Any of you Trump supporters starting to get nervous?

[NoleSoup4U]

How the recovery was handled is much different than stating ‘the crash of 1920 was much worse than the Great Depression.’

Do you want to retract that assessment?

Because the argument has been made by some economists that this was the case. The argument is actually in the first article I linked. I don't expect you to agree with me if you're a monetarist or a Keynesian, but that's my argument laid out and backed by two sources.

 

[ticket2ride04]

I never said he was. The government doesn't want to use witness that aren't credible unless absolutely necessary. Unless the feds have some more evidence, then I think Trump doesn't have to give in right now from a legal standpoint. He can let it play out for a little while longer. Especially with this stuff going on in the Flynn case. He would probably be better off from a PR perspective if he did what you said though. People would forget about this in a few months if he just paid the fine.

Federal prosecutors have found both to be credible. This is the SDNY. They don’t fvck around. I’ve got to believe they have more up their sleeve as well.

But even if they didn’t, it’s a bad look for Trump and keeps the fact that he was having an affair while his pregnant wife was at home in the news cycle.

Most likely isn't the same as definitely. As for Cohen and Pecker, I've already posted on here a few times about Muellers earlier failure by trying the same tactic. Mueller isn't good at what he does. He never has been, and he never will be. He's the janitor of the political world. He just happens to be best friends with the manager.

1. The SDNY is handling Cohen and Pecker. Not Mueller

2. Mueller is fantastic at what he does. What makes you think otherwise?

 

[prlyles]

So he should resign just in case something happens in the future? That's a horrible idea and no lawyer worth his salt would recommended that. No prosecutor would even offer that either.

If Trump has been truthful to his lawyers they have a good idea what Mueller has and doesn't have.

 

[NoleSoup4U]

Federal prosecutors have found both to be credible. This is the SDNY. They don’t fvck around. I’ve got to believe they have more up their sleeve as well.

But even if they didn’t, it’s a bad look for Trump and keeps the fact that he was having an affair while his pregnant wife was at home in the news cycle.



1. The SDNY is handling Cohen and Pecker. Not Mueller

2. Mueller is fantastic at what he does. What makes you think otherwise?

Well, there was the investigation he botched with the Hell's Angels in the '70s. Then there was the anthrax investigation after 9/11 which led to him to harass and accuse two innocent men, destroying both their lives. One man sued the US government over it and won while the other was harassed to the point that he committed suicide.

 

[tarheel0910]

Federal prosecutors have found both to be credible. This is the SDNY. They don’t fvck around. I’ve got to believe they have more up their sleeve as well.

There is a difference between federal prosecutors and a jury. They will put them on the stand, but it will be because they have to not because they want to. It's definitely possible they have something else though.

But even if they didn’t, it’s a bad look for Trump and keeps the fact that he was having an affair while his pregnant wife was at home in the news cycle.

Agreed. Trump doesn't seem to think anything makes him look bad though.

 

[NoleSoup4U]

There is a difference between federal prosecutors and a jury. They will put them on the stand, but it will be because they have to not because they want to. It's definitely possible they have something else though.


Agreed. Trump doesn't seem to think anything makes him look bad though.

The always-Trumpers aren't going to care. The never-Trumpers will pull their hair out, even though their messiah Bill Clinton has done far worse, so it just comes down to what the rest of us think. Personally, I don't care. What I do care about is that damn $1.3 trillion spending bill he signed into legislation.

 

[ticket2ride04]

Well, there was the investigation he botched with the Hell's Angels in the '70s. Then there was the anthrax investigation after 9/11 which led to him to harass and accuse two innocent men, destroying both their lives. One man sued the US government over it and won while the other was harassed to the point that he committed suicide.

So you focus on two small data points and ignore the mountains of evidence to suggest he is great as what he does?

That’s what people with agenda’s do.

 

[NoleSoup4U]

So you focus on two small data points and ignore the mountains of evidence to suggest he is great as what he does?

That’s what people with agenda’s do.

Two small data points? He harassed an innocent civilian to the point that they committed suicide. That isn't a small deal, IMO. What are some of his great accomplishments?

 

[ticket2ride04]

There is a difference between federal prosecutors and a jury. They will put them on the stand, but it will be because they have to not because they want to. It's definitely possible they have something else though.


Agreed. Trump doesn't seem to think anything makes him look bad though.

