Trump's Russian Collusion

[MDlaxfan76]

MICK MULVANEY CONFESSES OMB AND DOD ARE WITHHOLDING EVIDENCE OF A CRIME FROM CONGRESS

"As noted by Mulvaney today, a law passed in the wake of Richard Nixon playing games with appropriations requires that if you withhold duly appropriated funds, you explain to Congress why you’re doing so, a decision that Congress then gets to veto simply by refusing to approve of the decision. The law makes it clear that the President can’t simply ignore the will of Congress on appropriations.

And yet, that’s what Trump did for the entirety of the summer.

Worse, in his press conference today, Mulvaney admitted that Trump didn’t have a “really really good reason not to” release the funds. Rather, he had a really bad reason: he was trying to extort a quid pro quo."

Where are all our "no quid pro quo" posters now??

..

This might really bum you out Disslaxx, but I (and likely most Americans) aren't really tuned into this stuff - ie, don't care. Prefer my politicians to focus on matters that affect us via our wallet, health, civil rights, and security. Impeachment imo is a distraction of the highest order.

And before you call me a Trumper, please note I will vote for Joe Biden above all others in 2020, should be get the Democrat's nod.

Well then, why respond if you weren't one of the "no quid pro quo' posters?

Are you really 'not tuned into this stuff'?
...or are you saying you don't care about ANYTHING other than the wallet stuff?
Does NOTHING ELSE matter?

No line?

[MDlaxfan76]

WahooMurf -- I've never been to Al Smith. Closest I ever got to that level of fabuloso was the Friendly Sons Dinner.

Question -- do you actually own your white tie and tails? Or do you have to rent?

I'd bet on 'own'...I do; it simply makes good economic sense if you're gonna have a regular event when you need it...wanna save a buck, buy one from the rental company. I get roped into one tails event a year and every once in a blue moon a second one, so it's in the closet, just like my regular tux which does get a little more use in most years. It's not as if the 'fashions' change so much that anyone really cares if your tails are 20 years old. Of course, if you're hanging out with a crowd that actually cares about such, maybe you need a new crowd.

The only challenge with that game plan is if you change your body a lot, gain too many lbs, lose too many lbs, and back again...then it makes sense to be a renter...

[MDlaxfan76]

As I have for the last 35 years, I attended The Al Smith Dinner. It is a fund-raising event held in NYC and is among the more iconic events held in NY every year. Because it is a local event (has never been held in D.C., Baltimore, Boston or The Doral), I imagine very few FanLax folks may have heard of The Dinner.

Our table, one of many GS alumnae tables scattered throughout The Hilton, was buzzing about Slick Mick's bizarre public confession. Many in our group are registered Republicans and gave $$$$ to Trump's successful 2016 campaign. Then, General Mattis moved to the mic...a pin-drop moment.

We pretty much agreed that the General's wry comments were among the best given at The Dinner in decades. Thought Cardinal Dolan was going to keel over with laughter. Once again, a Squatload of money was raised. The money is used to support the disenfranchised no matter their race, religion or political affiliation.

N.B.Trump only hires the best people. Acting COS Mick's is da' man. On the other hand, General Mattis is the most overrated General in the world. Who hired General Mattis?

WHERE IN THE WORLD IS CARMEN SAN DIEGO AND BILLIE BOY BARR

I suspect you would be wrong about this. Al Smith is certainly very well known in the US. Any group discussing US politics has got to be pretty aware of this event. Perhaps the average LAX fan would not be.

On this, let's agree that the more 'inside the beltway' sorts of political conversations are probably aware of that dinner, as ggait pointed out, it gets covered in the media. Most of, not all, the participants on FanLax politics threads are likely to be 'tuned in' more than typical. Barbershop in Dubuque maybe not so much. For our Catholic brethren, of which their are quite a few in lax circles, probably pretty darn aware as well. So, a decent overlap amongst the FanLax participants.

That said, very easy to say that most of us haven't ever been invited...

