holmes435 wrote: ↑Sun Jul 12, 2020 11:27 pmold salt wrote: ↑Sun Jul 12, 2020 10:41 pmThe purpose of Mueller's investigation was to determine if Trump, or anyone in his campaign, conspired with Russia or committed espionage.holmes435 wrote: ↑Sun Jul 12, 2020 8:47 pmMueller laid out more than a dozen federal crimes. But since the current DOJ's policy is that you can't indict a sitting president, well, we know the rest.old salt wrote: ↑Sun Jul 12, 2020 7:01 pmSo you say. Prove it. Mueller & his Team USA All Stars could not.seacoaster wrote: ↑Sun Jul 12, 2020 6:54 pm A private citizen of the US worked with foreign spies to damage one presidential candidate and help the other. That Presidential candidate accepted the help. When caught, the private citizen lied. When the private citizen was indicted, tried before an American jury, convicted and punished, the President commuted his sentence.
Nothing from our faux patriots. Stand for America when it matters.
Mueller delivered nothing to substantiate such allegations. He obtained pleas & convictions on unrelated crimes or process crimes set up by his investigation.
When Mueller was appointed, I was fully prepared to believe anything about Trump.
He did not deliver, probably because as Investigator Strzok told Page, there's no there, there.
It was a very compelling narrative. Steele earned his fee. Give it up & move on. Mission Accomplished.
Now -- Let the voters decide.
Except Mueller DID find conspiracy and collusion, he just didn't have the evidence to prove intent, especially since he didn't follow up on some very basic things such as deposing the president. You of all people know that accidental leakage in most other capacities is severely criminal.
Cite the specific evidence. Insufficient to prove intent, or just insufficient ?
And didn't Clinton's impeachment investigation start some 6 years earlier about some real estate deals years 15 years before his presidency? Trump has clearly knowingly committed many federal crimes, and perhaps more damning, idiotically stumbled into many more.
...& Starr was ready to wrap it up before Paula Jone's lawyers forced Starr to investigate, then Isikoff & Goldberg showed up with tape recordings of Clinton witness tampering & suborning perjury. Show us comparable evidence on Trump. You'd think a criminal as dumb as Trump wou;ld be easier to catch.
"The Deep State" aka the American Intelligence Community
Re: The Deep State - aka "Intelligence" Community
Re: The Deep State - aka "Intelligence" Community
The Mueller Report. Insufficient to prove intent (or unwilling to pursue).old salt wrote: ↑Sun Jul 12, 2020 11:38 pmholmes435 wrote: ↑Sun Jul 12, 2020 11:27 pmold salt wrote: ↑Sun Jul 12, 2020 10:41 pmThe purpose of Mueller's investigation was to determine if Trump, or anyone in his campaign, conspired with Russia or committed espionage.holmes435 wrote: ↑Sun Jul 12, 2020 8:47 pmMueller laid out more than a dozen federal crimes. But since the current DOJ's policy is that you can't indict a sitting president, well, we know the rest.old salt wrote: ↑Sun Jul 12, 2020 7:01 pmSo you say. Prove it. Mueller & his Team USA All Stars could not.seacoaster wrote: ↑Sun Jul 12, 2020 6:54 pm A private citizen of the US worked with foreign spies to damage one presidential candidate and help the other. That Presidential candidate accepted the help. When caught, the private citizen lied. When the private citizen was indicted, tried before an American jury, convicted and punished, the President commuted his sentence.
Nothing from our faux patriots. Stand for America when it matters.
Mueller delivered nothing to substantiate such allegations. He obtained pleas & convictions on unrelated crimes or process crimes set up by his investigation.
When Mueller was appointed, I was fully prepared to believe anything about Trump.
He did not deliver, probably because as Investigator Strzok told Page, there's no there, there.
It was a very compelling narrative. Steele earned his fee. Give it up & move on. Mission Accomplished.
Now -- Let the voters decide.