- Trump will never take the stand. While the SDNY is full of accomplished people, it’s also highly political from a career advancement standpoint. It elevates guys like Rudy G. My guess is they would love to be the office that brings enough evidence to get the impeachment ball rolling. I think it’s doubtful that happens.

- He’s been largely right so far. The gamble is will the base and moderates who voted for him stick it out?

 

[NoleSoup4U]

- Trump will never take the stand. While the SDNY is full of accomplished people, it’s also highly political from a career advancement standpoint. It elevates guys like Rudy G. My guess is they would love to be the office that brings enough evidence to get the impeachment ball rolling. I think it’s doubtful that happens.

- He’s been largely right so far. The gamble is will the base and moderates who voted for him stick it out?

I don't think he has to worry about his base. One third will vote for him no matter what. One third will vote against him no matter what. Obviously it's that middle third that will matter. Those are always the voters that matter.

 

[ticket2ride04]

Two small data points? He harassed an innocent civilian to the point that they committed suicide. That isn't a small deal, IMO. What are some of his great accomplishments?

- enlisted and served in Vietnam
- prosecuted all sorts of criminals like Noriega, Gotti, Locerbie Bombing
- ran the FBI under two presidents
- continue white collar crime prosecution in the private sector including helping the nfl make the right decision regarding Ray Rice. Also prosecuted VW in their giant scam.

Mueller is widely considered by everyone to be a man of integrity. No one on the right objected when he was named.

 

[NoleSoup4U]

To take it even further, it'll only be the middle third in select states, like Florida, Ohio, Michigan, Wisconsin, and North Carolina.

 

[tarheel0910]

- Trump will never take the stand. While the SDNY is full of accomplished people, it’s also highly political from a career advancement standpoint. It elevates guys like Rudy G. My guess is they would love to be the office that brings enough evidence to get the impeachment ball rolling. I think it’s doubtful that happens.

I'm not arguing that the SDNY can't bring a strong case and/or they are bad at their job. What I'm saying is that at the end of the day, the jury needs to believe that the witnesses are credible. That's not always a sure thing when you don't have more evidence. I think they probably have something else though.

- He’s been largely right so far. The gamble is will the base and moderates who voted for him stick it out?

They will stick it out as long as they have a job to go to and money in their pocket. That's really what matters the most to voters.

ETA: The fact that the democrats don't have a great platform or a good candidate at this point doesn't help them. They've got to start promoting some viable candidates now to have a chance at 2020.

 

[NoleSoup4U]

- enlisted and served in Vietnam
- prosecuted all sorts of criminals like Noriega, Gotti, Locerbie Bombing
- ran the FBI under two presidents
- continue white collar crime prosecution in the private sector including helping the nfl make the right decision regarding Ray Rice. Also prosecuted VW in their giant scam.

Mueller is widely considered by everyone to be a man of integrity. No one on the right objected when he was named.

Nothing against his service in Vietnam and his integrity, but that's not really what I was talking about. Besides, there have been some shady stuff between he and Comey when one was at the FBI and the other was at Lockheed Martin. So, he basically ran the FBI during two presidencies and "only" really f'd up three times. I wonder what his track record would be next to other FBI directors?

 

[ticket2ride04]

Nothing against his service in Vietnam and his integrity, but that's not really what I was talking about. Besides, there have been some shady stuff between he and Comey when one was at the FBI and the other was at Lockheed Martin. So, he basically ran the FBI during two presidencies and "only" really f'd up three times. I wonder what his track record would be next to other FBI directors?

Sure thing. You’re right and everyone else that matters wrong. My apologies.

 

[ticket2ride04]

I'm not arguing that the SDNY can't bring a strong case and/or they are bad at their job. What I'm saying is that at the end of the day, the jury needs to believe that the witnesses are credible. That's not always a sure thing when you don't have more evidence. I think they probably have something else though.


They will stick it out as long as they have a job to go to and money in their pocket. That's really what matters the most to voters.

ETA: The fact that the democrats don't have a great platform or a good candidate at this point doesn't help them. They've got to start promoting some viable candidates now to have a chance at 2020.

- who are you talking about going in front of a jury? So far Cohen and others have admitted to wrong doings in order to take a plea deal. My guess is the SDNY has more but it only matters if Trump lied to Mueller’s team. I don’t think they have any smoking gun or that would have come out. They’re trying to get Trump on lying like they did with Clinton.