[Peter Brown]

MICK MULVANEY CONFESSES OMB AND DOD ARE WITHHOLDING EVIDENCE OF A CRIME FROM CONGRESS

"As noted by Mulvaney today, a law passed in the wake of Richard Nixon playing games with appropriations requires that if you withhold duly appropriated funds, you explain to Congress why you’re doing so, a decision that Congress then gets to veto simply by refusing to approve of the decision. The law makes it clear that the President can’t simply ignore the will of Congress on appropriations.

And yet, that’s what Trump did for the entirety of the summer.

Worse, in his press conference today, Mulvaney admitted that Trump didn’t have a “really really good reason not to” release the funds. Rather, he had a really bad reason: he was trying to extort a quid pro quo."

Where are all our "no quid pro quo" posters now??

..

This might really bum you out Disslaxx, but I (and likely most Americans) aren't really tuned into this stuff - ie, don't care. Prefer my politicians to focus on matters that affect us via our wallet, health, civil rights, and security. Impeachment imo is a distraction of the highest order.

And before you call me a Trumper, please note I will vote for Joe Biden above all others in 2020, should be get the Democrat's nod.

Well then, why respond if you weren't one of the "no quid pro quo' posters?

Are you really 'not tuned into this stuff'?
...or are you saying you don't care about ANYTHING other than the wallet stuff?
Does NOTHING ELSE matter?

No line?

Seriously?

I was really replying to a string of Disslaxx posts where it seemed to me, and correct me if I am wrong, Disslaxx is one of those folks who only sees the negative with Trump.

I don't follow nor care about the quid pro quo 'stuff' because I don't think it is an accurate portrayal of what went down. We can still respectfully disagree in this country, correct?

Maybe a better way to look at things would be this: how many of these Trump red lines have folks such as yourself bellyached (and I use that word intentionally) about on the Internet since his election? Stormy, Russia, Cohen, Mexico, the Wall, Gun Control, Barr, North Korea, Jared, Charlottesville, Brexit, G7, Doral, Brexit, Sessions, Turkey, Forest Raking, Covfefe, Kavanaugh, Fake News, Hurricane Dorian, ICE, Otto Warmbler, Rob Porter, and so on... I mean, doesn't it get exhausting to fret so passionately about these things? When everything is a crisis, nothing is.

None of us (I think) are under any illusion that Trump is a beacon of honor. You have an option next November to show your dislike. I belong to no party and do not look at people as one-dimensional figures. No one in my life is a one-dimensional person. My strong hunch, based on 48 years of life is, nor is Trump a one-dimensional figure. he has done some good, and some not so good.

And this is all written with profound respect that you are also not a one-dimensional character.

[youthathletics]

Pelosi just showed the lefts cards: https://www.instagram.com/p/B3xDwFJnVUv/

HRC still has Russia on here mind (pitiful), this time its Tulsi, then it was Trump, then it was Jill Stein: https://www.instagram.com/p/B3xLmMWHyQ9/

[jhu72]

Please get your news from someplace besides right wing Instagram posters.

Hillary did not mention Gabbard by name. The direct quote is "I believe the Russians have got their eye on somebody who's currently in the Democratic primary and are grooming her to be the third-party candidate." It's not like the Russian BOTs did not work freely for Stein last time. There is more than a little solid evidence for this. I suspect that there exists significant numbers of network traces that indicate Russian BOTs are currently "supporting" Gabbard. At no time did she refer to Gabbard as a Russian asset.

You want a headline, a fair headline (from the AP) -- "Clinton implies Russia wants Gabbard as 3rd-party candidate". The implication requires that you already have significant knowledge about the democratic candidates including Gabbard.

[RedFromMI]

Given the overwhelming public evidence that what Trump and Giuliani really wanted investigated was that bundle of conspiracy theories, that conclusion is increasingly inescapable: Hundreds of millions of dollars in military aid were leveraged to pressure Ukraine to help corrupt the factual record about the 2016 election, and to corrupt the 2020 election on Trump’s behalf as well.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions ... -timeline/

Great job by Greg Sargent in showing how Mulvaney really gave away the store yesterday.