Except Mueller DID find conspiracy and collusion, he just didn't have the evidence to prove intent, especially since he didn't follow up on some very basic things such as deposing the president. You of all people know that accidental leakage in most other capacities is severely criminal.
Cite the specific evidence. Insufficient to prove intent, or just insufficient ?
And didn't Clinton's impeachment investigation start some 6 years earlier about some real estate deals years 15 years before his presidency? Trump has clearly knowingly committed many federal crimes, and perhaps more damning, idiotically stumbled into many more.
...& Starr was ready to wrap it up before Paula Jone's lawyers forced Starr to investigate, then Isikoff & Goldberg showed up with tape recordings of Clinton witness tampering & suborning perjury. Show us comparable evidence on Trump. You'd think a criminal as dumb as Trump wou;ld be easier to catch.
Trump's been easy to catch. Just look at the thousands of lawsuits against him even prior to his presidency. He's been guilty of a ton of stuff but he's been able to avoid serious consequences like so many other fat cats. And I do mean fat.
Re: The Deep State - aka "Intelligence" Community
Has anyone read the full un-redacted Mueller Report?
Seems like a lot of people are saying it "didn't find"...
Seems like a lot of people are saying it "didn't find"...
by cradleandshoot » Fri Aug 13, 2021 8:57 am
Mr moderator, deactivate my account.
You have heck this forum up to making it nothing more than a joke. I hope you are happy.
This is cradle and shoot signing out.
Mr moderator, deactivate my account.
You have heck this forum up to making it nothing more than a joke. I hope you are happy.
This is cradle and shoot signing out.
-
- Posts: 12878
- Joined: Fri Mar 15, 2019 11:19 am
Re: The Deep State - aka "Intelligence" Community
It still boggles the mind that Stone was convicted by a jury whose foreperson was so blatantly partisan and in no universe could ever do anything other than vote for a conviction. The Judge Amy Jackson Berman isn't far behind the foreperson either.
How can anyone justify this system anymore?
-
- Posts: 8866
- Joined: Thu Aug 02, 2018 4:36 pm
Re: The Deep State - aka "Intelligence" Community
You're topping yourself with Stupid.Peter Brown wrote: ↑Tue Jul 14, 2020 8:02 am
It still boggles the mind that Stone was convicted by a jury whose foreperson was so blatantly partisan and in no universe could ever do anything other than vote for a conviction. The Judge Amy Jackson Berman isn't far behind the foreperson either.
How can anyone justify this system anymore?
Re: The Deep State - aka "Intelligence" Community
With made up facts about the foreperson and the judge. Pretty standard PB - worthless commentary...seacoaster wrote: ↑Tue Jul 14, 2020 9:46 amYou're topping yourself with Stupid.Peter Brown wrote: ↑Tue Jul 14, 2020 8:02 am
It still boggles the mind that Stone was convicted by a jury whose foreperson was so blatantly partisan and in no universe could ever do anything other than vote for a conviction. The Judge Amy Jackson Berman isn't far behind the foreperson either.
How can anyone justify this system anymore?
And did OS actually read the unredacted report? I would like to know where he got it...
-
- Posts: 12878
- Joined: Fri Mar 15, 2019 11:19 am
Re: The Deep State - aka "Intelligence" Community
RedFromMI wrote: ↑Tue Jul 14, 2020 9:50 amWith made up facts about the foreperson and the judge. Pretty standard PB - worthless commentary...seacoaster wrote: ↑Tue Jul 14, 2020 9:46 amYou're topping yourself with Stupid.Peter Brown wrote: ↑Tue Jul 14, 2020 8:02 am
It still boggles the mind that Stone was convicted by a jury whose foreperson was so blatantly partisan and in no universe could ever do anything other than vote for a conviction. The Judge Amy Jackson Berman isn't far behind the foreperson either.
How can anyone justify this system anymore?
And did OS actually read the unredacted report? I would like to know where he got it...