- the biggest issue is Dems don’t have anyone out there worth a shit. They need to tighten up.

 

[heelbent]

the biggest issue is Dems don’t have anyone out there worth a shit.

Not a single, solitary soul.

 

[ticket2ride04]

Not a single, solitary soul.

Dems need something like

Biden/Swalwell
Bloomberg/Hickenlooper
Or even Biden/Newsome


But Beto will get it and I’ll shake my head.

 

[tarheel0910]

who are you talking about going in front of a jury?

Cohen and the National Inquirer guy.

- the biggest issue is Dems don’t have anyone out there worth a shit. They need to tighten up.

Their best bet would be to run a minority. Someone like Warren. I think it's time to put an Indian in the WH.

 

[NoleSoup4U]

Sure thing. You’re right and everyone else that matters wrong. My apologies.

Your apologies are accepted.

 

[tarheel0910]

Here's a thought. Does anyone know what the statute of limitations are on campaign finance violations? If Trump wins in 2020, he could just ride this out and not have to worry about it. It would obviously be a PR nightmare, but Trump is the type of guy that thinks there's no such thing as bad publicity.

 

[ticket2ride04]

Cohen and the National Inquirer guy.


Their best bet would be to run a minority. Someone like Warren. I think it's time to put an Indian in the WH.

- Cohen and Pecker have plead guilty already. No jury to be involved. They will cooperate with the Feds.

- lol

 

[NoleSoup4U]

the biggest issue is Dems don’t have anyone out there worth a shit. They need to tighten up.

This is a massive problem, imo. It's bad enough having a two-party system, but right now it's really only a 1.5 party system. I also think all incumbents should be challenged in a primary. I'm tired of this whole issue of once you put a Republican or Democrat in the government you have to keep them until they lose. That's how you end up with people like Robert Byrd and Strom Thurman.

 

[ticket2ride04]

Here's a thought. Does anyone know what the statute of limitations are on campaign finance violations? If Trump wins in 2020, he could just ride this out and not have to worry about it. It would obviously be a PR nightmare, but Trump is the type of guy that thinks there's no such thing as bad publicity.

It’s already been discussed. 5 years. There is theory that it could be re-opened because he wasn’t prosecutable per the DOJ laws surrounding a sitting president. Plus it keeps the story front and center. If he owns it, it will be forgotten in a few news cycles.

 

[NoleSoup4U]

- Cohen and Pecker have plead guilty already. No jury to be involved. They will cooperate with the Feds.

- lol

I don't know much about Pecker, but they really can't use Cohen as a credible witness. That doesn't mean that he can't lead them to where some bodies are buried, but I have a hard time believing that anyone is going to find him to be credible.

 

[tarheel0910]

- Cohen and Pecker have plead guilty already. No jury to be involved. They will cooperate with the Feds.

I think you misunderstood what I was talking about. I was talking about the feds calling them as a witness in a hypothetical case against Trump.

 

[NoleSoup4U]

Dems need something like

Biden/Swalwell
Bloomberg/Hickenlooper
Or even Biden/Newsome


But Beto will get it and I’ll shake my head.

You want them to run The Groper in this #MeToo environment? He's worse than Trump.

 

[ticket2ride04]

This is a massive problem, imo. It's bad enough having a two-party system, but right now it's really only a 1.5 party system. I also think all incumbents should be challenged in a primary. I'm tired of this whole issue of once you put a Republican or Democrat in the government you have to keep them until they lose. That's how you end up with people like Robert Byrd and Strom Thurman.

Incumbents can be challenged in Presidential Primaries and they always are in House/Senate races.

Just a few years ago, people thought the Republican party was dead and didn't see a path to the White House. Even right up till the end, many thought Trump wouldn't win. Things change quickly in this country.

I don't know much about Pecker, but they really can't use Cohen as a credible witness. That doesn't mean that he can't lead them to where some bodies are buried, but I have a hard time believing that anyone is going to find him to be credible.

I think you misunderstood what I was talking about. I was talking about the feds calling them as a witness in a hypothetical case against Trump.

Cohen alone might not be credible, but paired with others and physical evidence he might be. Regardless, I don't ever see the President sitting on trial. Certainly not while he is President. And afterwards, I can't see it happening. Jury would be so tainted one way or the other.

