expand...
I agree but do you think he has changed it in a positive way?
 
heelz2345 said:
Bill's impeachment took place from 1998-1999, in the back half of his second term, so he wasn't eligible for reelection.
Click to expand...

Ahh, I was under the impression that it was during his first term. I stand corrected, but I still think Trump's fate lies with the economy. After the lost Obama decade, I don't think people are going to be too interested in going back to a Democrat president after only a couple of years of solid growth.
 
ticket2ride04 said:
I’m not accusing him of anything. Just stating it could be problematic if he lied to the feds.

But he absolutely did commit a campaign finance violation. Do you disagree?

As for the Starr investigation, no one really knew much of anything until after the 96’ election.
Click to expand...

I agree that lying to the feds would be problematic, but I don't agree that he definitely violated campaign finance regulations. I do think it's possible, but I've heard too many conflicting stories on this to know for certain.
 
prlyles said:
I agree but do you think he has changed it in a positive way?
Click to expand...

Not at the moment. But he’s shown that the world didn’t end when someone as sloppy as him won. The American Republic is strong and built to weather these storms. He’s exposed a lot of hypocrisy on both political spectrums which is always a good thing.


NoleSoup4U said:
Ahh, I was under the impression that it was during his first term. I stand corrected, but I still think Trump's fate lies with the economy. After the lost Obama decade, I don't think people are going to be too interested in going back to a Democrat president after only a couple of years of solid growth.
Click to expand...

Obama could have been better for the economy but to call it a lost decade is ridiculous. What he inherited vs what Trump inherited is night and day. Trump was handed the keys to a Ferrari and he hasn’t really opened it up yet. That’s been most disappointing to me. A guy like Romeny or Bloomberg would have us racing down the road right now.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Hark_The_Sound_2010
NoleSoup4U said:
I agree that lying to the feds would be problematic, but I don't agree that he definitely violated campaign finance regulations. I do think it's possible, but I've heard too many conflicting stories on this to know for certain.
Click to expand...
If someone contributes anything over $2,700 with the intent to help the candidate and fails to disclose the contribution, it’s a campaign finance violation. No room for debate here. It’s part of why Cohen is going to prison.
 
ticket2ride04 said:
It’s pretty simple. Cohen made a payment on behalf of the campaign to protect Trump and the campaign. That’s perfectly legal.

If you report it.

The Trump team knew it would create a frenzy if it was reported, so they did it as discreetly as possible.

Now Trump has lied about it on numerous occasions. He just needs to own it and pay a fine. He’s moving in that direction with the ‘my attorney should have known better’ excuse.

What will be interesting is a). What other tapes does Cohen have of Trump and b). Will the tapes or documents seized in two raids implicate Trump? I.e. did he lie to feds? If so, the call for impeachment will be strong. See Clinton, Bill.
Click to expand...
I think you could make an argument that it wasn't for the campaign. If I'm Trump's lawyer, I'm just going to say that this coming out wouldn't have had an impact on the election. Think about what had happened during his campaign. All the quotes about Mexican rapist, a Muslim ban, the Access Hollywood tape, his comments about his daughter, past affairs, etc. All that's ok, but having an affair with Stormy would be so horrible he would lose? That would be the straw that broke the camel's back? Seems like that would have probably gained him some votes from men.
 
Any lawyer worth his salt should be working behind the scene getting him a plea deal for no charges being filed in exchange for him resigning
 
  • Like
Reactions: SorryNotSorry
tarheel0910 said:
I think you could make an argument that it wasn't for the campaign. If I'm Trump's lawyer, I'm just going to say that this coming out wouldn't have had an impact on the election. Think about what had happened during his campaign. All the quotes about Mexican rapist, a Muslim ban, the Access Hollywood tape, his comments about his daughter, past affairs, etc. All that's ok, but having an affair with Stormy would be so horrible he would lose? That would be the straw that broke the camel's back? Seems like that would have probably gained him some votes from men.
Click to expand...
Your team can make that argument. But you’ve got sworn testimony from Cohen and Pecker that Trump instructed them to help the campaign. We’ve already had one tape leak. We don’t know what else is out there. But even if they didn’t have that, it’s clearly to assist in his campaign. John Edwards has already set precedent in this type of case

He should just own it and move on.
 
ticket2ride04 said:
Not at the moment. But he’s shown that the world didn’t end when someone as sloppy as him won. The American Republic is strong and built to weather these storms. He’s exposed a lot of hypocrisy on both political spectrums which is always a good thing.




Obama could have been better for the economy but to call it a lost decade is ridiculous. What he inherited vs what Trump inherited is night and day. Trump was handed the keys to a Ferrari and he hasn’t really opened it up yet. That’s been most disappointing to me. A guy like Romeny or Bloomberg would have us racing down the road right now.
Click to expand...