The jury forewoman posted specifically about the Stone case before she was selected to sit on the jury, as she retweeted an argument mocking those who considered Stone's dramatic arrest in a predawn raid by a federal tactical team to be excessive force. She also suggested President Trump and his supporters are racist and praised the investigation conducted by Special Counsel Robert Mueller, which ultimately led to Stone's prosecution.
U.S. District Judge Amy Berman Jackson had denied a defense request to strike a potential juror who was Obama-era press official with admitted anti-Trump views -- and whose husband worked at the same Justice Department division that handled the probe leading to Stone's arrest. And, another Stone juror, Seth Cousins, donated to former Democratic presidential candidate Beto O'Rourke and other progressive causes, federal election record revelaed.
When the Left birdbrains eviscerate the judicial system, watch them squeal when it comes for them.
Re: The Deep State - aka "Intelligence" Community
The "Left" has nothing to do with this. The prosecutors worked for the Trump administration justice department...Peter Brown wrote: ↑Tue Jul 14, 2020 9:54 am
(omitted)
The jury forewoman posted specifically about the Stone case before she was selected to sit on the jury, as she retweeted an argument mocking those who considered Stone's dramatic arrest in a predawn raid by a federal tactical team to be excessive force. She also suggested President Trump and his supporters are racist and praised the investigation conducted by Special Counsel Robert Mueller, which ultimately led to Stone's prosecution.
Again you fail the logic test. Her social media do not automatically make (as you assume) her "so blatantly partisan and in no universe could ever do anything other than vote for a conviction". And Stone's lawyers were the ones who could have struck her from the pool by doing their due diligence in jury selection, but failed to do so. Also - she is one of twelve. Have you ever been a jury foreperson in a criminal trial? I have. You cannot just push the other 11 any which way you desire...
U.S. District Judge Amy Berman Jackson had denied a defense request to strike a potential juror who was Obama-era press official with admitted anti-Trump views -- and whose husband worked at the same Justice Department division that handled the probe leading to Stone's arrest. And, another Stone juror, Seth Cousins, donated to former Democratic presidential candidate Beto O'Rourke and other progressive causes, federal election record revelaed.
Again, now you are up to 2 of 12. Who cares who donated to whom? Irrelevant in reality.
When the Left birdbrains eviscerate the judicial system, watch them squeal when it comes for them.
-
- Posts: 12878
- Joined: Fri Mar 15, 2019 11:19 am
Re: The Deep State - aka "Intelligence" Community
RedFromMI wrote: ↑Tue Jul 14, 2020 10:08 amThe "Left" has nothing to do with this. The prosecutors worked for the Trump administration justice department...Peter Brown wrote: ↑Tue Jul 14, 2020 9:54 am
(omitted)
The jury forewoman posted specifically about the Stone case before she was selected to sit on the jury, as she retweeted an argument mocking those who considered Stone's dramatic arrest in a predawn raid by a federal tactical team to be excessive force. She also suggested President Trump and his supporters are racist and praised the investigation conducted by Special Counsel Robert Mueller, which ultimately led to Stone's prosecution.
Again you fail the logic test. Her social media do not automatically make (as you assume) her "so blatantly partisan and in no universe could ever do anything other than vote for a conviction". And Stone's lawyers were the ones who could have struck her from the pool by doing their due diligence in jury selection, but failed to do so. Also - she is one of twelve. Have you ever been a jury foreperson in a criminal trial? I have. You cannot just push the other 11 any which way you desire...
U.S. District Judge Amy Berman Jackson had denied a defense request to strike a potential juror who was Obama-era press official with admitted anti-Trump views -- and whose husband worked at the same Justice Department division that handled the probe leading to Stone's arrest. And, another Stone juror, Seth Cousins, donated to former Democratic presidential candidate Beto O'Rourke and other progressive causes, federal election record revelaed.
Again, now you are up to 2 of 12. Who cares who donated to whom? Irrelevant in reality.
When the Left birdbrains eviscerate the judicial system, watch them squeal when it comes for them.
The same Justice Department that donated to HRC by a 98-2% margin? Did they all leave?
