POTUS Donald Trump

[PseudoSABR]

 

 

Once top Democrats began to back away slowly, this is what I expected. I still think it's important for us to see the full report, but don't expect a smoking gun. 2 years ago democrats were hoping for the smoking gun, and it just didn't happen. Trump is still a slime ball for campaign violations and obstruction of justice, but the investigation want enough to prove criminal conspiracy with Russia. However, I do think they are lucky Russia didn't attempt to influence the Trump campaign more, because I don't believe they had the self control to say no.

I'm seeing that the Padapolous (or whatever his name is) said they Trump campaign actually got the emails from the Russians through wikileaks, but that Padapolous wasn't credible.

 

Here's the twitter feed I'm following:

 

I think people are jumping the gun on the significance (or lack thereof) of the report before it's even been read or absorbed.  Give it day or two.

[LaBombo]

 

The Trump "I'm ****ed" line is going to be a classic, though.

 

Other than its 'R' rating, it's one of the most meme-able utterances of the decade.

 

In the context of the scene in which the line was delivered within the melodrama that is Trump's presidency, it becomes pretty clear that he meant that the appearance of impropriety and the inexhaustible supply of media fodder arising from a special counsel investigation would ruin the effectiveness of his presidency, rather than that he saw an actual finding of guilt or actionable cause for impeachment eventually coming from the investigation.

 

The twofold irony is that the "f-ed" line itself will probably be a bigger headache for him than any actual findings of the redacted full report, and that his presidency so far seems almost to have been scripted from the start to remove any shred of a benefit of the doubt that anyone but his supporters would give him with regard to the context of that line.

 

Assuming that Trump's "F-ed" was referring to his ability to govern and not his chances of remaining in office, then I think it's cause for entire non-Trumpian electorate to breathe a sigh of relief: it shows that Trump apparently sought the presidency with at least some intent to actually govern, rather than to simply punk the entire nation by proving he could be elected.

[PseudoSABR]

 

Other than its 'R' rating, it's one of the most meme-able utterances of the decade.

 

In the context of the scene in which the line was delivered within the melodrama that is Trump's presidency, it becomes pretty clear that he meant that the appearance of impropriety and the inexhaustible supply of media fodder arising from a special counsel investigation would ruin the effectiveness of his presidency, rather than that he saw an actual finding of guilt or actionable cause for impeachment eventually coming from the investigation.

 

The twofold irony is that the "f-ed" line itself will probably be a bigger headache for him than any actual findings of the redacted full report, and that his presidency so far seems almost to have been scripted from the start to remove any shred of a benefit of the doubt that anyone but his supporters would give him with regard to the context of that line.

 

Assuming that Trump's "F-ed" was referring to his ability to govern and not his chances of remaining in office, then I think it's cause for entire non-Trumpian electorate to breathe a sigh of relief: it shows that Trump apparently sought the presidency with at least some intent to actually govern, rather than to simply punk the entire nation by proving he could be elected.

I think you might be imputing a bit too much self-awareness onto Trump though your reading may be right.  Given the extent to which he seems to have obstructed, my sense is that there was a there-there, even if it could never be proven in a court a law, and Trump's worries about a media scandal were secondary at best.

[LaBombo]

 

I think you might be imputing a bit too much self-awareness onto Trump though your reading may be right.  Given the extent to which he seems to have obstructed, my sense is that there was a there-there, even if it could never be proven in a court a law, and Trump's worries about a media scandal were secondary at best.

 

You may be right; Trump has shown an unflagging willingness to sink beneath even the most minimal expectations on multiple occasions during his presidency.

 

On the other hand, there's his assertion just after the F'ed thing in which he states "Everyone tells me that if you get one of these independent counsels it ruins your presidency.  It takes years and years and I won't be able to do anything".

 

That part, at least, sounds like a guy seeing what's left of his political capital evaporating, as opposed to his office or his freedom from incarceration.

[D. Hocking]

I have to wonder what Barr was thinking when joining this administration at this stage of his career.   He has not exactly come across as an attorney general to admire for his dedication to the job and the country and comes across as the Trump's personal defense attorney.  Plus it just dug up his past where he might not have been exactly forthright in his previous AG stint.

