Trump's Russian Collusion

[a fan]

You think the eta of .50 cal sniper rifles & the prospects for more Javelins might be useful tactical intel to the Russians ?
Stop wasting our time with your trolling.

What are the odds Putin didn't know they were arriving BEFORE the Ukrainians did? I'd wager Putin has the serial numbers for each weapon sitting on his desk.

[a fan]

You expect me to seriously reply to seacoaster (such a gentleman) after that post?

Yes. I do. You told me not to create strawmen, and to ask for clarification on your views, rather than misrepresent them.

I have NO CLUE if you think it's ok for our President to ask a foreign leader in a corrupt nation to "investigate" his chief political rival.

So what's your opinion? This is twice now I've asked politely.....

[a fan]

Election in 1 year .. let America decide !!

I wish I had known this is how Americans are "supposed" to criticize their leaders. The Obama era water cooler would have been awful boring.

"Hey, I'm upset Obama left Iraq too soon".

Apparently the correct and only response to this valid criticism was: "oh, quit yer crying, you big f'ing baby. There's an election in a few years, take it to the ballot box."

[tech37]

Election in 1 year .. let America decide !!

thank you

[tech37]

You expect me to seriously reply to seacoaster (such a gentleman) after that post?

Yes. I do. You told me not to create strawmen, and to ask for clarification on your views, rather than misrepresent them.

I have NO CLUE if you think it's ok for our President to ask a foreign leader in a corrupt nation to "investigate" his chief political rival.

So what's your opinion? This is twice now I've asked politely.....

Wasn't talking to you a fan, so chill out...or look it up if you're so concerned

[a fan]

Illegai ? No. -- Executive authority, not underlying law, governs this level of the classification process.

The purpose of classification is to prevent the unauthorized disclosure of information which could be damaging to national security.
The concept is not that complicated.

I have a question: do you think the President or others in the Executive office can classify crimes? Someone breaks the law, Barr or Trump deems the information about these crimes classified, and 'eyes only"....and that's the end of it?

[seacoaster]

"Ukraine nonsense."

Is it OK for an elected official to use taxpayer funded dollars, appropriated and earmarked by another agency of government with that responsibility, to coerce personal political favors out of another person? Yes or no?

Assume, for example, that your local government has authorized the purchase of ten new police cars. Is it OK for the mayor to call up the local Ford dealership and say, I've got the money, but I need a promise that you'll always put a 'Reelect Tech37 -- Mayor of Bumf*ck'" on your property, since it has such great visibility and frontage? Or that "I need a favor though; my wife's car could you a thorough tune up and detailing every, say, month or so, OK?"

This is OK? Or not?

That guy gets to keep acting as the Mayor? Alderman? City Councilor? President?

Let me know if we live in Bolivia in the 1960s or not.

Blah, blah, blah... "impeachment" sport...

Not one of your more compelling posts, tech.

Is it ok or not?
Yes or no?

Tech37, you said when someone wasn't sure what your view is----ask to clarify.

Well, here it is, someone asking you to clarify your view.

You going to answer the question?

You expect me to seriously reply to seacoaster (such a gentleman) after that post? And, I've already stated my opinion regarding the Ukrainian impeachment railroad.

seacoaster is as partisan as dislaxxic but masked by his magniloquent style (like that seacoaster?) of writing and legalese. Such BS

euchre on coaster...

Magniloquent. Nice one. What was the word that got you? Alderman? Appropriated? A little flavor of the anti-intellectual to go with the unwillingness to answer what should be a pretty easy question. I get it: it's OK for Republicans to use the powers of their offices this way. It's not OK for Obama to slide through a stop sign in Baldwinsville. Folks like you will lead us into becoming a Guatemala circa (whoa, big word????) 1954.

[a fan]

Wasn't talking to you a fan

You quoted me directly.

[tech37]

Wasn't talking to you a fan

You quoted me directly.

Today?...Where?

[DMac]

Election in 1 year .. let America decide !!

Welcome aboard, 2L, see you've met a fan. Pretty intense, eh?
Ultimately I think "let America decide" is what will happen. Gettin' Trump's fat a*s*s (ya figure Melania still gets a little twinge of excitement when she see's her presidential prize naked?) out of the oval office before the end of his term is as likely as DocB posting a picture of himself in a Speedo. In the meantime the theater is a media cash cow with a cast of a whole lot of shady characters.
Go out and vote...and GO USA!!!!
A little 1L (as in angelic voice):
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gScUOqFxDSU

[ardilla secreta]

Election in 1 year .. let America decide !!

Let Russia decide then hand it off to the Electoral College so the Mexicans can build a mall.