Re: The Deep State - aka "Intelligence" Community
Maybe that is because they knew what Trump would mean for the rule of law? You have data on that ratio? Or are you relying on Trump's claim of "15" angry prosecutors on Mueller's team (discredited for the most part)?Peter Brown wrote: ↑Tue Jul 14, 2020 10:23 amRedFromMI wrote: ↑Tue Jul 14, 2020 10:08 amThe "Left" has nothing to do with this. The prosecutors worked for the Trump administration justice department...Peter Brown wrote: ↑Tue Jul 14, 2020 9:54 am
(omitted)
The jury forewoman posted specifically about the Stone case before she was selected to sit on the jury, as she retweeted an argument mocking those who considered Stone's dramatic arrest in a predawn raid by a federal tactical team to be excessive force. She also suggested President Trump and his supporters are racist and praised the investigation conducted by Special Counsel Robert Mueller, which ultimately led to Stone's prosecution.
Again you fail the logic test. Her social media do not automatically make (as you assume) her "so blatantly partisan and in no universe could ever do anything other than vote for a conviction". And Stone's lawyers were the ones who could have struck her from the pool by doing their due diligence in jury selection, but failed to do so. Also - she is one of twelve. Have you ever been a jury foreperson in a criminal trial? I have. You cannot just push the other 11 any which way you desire...
U.S. District Judge Amy Berman Jackson had denied a defense request to strike a potential juror who was Obama-era press official with admitted anti-Trump views -- and whose husband worked at the same Justice Department division that handled the probe leading to Stone's arrest. And, another Stone juror, Seth Cousins, donated to former Democratic presidential candidate Beto O'Rourke and other progressive causes, federal election record revelaed.
Again, now you are up to 2 of 12. Who cares who donated to whom? Irrelevant in reality.
When the Left birdbrains eviscerate the judicial system, watch them squeal when it comes for them.
The same Justice Department that donated to HRC by a 98-2% margin? Did they all leave?
-
- Posts: 12878
- Joined: Fri Mar 15, 2019 11:19 am
Re: The Deep State - aka "Intelligence" Community
RedFromMI wrote: ↑Tue Jul 14, 2020 10:29 amMaybe that is because they knew what Trump would mean for the rule of law? You have data on that ratio? Or are you relying on Trump's claim of "15" angry prosecutors on Mueller's team (discredited for the most part)?Peter Brown wrote: ↑Tue Jul 14, 2020 10:23 amRedFromMI wrote: ↑Tue Jul 14, 2020 10:08 amThe "Left" has nothing to do with this. The prosecutors worked for the Trump administration justice department...Peter Brown wrote: ↑Tue Jul 14, 2020 9:54 am
(omitted)
The jury forewoman posted specifically about the Stone case before she was selected to sit on the jury, as she retweeted an argument mocking those who considered Stone's dramatic arrest in a predawn raid by a federal tactical team to be excessive force. She also suggested President Trump and his supporters are racist and praised the investigation conducted by Special Counsel Robert Mueller, which ultimately led to Stone's prosecution.
Again you fail the logic test. Her social media do not automatically make (as you assume) her "so blatantly partisan and in no universe could ever do anything other than vote for a conviction". And Stone's lawyers were the ones who could have struck her from the pool by doing their due diligence in jury selection, but failed to do so. Also - she is one of twelve. Have you ever been a jury foreperson in a criminal trial? I have. You cannot just push the other 11 any which way you desire...
U.S. District Judge Amy Berman Jackson had denied a defense request to strike a potential juror who was Obama-era press official with admitted anti-Trump views -- and whose husband worked at the same Justice Department division that handled the probe leading to Stone's arrest. And, another Stone juror, Seth Cousins, donated to former Democratic presidential candidate Beto O'Rourke and other progressive causes, federal election record revelaed.
Again, now you are up to 2 of 12. Who cares who donated to whom? Irrelevant in reality.
When the Left birdbrains eviscerate the judicial system, watch them squeal when it comes for them.