[TheLeviathan]

The most shocking thing about the "I'm F'ed" remark is that it demonstrates Trump is capable of self-awareness.

[TheLeviathan]

Also shocked that he hird people competent enough to ignore him 10 times from committing obstruction.  Basically, he was saved from obstruction by renegade staffers who think he's a joke.

 

The times we live in man.....

[PseudoSABR]

 

I have to wonder what Barr was thinking when joining this administration at this stage of his career.   He has not exactly come across as an attorney general to admire for his dedication to the job and the country and comes across as the Trump's personal defense attorney.  Plus it just dug up his past where he might not have been exactly forthright in his previous AG stint.

Russians or GOP have dirt on him?  Why did Lindsey Graham do an about-face on decency? IIRC, didn't the Russians also hack GOP emails which were never released? 

[gunnarthor]

 

Russians or GOP have dirt on him?  Why did Lindsey Graham do an about-face on decency? IIRC, didn't the Russians also hack GOP emails which were never released? 

I mean, I've read that conspiracy theory too but Graham's most likely about face is that he knows the GOP base is 100% Trump and he doesn't want to be primaried in 2020 from the right. If he was, he could very well lose.

[Badsmerf]

I mean, I've read that conspiracy theory too but Graham's most likely about face is that he knows the GOP base is 100% Trump and he doesn't want to be primaried in 2020 from the right. If he was, he could very well lose.

My take as well. Keep your friends close and your enemies closer. After he makes it through 2020 I'll be interested how he acts. He is a politician after all...

[gunnarthor]

I will say, after the Mueller report, anyone supporting Trump is ****ing insane.

 

"The Mueller report makes unmistakably clear that Americans were attacked by foreign military units: specifically Russian “Military Units 26165 and 74455.” And it reminds us that the president and members of his campaign invited and welcomed those attacks, even if it did not arrange them, and that they were eager to profit from the proceeds of those attacks. That should be of immense concern. If the attack were a bombing rather than a hacking, perhaps the magnitude of the problem would be clearer. The hack was no less an attack than something more literally explosive."

 

https://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2019/04/19/mueller-report-analysis-legal-experts-226662

 

Even if you want Trump to "own the libtards", it's time to grow up.

[ashbury]

I will say, after the Mueller report, anyone supporting Trump is ****ing insane.

Moderator's note: Look, that is over the line, even in a political thread. Debate the topic, not the state of mind of other posters (unspecified or otherwise).

[PseudoSABR]

This 538 chat on the Mueller report is a useful discussion for those wanting to know a bit more about what's in the report without actually having to read it. 

[ashbury]

This 538 chat on the Mueller report is a useful discussion for those wanting to know a bit more about what's in the report without actually having to read it. 

The quantity is too much for me, but many people are reading it and summarizing by now, and what I like to do is then verify by looking up the passage they quote and look also at the surrounding context in the released text. The PDF I downloaded is for some reason not searchable, but the NYT has a searchable copy that isn't behind their paywall.

 https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2019/04/18/us/politics/mueller-report-document.html#g-page-202

 

The redactions did not include the F-word in that one passage being bandied about.

[Bark's Lounge]

I am not going to defend gunarthor for what he said.... he can defend himself. But I have his back 100%. This is the worst I have seen the state of this country in the almost 44 years of my existence. When the leader of the free world can't condemn a pussy ass band of bigots that marched on Charlottesville , VA - Who were carrying tiki torches, chanting "Jews will not replace us" and "Our Blood, Our Soil" which one of them murdered an innocent woman, and to add on the colored people "****hole Countries", etc., etc., etc., etc., etc., x infinity kind of comments. I believe gunarthors post was sort of mild. Our current president is a cancer... and it's not even political to me any more... give me John Kasich, give me Jeb Bush. When you vote to destroy something, sometimes you destroy yourself.

[ewen21]

Obama couldnt condemn Islamic terrorism. Where was your outrage for that?