[Trinity]

Republican John Kasich comes out for Impeachment. If he wasn’t as boring as Al Gore this would matter.

[youthathletics]

Please get your news from someplace besides right wing Instagram posters.

Hillary did not mention Gabbard by name. The direct quote is "I believe the Russians have got their eye on somebody who's currently in the Democratic primary and are grooming her to be the third-party candidate." It's not like the Russian BOTs did not work freely for Stein last time. There is more than a little solid evidence for this. I suspect that there exists significant numbers of network traces that indicate Russian BOTs are currently "supporting" Gabbard. At no time did she refer to Gabbard as a Russian asset.

You want a headline, a fair headline (from the AP) -- "Clinton implies Russia wants Gabbard as 3rd-party candidate". The implication requires that you already have significant knowledge about the democratic candidates including Gabbard.

Then go read Tulsi's Twitter Timeline.....maybe you'll believe her, but I doubt that either..... mister know it all

[jhu72]

Please get your news from someplace besides right wing Instagram posters.

Hillary did not mention Gabbard by name. The direct quote is "I believe the Russians have got their eye on somebody who's currently in the Democratic primary and are grooming her to be the third-party candidate." It's not like the Russian BOTs did not work freely for Stein last time. There is more than a little solid evidence for this. I suspect that there exists significant numbers of network traces that indicate Russian BOTs are currently "supporting" Gabbard. At no time did she refer to Gabbard as a Russian asset.

You want a headline, a fair headline (from the AP) -- "Clinton implies Russia wants Gabbard as 3rd-party candidate". The implication requires that you already have significant knowledge about the democratic candidates including Gabbard.

Then go read Tulsi's Twitter Timeline.....maybe you'll believe her, but I doubt that either..... mister know it all

Read it. Doesn't refute anything I wrote or the AP story.

[youthathletics]

Please get your news from someplace besides right wing Instagram posters.

Hillary did not mention Gabbard by name. The direct quote is "I believe the Russians have got their eye on somebody who's currently in the Democratic primary and are grooming her to be the third-party candidate." It's not like the Russian BOTs did not work freely for Stein last time. There is more than a little solid evidence for this. I suspect that there exists significant numbers of network traces that indicate Russian BOTs are currently "supporting" Gabbard. At no time did she refer to Gabbard as a Russian asset.

You want a headline, a fair headline (from the AP) -- "Clinton implies Russia wants Gabbard as 3rd-party candidate". The implication requires that you already have significant knowledge about the democratic candidates including Gabbard.

Then go read Tulsi's Twitter Timeline.....maybe you'll believe her, but I doubt that either..... mister know it all

Read it. Doesn't refute anything I wrote or the AP story.

Does she really need to call her by name....c'mon man. You are clearly defending Hillary, and for what reason I do not know. The point of the post was HRC is like Jan Brady......Russia-Russia-Russia.

[RedFromMI]

There is no question that both Trump and the Russians (who love having Trump destroying what he can of the West) would dearly love to have a third party candidate who can draw votes away from whomever the Democrats nominate. It may in fact be the only way Trump gets re-elected.

But it is way to premature to speculate that Tulsi would be the choice, especially since she has already said she would not run as a third party candidate.

[RedFromMI]

From talkingpointsmemo’s Josh Marshall:

AND THERE IT IS; The real QUID PRO QUO. Notorious Ukraine Oligarch Firtash wld manufacture Biden dirt. Rudy and the DiGenovas/Toensing wld work with Trump to drop US corruption charges against him.

https://talkingpointsmemo.com/edblog/the-big-dirty


https://talkingpointsmemo.com/muckraker ... ry-firtash

Firtash has been fighting extradition to the US for several years. He is stuck in Austria (who holds his passport), and seems to be the main proponent of the false story about the Bidens

Oh - and Firtash is the oligarch who got Manafort his start in dirty Ukrainian politics...