The same Justice Department that donated to HRC by a 98-2% margin? Did they all leave?
My bad!!! 97-3. Sorry. Off by one.
https://thehill.com/homenews/campaign/3 ... n-campaign
Could you now let me know if they all left? Thx.
Re: The Deep State - aka "Intelligence" Community
Again with the logic issue. Of those employees who donated enough to trigger documentation (something like $100) - it was 97% to 3%. Not surprising given Hillary was a known quantity and Trump definitely was not (or like some of us knew would be very bad). But to conflate that with the entire DOJ is woefully wrong.Peter Brown wrote: ↑Tue Jul 14, 2020 10:38 amRedFromMI wrote: ↑Tue Jul 14, 2020 10:29 amMaybe that is because they knew what Trump would mean for the rule of law? You have data on that ratio? Or are you relying on Trump's claim of "15" angry prosecutors on Mueller's team (discredited for the most part)?Peter Brown wrote: ↑Tue Jul 14, 2020 10:23 amRedFromMI wrote: ↑Tue Jul 14, 2020 10:08 amThe "Left" has nothing to do with this. The prosecutors worked for the Trump administration justice department...Peter Brown wrote: ↑Tue Jul 14, 2020 9:54 am
(omitted)
The jury forewoman posted specifically about the Stone case before she was selected to sit on the jury, as she retweeted an argument mocking those who considered Stone's dramatic arrest in a predawn raid by a federal tactical team to be excessive force. She also suggested President Trump and his supporters are racist and praised the investigation conducted by Special Counsel Robert Mueller, which ultimately led to Stone's prosecution.
Again you fail the logic test. Her social media do not automatically make (as you assume) her "so blatantly partisan and in no universe could ever do anything other than vote for a conviction". And Stone's lawyers were the ones who could have struck her from the pool by doing their due diligence in jury selection, but failed to do so. Also - she is one of twelve. Have you ever been a jury foreperson in a criminal trial? I have. You cannot just push the other 11 any which way you desire...
U.S. District Judge Amy Berman Jackson had denied a defense request to strike a potential juror who was Obama-era press official with admitted anti-Trump views -- and whose husband worked at the same Justice Department division that handled the probe leading to Stone's arrest. And, another Stone juror, Seth Cousins, donated to former Democratic presidential candidate Beto O'Rourke and other progressive causes, federal election record revelaed.
Again, now you are up to 2 of 12. Who cares who donated to whom? Irrelevant in reality.
When the Left birdbrains eviscerate the judicial system, watch them squeal when it comes for them.
The same Justice Department that donated to HRC by a 98-2% margin? Did they all leave?
My bad!!! 97-3. Sorry. Off by one.
https://thehill.com/homenews/campaign/3 ... n-campaign
Could you now let me know if they all left? Thx.
The total dollar amounts actually make it quite likely that only a small fraction of DOJ employees actually donated...
Another PB fail!
-
- Posts: 12878
- Joined: Fri Mar 15, 2019 11:19 am
Re: The Deep State - aka "Intelligence" Community
RedFromMI wrote: ↑Tue Jul 14, 2020 10:55 amAgain with the logic issue. Of those employees who donated enough to trigger documentation (something like $100) - it was 97% to 3%. Not surprising given Hillary was a known quantity and Trump definitely was not (or like some of us knew would be very bad). But to conflate that with the entire DOJ is woefully wrong.Peter Brown wrote: ↑Tue Jul 14, 2020 10:38 amRedFromMI wrote: ↑Tue Jul 14, 2020 10:29 amMaybe that is because they knew what Trump would mean for the rule of law? You have data on that ratio? Or are you relying on Trump's claim of "15" angry prosecutors on Mueller's team (discredited for the most part)?Peter Brown wrote: ↑Tue Jul 14, 2020 10:23 amRedFromMI wrote: ↑Tue Jul 14, 2020 10:08 amThe "Left" has nothing to do with this. The prosecutors worked for the Trump administration justice department...Peter Brown wrote: ↑Tue Jul 14, 2020 9:54 am
(omitted)
The jury forewoman posted specifically about the Stone case before she was selected to sit on the jury, as she retweeted an argument mocking those who considered Stone's dramatic arrest in a predawn raid by a federal tactical team to be excessive force. She also suggested President Trump and his supporters are racist and praised the investigation conducted by Special Counsel Robert Mueller, which ultimately led to Stone's prosecution.