 

I never threw a conniption over that. I know some people were angered by it but nowhere near how whites on the far left got about Trump on Charlottiesville.

 

Is Trump an Islamophobe for posting what Ihlan said with an image of 9/11 accompanying her words? Amazing how people carry on about that. I'm GLAD he did that. People who there use wouldn't see or hear those comments get to see them. I'm far more disturbed by her as an American than I am Trump.

 

For the life of me I cannot understand anyone who sees that the other way

[Squirrel]

Obama couldnt condemn Islamic terrorism. Where was your outrage for that?

 

I never threw a conniption over that. I know some people were angered by it but nowhere near how whites on the far left got about Trump on Charlottiesville.

 

Is Trump an Islamophobe for posting what Ihlan said with an image of 9/11 accompanying her words? Amazing how people carry on about that. I'm GLAD he did that. People who there use wouldn't see or hear those comments get to see them. I'm far more disturbed by her as an American than I am Trump.

 

For the life of me I cannot understand anyone who sees that the other way

Because, in my opinion, radical/terrorist Christians are a far more dangerous in this country than radical/terrorist Muslims. That could be one reason.

 

Two, because most people, yourself included it seems, want to label every Muslim a terrorist. That's just wrong in the same way not every Christian is a terrorist. But Christian radicalization in this country is the bigger threat.

[Bark's Lounge]

 

Because, in my opinion, radical/terrorist Christians are a far more dangerous being in this country than radical/terrorist Muslims. That could be one reason.

 

Two, because most people, yourself included it seems, want to label every Muslim a terrorist. That's just wrong in the same way not every Christian is a terrorist. But Christian radicalization in this country is the bigger threat.

Love your post Carole!!! Spot on!

[TheLeviathan]

 

Because, in my opinion, radical/terrorist Christians are a far more dangerous being in this country than radical/terrorist Muslims. That could be one reason.

 

Two, because most people, yourself included it seems, want to label every Muslim a terrorist. That's just wrong in the same way not every Christian is a terrorist. But Christian radicalization in this country is the bigger threat.

 

The threat from radical Islam, at least to America, does seem to have been reduced.  I'm curious what you are referring to as radical/terrorist Christians?

[Squirrel]

 

The threat from radical Islam, at least to America, does seem to have been reduced.  I'm curious what you are referring to as radical/terrorist Christians?

White supremacy is very Christian based. It's on the rise.

 

And that's just one example.

[TheLeviathan]

 

White supremacy is very Christian based. It's on the rise.

 

I'm not sure that's fair.  Do you have anything to substantiate that tie?

 

I agree there is overlap, but that's not the same thing.

[TheLeviathan]

 

Obama couldnt condemn Islamic terrorism. Where was your outrage for that?

I never threw a conniption over that. I know some people were angered by it but nowhere near how whites on the far left got about Trump on Charlottiesville.

Is Trump an Islamophobe for posting what Ihlan said with an image of 9/11 accompanying her words? Amazing how people carry on about that. I'm GLAD he did that. People who there use wouldn't see or hear those comments get to see them. I'm far more disturbed by her as an American than I am Trump.

For the life of me I cannot understand anyone who sees that the other way

 

Obama listened to his generals, I am not going to be outraged by military strategy to protect Americans.  

 

People walked in our streets carrying torches and chanting racism and our President couldn't find the balls to say they were bad people.  He didn't get enough criticism for that.  It should stain him for the rest of his miserable life.

[Squirrel]

 

I'm not sure that's fair.  Do you have anything to substantiate that tie?

 

I agree there is overlap, but that's not the same thing.

I consider violence and death threats at women's clinics to be terrorist acts.

 

People like Dylann Roof.

 

The recent fires at black churches in Louisiana.

 

The recent fire at the Civil Rights center in Tennessee.

 

Anti-Muslim violence that has been on the rise since 9/11.

 

These are all acts of home grown, Christian terrorism.

[TheLeviathan]

 

I consider violence and death threats at women's clinics to be terrorist acts.

 

People like Dylann Roof.