I don't buy that one bit. Obama had eight years to fix the economy, and all he did was give taxpayer money to his buddies on Wall Street and in green energy boondoggles. We didn't need a decade to fix this mess. The crash of 1920 was fixed in about a year, and by many measures that crash was worse than the Great Depression.
 
prlyles said:
Any lawyer worth his salt should be working behind the scene getting him a plea deal for no charges being filed in exchange for him resigning
Click to expand...
No. He just needs to own it and claim it was a mistake. Pay a fine.

The problem if he does that is:

1. He gives the story and accusations credibility.

2. If he’s lied in any way to the Feds. It’s slippery right now
 
NoleSoup4U said:
I don't buy that one bit. Obama had eight years to fix the economy, and all he did was give taxpayer money to his buddies on Wall Street and in green energy boondoggles. We didn't need a decade to fix this mess. The crash of 1920 was fixed in about a year, and by many measures that crash was worse than the Great Depression.
Click to expand...
Whoa whoa there’s a lot to address here.

1. You think the economy and America was in shambles late into the Obama presidency? What metric can you cite to support that?

2. We recovered front he Great Depression in one year? If you believe that, I can’t take anything you say seriously.
 
  • Like
Reactions: SorryNotSorry
ticket2ride04 said:
If someone contributes anything over $2,700 with the intent to help the candidate and fails to disclose the contribution, it’s a campaign finance violation. No room for debate here. It’s part of why Cohen is going to prison.
Click to expand...

Dershowitz disagrees with your, and the medias, assessment of what likely happened. He argues that it isn't a campaign violation if Cohen was getting reimbursed by Trump, which I'm guessing he was since I couldn't see Cohen forking out almost $300k of his own money to help Trump out.
 
NoleSoup4U said:
I don't buy that one bit. Obama had eight years to fix the economy, and all he did was give taxpayer money to his buddies on Wall Street and in green energy boondoggles. We didn't need a decade to fix this mess. The crash of 1920 was fixed in about a year, and by many measures that crash was worse than the Great Depression.
Click to expand...
Also, the crash didn’t happen in 1920
 
NoleSoup4U said:
I don't buy that one bit. Obama had eight years to fix the economy, and all he did was give taxpayer money to his buddies on Wall Street and in green energy boondoggles. We didn't need a decade to fix this mess. The crash of 1920 was fixed in about a year, and by many measures that crash was worse than the Great Depression.
Click to expand...

Your history knowledge continues to suck.
 
  • Like
Reactions: SorryNotSorry and ticket2ride04
ticket2ride04 said:
Whoa whoa there’s a lot to address here.

1. You think the economy and America was in shambles late into the Obama presidency? What metric can you cite to support that?

2. We recovered front he Great Depression in one year? If you believe that, I can’t take anything you say seriously.
Click to expand...

1. Jobs and Growth.

2. I didn't say we recovered from the Great Depression in one year. I stated that we recovered from the 1920 crash in about a year to a year and a half.

The tax cuts have helped grow the economy, and we've actually collected more tax revenue with the cuts from everything I've read on the subject.
 
ticket2ride04 said:
Your team can make that argument. But you’ve got sworn testimony from Cohen and Pecker that Trump instructed them to help the campaign. We’ve already had one tape leak. We don’t know what else is out there. But even if they didn’t have that, it’s clearly to assist in his campaign. John Edwards has already set precedent in this type of case

He should just own it and move on.
Click to expand...
Cohen and Pecker aren't really the most creditable witnesses. I'm not sure the John Edwards comparison is entirely accurate, but I understand why you are using it. His reputation was somewhat better and he didn't have a track record for that sort of thing. Trump has a track record for it. It just seems there's enough grey area to cut a favorable deal.
 
  • Like
Reactions: NoleSoup4U
NoleSoup4U said:
Dershowitz disagrees with your, and the medias, assessment of what likely happened. He argues that it isn't a campaign violation if Cohen was getting reimbursed by Trump, which I'm guessing he was since I couldn't see Cohen forking out almost $300k of his own money to help Trump out.
Click to expand...
Dershowitz agrees with me:

https://thehill.com/opinion/judiciary/403072-did-president-trump-violate-campaign-finance-laws

A candidate is free to contribute to his or her own campaign. It also is not criminal for a candidate to pay hush money to women whose disclosures might endanger his campaign. So if candidate Trump paid hush money to his two accusers, there would be no violation of any campaign or other laws. To be sure, if he did so for the purpose of helping his campaign, as distinguished from helping his marriage, his campaign would have to disclose any such contribution, and failure to do so might be a violation of a campaign law, but the payments themselves would be entirely lawful.
 
tarheel0910 said:
Cohen and Pecker aren't really the most creditable witnesses. I'm not sure the John Edwards comparison is entirely accurate, but I understand why you are using it. His reputation was somewhat better and he didn't have a track record for that sort of thing. Trump has a track record for it. It just seems there's enough grey area to cut a favorable deal.
Click to expand...

Mueller is using the same tactic he used in the '70s while going after the Hell's Angel's organization. He lost that one because all the people he gave immunity to, in order to testify, weren't found to be credible. Does that remind you of anything?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
ADVERTISEMENT

Latest posts

ADVERTISEMENT
Top Bottom
Back