Again you fail the logic test. Her social media do not automatically make (as you assume) her "so blatantly partisan and in no universe could ever do anything other than vote for a conviction". And Stone's lawyers were the ones who could have struck her from the pool by doing their due diligence in jury selection, but failed to do so. Also - she is one of twelve. Have you ever been a jury foreperson in a criminal trial? I have. You cannot just push the other 11 any which way you desire...
U.S. District Judge Amy Berman Jackson had denied a defense request to strike a potential juror who was Obama-era press official with admitted anti-Trump views -- and whose husband worked at the same Justice Department division that handled the probe leading to Stone's arrest. And, another Stone juror, Seth Cousins, donated to former Democratic presidential candidate Beto O'Rourke and other progressive causes, federal election record revelaed.
Again, now you are up to 2 of 12. Who cares who donated to whom? Irrelevant in reality.
When the Left birdbrains eviscerate the judicial system, watch them squeal when it comes for them.
The same Justice Department that donated to HRC by a 98-2% margin? Did they all leave?
My bad!!! 97-3. Sorry. Off by one.
https://thehill.com/homenews/campaign/3 ... n-campaign
Could you now let me know if they all left? Thx.
The total dollar amounts actually make it quite likely that only a small fraction of DOJ employees actually donated...
Another PB fail!
For the libs here:
Re: The Deep State - aka "Intelligence" Community
They're all still there, Pete.Peter Brown wrote: ↑Tue Jul 14, 2020 10:38 am My bad!!! 97-3. Sorry. Off by one.
https://thehill.com/homenews/campaign/3 ... n-campaign
Could you now let me know if they all left? Thx.
it's only a matter of time before these Republican haters come for you, Pete. My advice? Don't bother paying for an expensive lawyer. You're going to jail no matter what, so you might as well save whatever money you have.
-
- Posts: 8866
- Joined: Thu Aug 02, 2018 4:36 pm
Re: The Deep State - aka "Intelligence" Community
Frank Bruni's entertaining newsletter, concerning the Two Ratf*ckers, Stone and Trump, and a favorite topic of mine: that the sh*ttiest people wrapped themselves in the faux garlands of religiosity to foist their poisonous nonsense on us:
"As the start of his prison sentence approached, Roger Stone didn’t despair.
“I had prayed fervently,” the felon told Mike Allen of Axios in a phone interview a few days ago, adding that he believed that “the whole matter was in God’s hands” and that “God would provide.”
“And he did,” Stone said.
No, Mr. Stone. President Trump provided. That’s who commuted your sentence and set you free, which you have no business being. And this conflation of human corruption and divine intervention, of “The Apprentice” and the Almighty, has gone too far and has to stop. It’s an insult to true faith. It’s cheap.
I’m not going to detail the ways in which godliness and Trumpiness are at violent odds with each other. I’m not going to delineate the president’s digressions from the Commandments. That’s an exercise in the blindingly obvious.
Nor do I care to revisit the question of why so many evangelicals and other conservative Christians support Trump, because it has been amply visited and there’s no mystery there. Trump has aligned certain positions of his — principally, opposition to legal abortion — with theirs. They’ll accept his profanity in return for his judges. It’s a calculation, pure and simple: a compromise. Politics is lousy with them.
But I do want to flag the propensity for God talk among Trump’s unscrupulous minions. I want to object to their use of God as a cover, their nod to God to justify their service to a president who no doubt thinks that the Golden Rule refers to the requisite measure of gilding for a skyscraper or casino.
