Trump To Use Executive Privilege?

[carpedm9587]

The only one slow walking it, as he has been doing since day one, is the president itself. His obstruction and attempted obstruction is itself evidence of his guilt, and now he wants to slow it down as much as possible in the hopes of getting him through to the point where impeachent is no longer viable. Are you really that blind.

Actually, I think Trump is going to continue to be his own worst enemy. The more he hides, the more he gives his political opponents ammunition to hit him with "what do you have to hide?" The more he hides and resists, the longer the Dems can justify stretching out the proceedings, right into the general election cycle (not that the Dems are likely to let it go before election day, mind you). The battle is not for the Trump lovers or Trump haters (and I count myself among the latter). Their vote is largely a foregone conclusion. Trump's base is not going to abandon him short of him shooting someone on 5th Avenue (and I have to wonder if they would do so even then), and Trump's opposition is not going to vote for him (and I have to wonder if we would do so even if Trump personally paid the medical bills of everyone struggling with cancer).

The battle is for that array of voters who swallowed hard and voted for Trump as a "better alternative than Hillary" or as "a hope for change via an outsider." The more Trump is seen by then as continuing the swamp he had promised to drain, as not taking actions to make the day-to-day lives of the average person better (spoon feeding his cronies and the wealthy instead), and as hopelessly mired in narcissism and childish behavior, the more likely they are to cast a vote for a more stable, more presidential, more reasonable candidate.

I keep looking at that narrow, 70,000-vote win. It would not take a lot of people who were near that middle point to shift to the left to show Trump the door. 2018 suggested that shift is in place. The signs, at least right now, for 2020 are hopeful. My prediction: Dems take the Executive and keep the House but don't take the Senate. That would not be my ideal outcome, but I could live with it. My ideal is that Dems take the Executive and Senate and lose the House.

[Mountain Man]

The more he hides...

Trump fully cooperated with Mueller and gave AG Barr permission to release a lightly redacted version of Mueller's report when he could have invoked executive privilege and buried the whole thing. He's not acting like a man who's trying to hide anything. If he did anything for which he could be impeached then Mueller would have found it.

[carpedm9587]

Trump fully cooperated with Mueller and gave AG Barr permission to release a lightly redacted version of Mueller's report when he could have invoked executive privilege and buried the whole thing. He's not acting like a man who's trying to hide anything. If he did anything for which he could be impeached then Mueller would have found it.

"Fully cooperated" is more than a bit of a stretch. He spent months undermining the investigation at every turn. He refused to be interviewed and provided (apparently vague) answers in writing. And then he appointed a new AG who had already written against the report, and then set out on a campaign to "manage" the release and spin its contents, including that amazingly bogus 4-page report that even some Republicans are saying he should be held to account for. Trump is hiding a great deal, MM, that you really have to squint to ignore.

1) The Report (I have no problem with a redacted report for the public, but Congress should see the whole thing)
2) His tax returns (not only is how he is likely enriching himself from the presidency an issue, but so is any information about ongoing entanglements with other powers and his own business).
3) His inauguration committee finances (not only did he raise twice as much as previous presidencies, he did so for a smaller set of activities, apparently steered much of the business towards his own businesses, and apparently received some of those donations as much as 2 months after the events in question when more than enough had already been gathered to pay for them. Pay-to-play is a distinct possibility)

As far as I am concerned, that is just the beginning. There is a great deal about this man that I want to see revealed because I am reasonably sure it will significantly sway that center set of voters, the ones who pinched their nose and pulled the lever for Trump as a "least onerous choice." Any legally viable way to make that happen is fine by me. I realize you are as much a Trump lover as I am a Trump hater, and neither one of us is likely to be swayed from our stance. But you aren't the person I am most interested in seeing swayed, because I know that you (and pretty much all of Trump's base) is locked in and will not be swayed. Frankly, I won't likely be swayed either. I have watched Trump, listened to him, followed his words and choices and actions, and find him a reprehensible man that I am ashamed to have in the highest office in our land. He cannot be (legally) gone soon enough.

[seer]

1) The Report (I have no problem with a redacted report for the public, but Congress should see the whole thing)
2) His tax returns (not only is how he is likely enriching himself from the presidency an issue, but so is any information about ongoing entanglements with other powers and his own business).
3) His inauguration committee finances (not only did he raise twice as much as previous presidencies, he did so for a smaller set of activities, apparently steered much of the business towards his own businesses, and apparently received some of those donations as much as 2 months after the events in question when more than enough had already been gathered to pay for them. Pay-to-play is a distinct possibility)

I don't think investigating these will go over big with the public. After the whole collusion, Trump is a trader thing, these will look petty.