[Brooklyn]

Allison wrote: ↑Sun Nov 03, 2019 4:11 pm
Election in 1 year .. let America decide !!

If Republicans do not suppress votes (especially in the southern states) we may well have regime change in Washington, DC.

[a fan]

Today?...Where?

Here ya go-----It appears to me you just missed it, and thought you were replying to MDlax. You replied to me and quoted me directly. No big deal.

"Ukraine nonsense."

Is it OK for an elected official to use taxpayer funded dollars, appropriated and earmarked by another agency of government with that responsibility, to coerce personal political favors out of another person? Yes or no?

Assume, for example, that your local government has authorized the purchase of ten new police cars. Is it OK for the mayor to call up the local Ford dealership and say, I've got the money, but I need a promise that you'll always put a 'Reelect Tech37 -- Mayor of Bumf*ck'" on your property, since it has such great visibility and frontage? Or that "I need a favor though; my wife's car could you a thorough tune up and detailing every, say, month or so, OK?"

This is OK? Or not?

That guy gets to keep acting as the Mayor? Alderman? City Councilor? President?

Let me know if we live in Bolivia in the 1960s or not.

Blah, blah, blah... "impeachment" sport...

Not one of your more compelling posts, tech.

Is it ok or not?
Yes or no?

Tech37, you said when someone wasn't sure what your view is----ask to clarify.

Well, here it is, someone asking you to clarify your view.

You going to answer the question?

You expect me to seriously reply to seacoaster (such a gentleman) after that post? And, I've already stated my opinion regarding the Ukrainian impeachment railroad.

seacoaster is as partisan as dislaxxic but masked by his magniloquent style (like that seacoaster?) of writing and legalese. Such BS

euchre on coaster...

[CU77]

Election in 1 year .. let America decide !!

That works only if the election is fair. Trump was caught red-handed at a blatant attempt at CHEATING: bribing a foreign leader to falsely accuse his likely election opponent of nonexistent corruption.

And that's just the part we know about. What cheating has he done that we DON"T know about???

[wahoomurf]

Mencken

[MDlaxfan76]

To answer one of your questions, though, I'm pretty sure it's illegal (certainly improper) to classify something because of fear of disclosure of illegal or politically embarrassing acts. Classification is for national security not prevention of personal embarrassment or legal liability.

Illegai ? No. -- Executive authority, not underlying law, governs this level of the classification process.

The purpose of classification is to prevent the unauthorized disclosure of information which could be damaging to national security.
The concept is not that complicated.

Classified info which, by nature, is more vulnerable to unauthorized disclosure, requires higher classification & limited access.

Calls between the President & other national leaders can impact national security & relations between nations,
...as the politicization of this call is doing.

This was not the first such call classified at this level, using this mechanism.
The leaks of 3 such calls during the early months of the Trump Presidency made such classification & ;imited access necessary.

Again, for national security, not prevention of disclosure that would be personally embarrassing, much less to cover-up an illegal act. To do such would be improper, at a minimum. Indeed, it would actually be a crime, abuse of power and obstruction of justice if done to cover-up a crime.

The President does have the authority to classify or de-classify as he sees fit, albeit to do so for his personal interests, especially to cover-up a crime he has committed, would be a definite abuse of his power and obstruction of justice.

There's a valid argument to be made (which you are making) that preventing disclosure of what a foreign leader has said is important to 'national security'.

But not if the intent is to cover-up a crime committed by our President. Proving that intent may be more of a challenge, and whether that was the President or one or more of his subordinates will be an issue as well; but the de facto aspect of the act indeed 'covering up' an illegal act will be easier to demonstrate.

Do you think Trump specifically directed that this specific ph call receive special handling ?

I think it more likely that after the first 3 calls leaked, this process became SOP by WH staff for potentially sensitive Presidential calls with foreign leaders which would be attractive to leakers & potentially damaging if leaked.
Rational threat assessment. The threat = leaks of classified information.

I see it as a rational decision by WH staff to use the tools at hand to prevent leaking & unauthorized disclosure of classified information.
It worked, forcing the whistleblower route rather than the normal leak channel for the disclosure of classified info,

I really don't know...but that's why the intent matters.

[MDlaxfan76]

"Ukraine nonsense."

Is it OK for an elected official to use taxpayer funded dollars, appropriated and earmarked by another agency of government with that responsibility, to coerce personal political favors out of another person? Yes or no?