They have turned God into a prop, a tic, and while they’re welcome to their rationalizations, they’re not entitled to their righteousness. I’m not offended on behalf of God. I’m offended on behalf of decency.
Kayleigh McEnany, the relatively new White House press secretary, wears a silver cross around her neck. As a recent profile of her in The Atlantic by Emma Green pointed out, she publicly faith-shamed reporters who challenged Trump’s blasé attitude toward the pandemic as a group that “desperately wants to see these churches and houses of worship stay closed.”
And in a recent interview with the Christian Broadcasting Network, McEnany said: “I stand as a Christian woman, someone who believes in equality and truth and loyalty and honesty.” She also, by all appearances, believes in Trump, which doesn’t quite square with those other principles. But it does give her a pedestal.
“Only God could deliver such a savior to our nation and only God could allow me to help,” Brad Parscale, who is managing Trump’s re-election campaign, tweeted last year. Hmm. I don’t know about that. Vladimir Putin and Mark Zuckerberg played their parts.
Sarah Huckabee Sanders, who once had McEnany’s job, suggested that Trump was chosen for his current task by God. So did Mike Pompeo, the secretary of state.
I wouldn’t be at all surprised if Bill Barr, the attorney general, more or less shares that view. The tenor of a big speech he gave last year at the University of Notre Dame made clear that he sees himself as a soldier in a holy war between the Judeo-Christian tradition and godless secularists. He must see Trump as the general, given how obsequiously he marches behind him.
I have enormous respect for people of faith, or at least for many of them, because their conviction can be a wellspring of empathy, generosity, grace. But those traits also flourish in many people who don’t belong to any organized religion or, for that matter, don’t believe in God. And invoking God — as so many of Trump’s enablers do — is no predictor of rectitude or real devotion. Sometimes it’s just a reflex. Other times it’s a ruse.
I myself am not conventionally religious. I’m not versed in theology, either. So I cannot claim to understand God’s design any better than the Trump aides who drone on about it do. I’m no more tapped into God than Roger Stone is.
But I’m nonetheless confident that no God would smile on Trump’s stewardship of this pandemic, during which so many lives are being needlessly lost. No God would bless Trump’s march across Lafayette Square, which was cleared with force and tear gas, so that he could brandish a Bible for photographers, turning a sacred text into a partisan bauble.
No God would fail to notice the void of penitence in a president with so much to atone for. And no God would put Stone, a dirty-trickster who has never demonstrated any discernible interest in cleansing himself, at the top of his to-do list, liberating him so that he could rejoin the ranks of
Republicans intent on securing Trump another four years.
Good luck to them. Polls, death tolls and the president’s increasingly unhinged behavior suggest that they haven’t a prayer."
"As the start of his prison sentence approached, Roger Stone didn’t despair.
“I had prayed fervently,” the felon told Mike Allen of Axios in a phone interview a few days ago, adding that he believed that “the whole matter was in God’s hands” and that “God would provide.”
“And he did,” Stone said.
No, Mr. Stone. President Trump provided. That’s who commuted your sentence and set you free, which you have no business being. And this conflation of human corruption and divine intervention, of “The Apprentice” and the Almighty, has gone too far and has to stop. It’s an insult to true faith. It’s cheap.
I’m not going to detail the ways in which godliness and Trumpiness are at violent odds with each other. I’m not going to delineate the president’s digressions from the Commandments. That’s an exercise in the blindingly obvious.
Nor do I care to revisit the question of why so many evangelicals and other conservative Christians support Trump, because it has been amply visited and there’s no mystery there. Trump has aligned certain positions of his — principally, opposition to legal abortion — with theirs. They’ll accept his profanity in return for his judges. It’s a calculation, pure and simple: a compromise. Politics is lousy with them.
But I do want to flag the propensity for God talk among Trump’s unscrupulous minions. I want to object to their use of God as a cover, their nod to God to justify their service to a president who no doubt thinks that the Golden Rule refers to the requisite measure of gilding for a skyscraper or casino.