[Mountain Man]

"Fully cooperated" is more than a bit of a stretch.

No it's not.

"The White House fully cooperated with the Special Counsel's investigation, providing unfettered access to campaign and White House documents, directing senior aides to testify freely, and asserting no privilege claims. And at the same time, the President took no act that in fact deprived the Special Counsel of the documents and witnesses necessary to complete his investigation."
-Attorney General William Barr

[carpedm9587]

No it's not.

Of course, you saying so makes ALL the difference...

"The White House fully cooperated with the Special Counsel's investigation, providing unfettered access to campaign and White House documents, directing senior aides to testify freely, and asserting no privilege claims. And at the same time, the President took no act that in fact deprived the Special Counsel of the documents and witnesses necessary to complete his investigation."
-Attorney General William Barr

Right - let's all adjust our beliefs based on a quote from a man who had already published his anti-Mueller position, who's 4-page summary was an amazing spin on the actual document worthy of your stile of cherry-picking, and who is a demonstrable Trump sycophant.

Really, MM? This is what you have?

[JimL]

No it's not.

"The White House fully cooperated with the Special Counsel's investigation, providing unfettered access to campaign and White House documents, directing senior aides to testify freely, and asserting no privilege claims. And at the same time, the President took no act that in fact deprived the Special Counsel of the documents and witnesses necessary to complete his investigation."
-Attorney General William Barr

You really need to come out from that bubble, MM. You can't see anything that doesn't confirm what you already believe, which is probably all you ever see because it's all you ever look for. That's why ya'll are so fearful of Congressional hearings!

[seer]

You really need to come out from that bubble, MM. You can't see anything that doesn't confirm what you already believe, which is probably all you ever see because it's all you ever look for. That's why ya'll are so fearful of Congressional hearings!

Did you miss this Jim?

Oh please with the democratic institutions, you cared nothing about Lois Lerner stonewalling congress by claiming the fifth with the IRS targeting of conservative groups, or Eric Holder stonewalling on fast and furious. Where hundreds of Mexicans were killed by these illegal firearms and one border patrol officer. If you did decried these please link your posts...If not, this is no more than partisan pap on your part.

[JimL]

Did you miss this Jim?

Oh please with the democratic institutions, you cared nothing about Lois Lerner stonewalling congress by claiming the fifth with the IRS targeting of conservative groups, or Eric Holder stonewalling on fast and furious. Where hundreds of Mexicans were killed by these illegal firearms and one border patrol officer. If you did decried these please link your posts...If not, this is no more than partisan pap on your part.

Looks to me as though you are admitting to knowing that Trump is stonewalling. Good man. Now, if you honestly care about democracy and your country let your cohorts know.

[Mountain Man]

Of course, you saying so makes ALL the difference...



Right - let's all adjust our beliefs based on a quote from a man who had already published his anti-Mueller position, who's 4-page summary was an amazing spin on the actual document worthy of your stile of cherry-picking, and who is a demonstrable Trump sycophant.

Really, MM? This is what you have?

Your argument is not with me but with AG Barr, the facts, and the law

[seer]

Looks to me as though you are admitting to knowing that Trump is stonewalling. Good man. Now, if you honestly care about democracy and your country let your cohorts know.

No Jim, it is your double standard and the fact that you care nothing about democratic institutions or transparency when it is your guy. So spare us your fake outrage...

[carpedm9587]

Your argument is not with me but with AG Barr, the facts, and the law

You aren't presenting "facts" and "the law" MM. You're presenting quotes from Trump cronies and politicians and cherry-picked excepts from the Mueller report to make your case. It's not much of a case.

[Mountain Man]

You're presenting quotes from Trump cronies and politicians and cherry-picked excepts from the Mueller report to make your case. It's not much of a case.

Right. You're getting as bad as Jimmy the way you uncritically spew the liberal talking points.

[carpedm9587]

Right. You're getting as bad as Jimmy the way you uncritically spew the liberal talking points.

I haven't actually spouted any "liberal talking points," AFAIK. I've simply called you out for cherry picking quotes, and trying to make a legal case by quoting politicians and and Trump cronies. One doesn't have to be a liberal to point out a bad argument. And now you're apparently trying to divert attention from the problem, which doesn't make it go away.

Sorry, MM, but this was not one of your better rants.

And now I'm definitely into repeating myself, so I'll leave the last word to you.

[Mountain Man]

I haven't actually spouted any "liberal talking points,"

Actually, you have.