Assume, for example, that your local government has authorized the purchase of ten new police cars. Is it OK for the mayor to call up the local Ford dealership and say, I've got the money, but I need a promise that you'll always put a 'Reelect Tech37 -- Mayor of Bumf*ck'" on your property, since it has such great visibility and frontage? Or that "I need a favor though; my wife's car could you a thorough tune up and detailing every, say, month or so, OK?"

This is OK? Or not?

That guy gets to keep acting as the Mayor? Alderman? City Councilor? President?

Let me know if we live in Bolivia in the 1960s or not.

Blah, blah, blah... "impeachment" sport...

Not one of your more compelling posts, tech.

Is it ok or not?
Yes or no?

You're right mdlax, my bad... I had to run to meet friends. We hiked a mountain in the ADKs today...what did you do?

Nothing so fun as that. Helped make some chicken chili for a group of HBS women gathering at our place for lunch with my wife, made a fire, transplanted some pots, prepared a PPT presentation for next week, took a 45 minute Peloton ride...gonna watch the Ravens and Pats tonight.

Not a bad day, but rather been hiking the Adirondacks!

Did I miss it or have you answered the question?
It's actually a pretty easy one.

[tech37]

"Ukraine nonsense."

Is it OK for an elected official to use taxpayer funded dollars, appropriated and earmarked by another agency of government with that responsibility, to coerce personal political favors out of another person? Yes or no?

Assume, for example, that your local government has authorized the purchase of ten new police cars. Is it OK for the mayor to call up the local Ford dealership and say, I've got the money, but I need a promise that you'll always put a 'Reelect Tech37 -- Mayor of Bumf*ck'" on your property, since it has such great visibility and frontage? Or that "I need a favor though; my wife's car could you a thorough tune up and detailing every, say, month or so, OK?"

This is OK? Or not?

That guy gets to keep acting as the Mayor? Alderman? City Councilor? President?

Let me know if we live in Bolivia in the 1960s or not.

Blah, blah, blah... "impeachment" sport...

Not one of your more compelling posts, tech.

Is it ok or not?
Yes or no?

You're right mdlax, my bad... I had to run to meet friends. We hiked a mountain in the ADKs today...what did you do?

Nothing so fun as that. Helped make some chicken chili for a group of HBS women gathering at our place for lunch with my wife, made a fire, transplanted some pots, prepared a PPT presentation for next week, took a 45 minute Peloton ride...gonna watch the Ravens and Pats tonight.

Not a bad day, but rather been hiking the Adirondacks!

Did I miss it or have you answered the question?
It's actually a pretty easy one.

I did answer it...a couple weeks ago...no one cared then obviously

Sounds like a nice day

[MDlaxfan76]

"Ukraine nonsense."

Is it OK for an elected official to use taxpayer funded dollars, appropriated and earmarked by another agency of government with that responsibility, to coerce personal political favors out of another person? Yes or no?

Assume, for example, that your local government has authorized the purchase of ten new police cars. Is it OK for the mayor to call up the local Ford dealership and say, I've got the money, but I need a promise that you'll always put a 'Reelect Tech37 -- Mayor of Bumf*ck'" on your property, since it has such great visibility and frontage? Or that "I need a favor though; my wife's car could you a thorough tune up and detailing every, say, month or so, OK?"

This is OK? Or not?

That guy gets to keep acting as the Mayor? Alderman? City Councilor? President?

Let me know if we live in Bolivia in the 1960s or not.

Blah, blah, blah... "impeachment" sport...

Not one of your more compelling posts, tech.

Is it ok or not?
Yes or no?

You're right mdlax, my bad... I had to run to meet friends. We hiked a mountain in the ADKs today...what did you do?

Nothing so fun as that. Helped make some chicken chili for a group of HBS women gathering at our place for lunch with my wife, made a fire, transplanted some pots, prepared a PPT presentation for next week, took a 45 minute Peloton ride...gonna watch the Ravens and Pats tonight.

Not a bad day, but rather been hiking the Adirondacks!

Did I miss it or have you answered the question?
It's actually a pretty easy one.

I did answer it...a couple weeks ago...no one cared then obviously

Sounds like a nice day

It was fine.
Wife appreciate me. Every day is a new opportunity to 'close the deal'...'always be closing'.

But come on, help us out.
Please answer the question. It's a really, really easy one.

[old salt]

You think the eta of .50 cal sniper rifles & the prospects for more Javelins might be useful tactical intel to the Russians ?
Stop wasting our time with your trolling.

What are the odds Putin didn't know they were arriving BEFORE the Ukrainians did? I'd wager Putin has the serial numbers for each weapon sitting on his desk.

Nobody knew because at the time of the classification process, it was still tbd, until Trump released the aid.
That's why all the friends of Ukraine within the govt we're getting frantic.