[jhu72]

There is no question that both Trump and the Russians (who love having Trump destroying what he can of the West) would dearly love to have a third party candidate who can draw votes away from whomever the Democrats nominate. It may in fact be the only way Trump gets re-elected.

But it is way to premature to speculate that Tulsi would be the choice, especially since she has already said she would not run as a third party candidate.

CNN and others were ahead of HRC. Although never expressed here, I have had the same thought. Gabbard is running a pretty strange campaign I think. See is just too much of a one note. Originally I thought this was just her being inexperienced but after 6 or 7 months she should be concentrating on her other issue positions. But as far as I can see, every time I see her, it is the one issue. It is an issue that would have the ability to draw significantly from the democrats and not touch the trumpnista.

Hillary's "speculation" is actually a pretty benign way to introduce the possibility to the general consciousness.

[Typical Lax Dad]

The economy is good...to deny that is to deny reality. Feeding your kids and putting clothes on them is a moral imperative, imo

Respectfully, the economy isn't good for everyone. It's a good thing to remember thhat.

You might believe that Trump's outlandish Tweets and overall character outweigh any positive impact his administration had had on the economy,

Ok, I'd like your opinion here: what do you think Trump did that had a positive impact on the economy?

The economy is never ‘good for everyone’. If that was our metric, we may as well call it a day.

As to Trump, he signed The sweeping tax law changes. For businesses, the law permanently lowered the corporate tax rate to 21 percent, down from 35 percent, and temporarily allowed businesses to fully deduct new U.S. investments. This has been a boon to aviation, which in the US means 2,500,000 employees and families. I give him credit here as his Administration crafted this law and fought for it. It has meaningfully impacted millions of American families.

And again, I’m no Trumper. I’d vote for Biden over him. And I thought GWB was our worst POTUS ever.

Aerospace industry was struggling before Trump?

The aviation industry, like others, is multi-dimensional; previously, some parts were good, some parts were okay; none were awful. I give Obama and especially Geithner so much credit.

Today, all parts are doing very very well. I give Trump credit here. This is a good industry for America, skilled labor, manufacturing and services (software and AI especially), growing fast. Obviously I have some selfish motives here, but not so obviously I actually care about most everyone who earns a paycheck and I want to see it continue.

My two no-go's are Elizabeth Warren and Kamala Harris, for different reasons (ironically, each is stronger where I see the other's glaring weakness). I like Joe Biden a great deal, for many reasons. I am afraid the DNC does not want him and is doing their part already to promote Warren whom they seem to be in love with. I like Kang, Pete, and to some extent Bernie. But it is obvious to me anyway that the DNC is angling this for Warren as much as they can.

What did Trump do that created more demand for the segment of the aerospace parts manufacturing business that wasn’t doing well?

[Farfromgeneva]

WahooMurf -- I've never been to Al Smith. Closest I ever got to that level of fabuloso was the Friendly Sons Dinner.

Question -- do you actually own your white tie and tails? Or do you have to rent?

Rent, owning is for suckers

[Trinity]

Rick Perry won’t answer subpoena. Nobody will step up and clear Trump.

[RedFromMI]

Rick Perry won’t answer subpoena. Nobody will step up and clear Trump.

Maybe because of their own guilt?

[wahoomurf]

GGAIT-- I've never been to Al Smith. Closest I ever got to that level of fabuloso was the Friendly Sons Dinner.

A question for wahoomurf -- do you actually own your white tie and tails? Or do you have to rent?

[wahoomurf]

WahooMurf -- I've never been to Al Smith. Closest I ever got to that level of fabuloso was the Friendly Sons Dinner.

Question -- do you actually own your white tie and tails? Or do you have to rent?

Rent, owning is for suckers

Do you actually think renting 4 or 5 times each year and wearing random often ill-fitting clothes is LESS EXPENSIVE and more comfortable than owning your own? Guess my cipherin' skill and comfort levels need adjusting!