 

[ticket2ride04]

You want them to run The Groper in this #MeToo environment? He's worse than Trump.

I don't have a particular rooting interest because no candidate really represents me. I just try to understand the political winds and adjust my sail accordingly.

If I could pick one person for the job, it would be Bloomberg. I would also love to see Mattis as Sec of Defense for life.

 

[NoleSoup4U]

Incumbents can be challenged in Presidential Primaries and they always are in House/Senate races.

Just a few years ago, people thought the Republican party was dead and didn't see a path to the White House. Even right up till the end, many thought Trump wouldn't win. Things change quickly in this country.






Cohen alone might not be credible, but paired with others and physical evidence he might be. Regardless, I don't ever see the President sitting on trial. Certainly not while he is President. And afterwards, I can't see it happening. Jury would be so tainted one way or the other.

I understand that there are still primaries, but I guess I just wish the parties would actually participate in them. How often do you see someone in party run against an incumbent? I'm sure it happens, but not often.

 

[NoleSoup4U]

I don't have a particular rooting interest because no candidate really represents me. I just try to understand the political winds and adjust my sail accordingly.

If I could pick one person for the job, it would be Bloomberg. I would also love to see Mattis as Sec of Defense for life.

Gotcha. I agree that they need better candidates. I just think if they ran Sad Joe that the Republicans already have fifteen women lined up to smash him to pieces.

 

[tarheel0910]

If I could pick one person for the job, it would be Bloomberg.

I'm going to pass on that one.

 

[ticket2ride04]

Gotcha. I agree that they need better candidates. I just think if they ran Sad Joe that the Republicans already have fifteen women lined up to smash him to pieces.

Joe would probably win. He would have easily won in 2016. He’s highly likable. Dems just need to run away from Corey Booker, Kamala Harris, and Liz Warren.

I'm going to pass on that one.

Why?

 

[NoleSoup4U]

Joe would probably win. He would have easily won in 2016. He’s highly likable. Dems just need to run away from Corey Booker, Kamala Harris, and Liz Warren.

Why?

Well, if he ran I'm sure it would be "a big f'ing deal."

 

[tarheel0910]

Why?

Multiple reasons.

-Changing NY law so he could serve a third term.
-I don't like his stance on abortion.
-His stance on weed.
-His stance on guns.
-His stance on immigration.
-His attempt to get rid of big drinks.

 

[ticket2ride04]

Multiple reasons.

-Changing NY law so he could serve a third term.
-I don't like his stance on abortion.
-His stance on weed.
-His stance on guns.
-His stance on immigration.
-His attempt to get rid of big drinks.

Fair enough. He’s pro-life, wants stricter gun control, and immigration reform. My only areas I disagree with him is on Weed. But I suspect his views on that have changed.

Regardless, he’s not going to mess with much of those if elected. He’s an actual businessman and would be great for this economy. Far better than anyone else.

 

[tarheel0910]

Fair enough. He’s pro-life, wants stricter gun control, and immigration reform. My only areas I disagree with him is on Weed. But I suspect his views on that have changed.

Unless something has changed, he's not pro life. And I'm not against immigration reform, but he doesn't really seem to want comprehensive reform. He's closer to an open borders type of guy.

 

[NoleSoup4U]

Fair enough. He’s pro-life, wants stricter gun control, and immigration reform. My only areas I disagree with him is on Weed. But I suspect his views on that have changed.

Regardless, he’s not going to mess with much of those if elected. He’s an actual businessman and would be great for this economy. Far better than anyone else.

That's possible. I would definitely rather have a businessman in there than a lawyer, but when you're that close to the top it worries me a little bit. Regardless, I have too many differences with him myself. Gun control is a real firm line with me. I think there are already too many laws on the books. It's our most important right as U.S. citizens.

 

[cletusnow]

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.

Not in the least. The only unlawful act would be the campaign finance issue and that’s difficult to prove. If they can prove it it’s not impeachable. Obama paid a fine of around $370k for a $2 million campaign finance violation. These amounts aren’t even close.
I think he carries on out of spite and will turn the tables at some point.

 

[strummingram]

Multiple reasons.

-Changing NY law so he could serve a third term.
-I don't like his stance on abortion.
-His stance on weed.
-His stance on guns.
-His stance on immigration.
-His attempt to get rid of big drinks.

I wouldn't vote for Michael Bloomberg... no fvckin way! That dude scares me.