 

The recent fires at black churches in Louisiana.

 

The recent fire at the Civil Rights center in Tennessee.

 

Anti-Muslim violence that has been on the rise since 9/11.

 

These are all acts of home grown, Christian terrorism.

 

The attacks on women's health clinics and Dylan Roof are absolutely Christian terrorists.  Some (maybe most?) of the attacks on Muslims probably fit as well, but that'd be case by case.

 

From what I can see they never found out who or how the fire in Tennessee happened - do you have some personal knowledge google doesn't to make the leap you just did?  It also seems odd to me that Christians would be using their religion to terrorize Christian churches.

 

You are lumping racism and violence with Christian and your evidence (other than those first two) isn't even good enough to be called flimsy.  Many Christian sects are awful, homophobic, and backwards.  However, I think you took your claim a step farther that facts do not justify. 

 

White Supremacy is a real and dangerous threat, however.  To that I would make no argument.  

[TheLeviathan]

In fact, the Louisiana jerk seems to have made this about attacking Baptists.  Along with the clearly racist motivations.

[Squirrel]

 

The attacks on women's health clinics and Dylan Roof are absolutely Christian terrorists.  Some (maybe most?) of the attacks on Muslims probably fit as well, but that'd be case by case.

 

From what I can see they never found out who or how the fire in Tennessee happened - do you have some personal knowledge google doesn't to make the leap you just did?  It also seems odd to me that Christians would be using their religion to terrorize Christian churches.

 

You are lumping racism and violence with Christian and your evidence (other than those first two) isn't even good enough to be called flimsy.  Many Christian sects are awful, homophobic, and backwards.  However, I think you took your claim a step farther that facts do not justify. 

 

White Supremacy is a real and dangerous threat, however.  To that I would make no argument.  

White Supremacy absolutely has its roots in Christianity. Yes, racism is at its core, but that racism is part of their Christian creed. It's part of the radicalization of Christianity. To dismiss this just because it's Christian on Christian doesn't make it less of Christian terrorism.

[TheLeviathan]

 

White Supremacy absolutely has its roots in Christianity. Yes, racism is at its core, but that racism is part of their Christian creed. It's part of the radicalization of Christianity. To dismiss this just because it's Christian on Christian doesn't make it less of Christian terrorism.

 

You're trying to wed two distinct problems (that overlap at times) and you simply don't have much grounds to do that as evidenced by how you had to pad your examples with some that were clearly false.

 

I have plenty of problems with Christians, I don't see the need to invent more.

[Squirrel]

 

You're trying to wed two distinct problems (that overlap at times) and you simply don't have much grounds to do that as evidenced by how you had to pad your examples with some that were clearly false.

 

I have plenty of problems with Christians, I don't see the need to invent more.

Well, it's how I see it ... part of why I left the church long ago. Racism is at the core of a lot of Christian terrorism. The KKK is prime in example.

[TheLeviathan]

Well, it's how I see it ... part of why I left the church long ago. Racism is at the core of a lot of Christian terrorism. The KKK is prime in example.

I can understand that, even relate to it a bit. Not sure it's part of the "creed" however.

 

Either way, you may want to consider whether you are being fair in analysis given just how far off base some of your examples were.

[Squirrel]

 

I can understand that, even relate to it a bit. Not sure it's part of the "creed" however.

Either way, you may want to consider whether you are being fair in analysis given just how far off base some of your examples were.

 It's just difficult for me to deny all the common threads. In many white supremacy groups, Christianity and racism are so intertwined. Maybe it's easier for you to isolate these threads. It isn't for me. And I don't say that to accuse Christians and Christianity in general as being bad here. Not at all. Nor are all white supremacy groups based in Christianity, but many, and I'd say the majority, are. There are many who believe that God decreed one race being superior to another. They feel their racism is justified in these beliefs. I'd say that's pretty extreme, and the resulting actions, terrorism. And the terrorism, Christian terrorism. I get it ... to you that's a leap you cannot take. I don't find that leap so great.

 

But back to my main point ... in this country, it's the greater danger, and not Islamic terrorism.