They have turned God into a prop, a tic, and while they’re welcome to their rationalizations, they’re not entitled to their righteousness. I’m not offended on behalf of God. I’m offended on behalf of decency.
Kayleigh McEnany, the relatively new White House press secretary, wears a silver cross around her neck. As a recent profile of her in The Atlantic by Emma Green pointed out, she publicly faith-shamed reporters who challenged Trump’s blasé attitude toward the pandemic as a group that “desperately wants to see these churches and houses of worship stay closed.”
And in a recent interview with the Christian Broadcasting Network, McEnany said: “I stand as a Christian woman, someone who believes in equality and truth and loyalty and honesty.” She also, by all appearances, believes in Trump, which doesn’t quite square with those other principles. But it does give her a pedestal.
“Only God could deliver such a savior to our nation and only God could allow me to help,” Brad Parscale, who is managing Trump’s re-election campaign, tweeted last year. Hmm. I don’t know about that. Vladimir Putin and Mark Zuckerberg played their parts.
Sarah Huckabee Sanders, who once had McEnany’s job, suggested that Trump was chosen for his current task by God. So did Mike Pompeo, the secretary of state.
I wouldn’t be at all surprised if Bill Barr, the attorney general, more or less shares that view. The tenor of a big speech he gave last year at the University of Notre Dame made clear that he sees himself as a soldier in a holy war between the Judeo-Christian tradition and godless secularists. He must see Trump as the general, given how obsequiously he marches behind him.
I have enormous respect for people of faith, or at least for many of them, because their conviction can be a wellspring of empathy, generosity, grace. But those traits also flourish in many people who don’t belong to any organized religion or, for that matter, don’t believe in God. And invoking God — as so many of Trump’s enablers do — is no predictor of rectitude or real devotion. Sometimes it’s just a reflex. Other times it’s a ruse.
I myself am not conventionally religious. I’m not versed in theology, either. So I cannot claim to understand God’s design any better than the Trump aides who drone on about it do. I’m no more tapped into God than Roger Stone is.
But I’m nonetheless confident that no God would smile on Trump’s stewardship of this pandemic, during which so many lives are being needlessly lost. No God would bless Trump’s march across Lafayette Square, which was cleared with force and tear gas, so that he could brandish a Bible for photographers, turning a sacred text into a partisan bauble.
No God would fail to notice the void of penitence in a president with so much to atone for. And no God would put Stone, a dirty-trickster who has never demonstrated any discernible interest in cleansing himself, at the top of his to-do list, liberating him so that he could rejoin the ranks of
Republicans intent on securing Trump another four years.
Good luck to them. Polls, death tolls and the president’s increasingly unhinged behavior suggest that they haven’t a prayer."
Re: The Deep State - aka "Intelligence" Community
Well, he is the Chosen One, after all.
-
- Posts: 8866
- Joined: Thu Aug 02, 2018 4:36 pm
Re: The Deep State - aka "Intelligence" Community
Is it that Trump will not or cannot (because the good ones wont work for him) hire good lawyers?seacoaster wrote: ↑Thu Jul 16, 2020 1:55 pmBill, see this:
https://mobile.twitter.com/jentaub/stat ... 4566188037
-
- Posts: 8866
- Joined: Thu Aug 02, 2018 4:36 pm
Re: The Deep State - aka "Intelligence" Community
I'm not sure that Trump hired bad lawyers here; they may get him to the place he wants to be -- not disclosing anything before, say, the 4th of November 2020. They are definitely second echelon, though.RedFromMI wrote: ↑Thu Jul 16, 2020 2:19 pmIs it that Trump will not or cannot (because the good ones wont work for him) hire good lawyers?seacoaster wrote: ↑Thu Jul 16, 2020 1:55 pmBill, see this:
https://mobile.twitter.com/jentaub/stat ... 4566188037
I will say that many a federal judge I have been before would have exploded at me if I said, "Gee, my client hasn't decided what to do just yet...." But I have never had a President of the United States for my client.