Page 3 of 6 FirstFirst 123456 LastLast
Results 61 to 90 of 156

Thread: Life in the Trump Era, Part 2

  1. #61
    Even after becoming a Christian AND successfully prosecuting the War on Christmas, I don't think Donald is going to extend a Christmas party invitation to Joe Scarborough, this year: http://thehill.com/homenews/media/36...e-has-dementia

  2. #62
    Sam the Sheepdog LA Ute's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Location
    Los Angeles, California
    Posts
    15,193
    Disclaimer: You All know I can’t stand Trump, and that I also think the Russian collusion narrative may turn out to be the most cynical ploy in the history of American politics. Now this from Andrew McCarthy, a former DOJ prosecutor:

    Mueller’s investigation was not a criminal investigation. It started out as a fishing expedition, under the vaporous heading of “collusion,” into “contacts” between Russian officials and Trump associates — notwithstanding that collusion is not conspiracy and that it was perfectly legal for Trump associates to have contacts with Russia (just like Clinton associates did)…

    Only one conceivable crime could have arisen out of the “collusion” that was the pretext for Mueller’s probe: the knowing complicity of Trump associates in Russia’s hacking of Democratic email accounts. Of course, there was never evidence of such a scheme…

    …And in the event our aggressive prosecutor can’t find any crimes — which would be no surprise, since the investigation was not triggered by a crime — no matter: The special counsel is encouraged to manufacture crimes through the investigative process. Misleading assertions by non-suspects made to investigators probing non-crimes can be charged as felony false statements.

    The end game of the investigation is the removal of Donald Trump from the presidency, either by impeachment (which does not require proof of a court-prosecutable crime) or by publicly discrediting Trump to such a degree that his reelection becomes politically impossible. The latter can be accomplished by projecting the appearance of a critical investigation (notwithstanding that there is no underlying crime), turning administration officials into suspects, and hopefully generating the false-statement prosecutions that help depict the administration as dishonest and icky.

    While all that plays out, though, behold the frightening thing Mueller’s investigation has become: a criminalization of politics. In the new order of things, policy differences are the grist for investigation and prosecution. There is no evidence that Flynn or any other Trump associate was involved in Russia’s election interference. Instead, after being elected on the promise of significant policy shifts from the Obama administration, President-elect Trump directed Flynn, his incoming national-security adviser, to make contact with foreign counterparts, including but not limited to officials from Russia. This is standard operating procedure when administrations change — that’s why they call it a transition....

    The ongoing Mueller probe is not a good-faith investigation of suspected espionage or other crime. It is the exploitation of the executive’s intelligence-gathering and law-enforcement powers in order to (a) criminalize Trump political policies with which the Obama administration disagreed and (b) frame Clinton’s electoral defeat as the product of a traitorous scheme rather than a rejection of Democratic-party priorities.
    http://www.nationalreview.com/articl...-policy-israel

    I don’t like this, and my Democratic friends here won’t like it when it’s done to their side. It’s a horrible precedent.

    "It is only with the heart that one can see rightly; what is essential is invisible to the eye."
    --Antoine de Saint-Exupery

    "Things fall apart; the centre cannot hold."
    --Yeats

    “True, we [lawyers] build no bridges. We raise no towers. We construct no engines. We paint no pictures - unless as amateurs for our own principal amusement. There is little of all that we do which the eye of man can see. But we smooth out difficulties; we relieve stress; we correct mistakes; we take up other men's burdens and by our efforts we make possible the peaceful life of men in a peaceful state.”

    --John W. Davis, founder of Davis Polk & Wardwell

  3. #63
    Quote Originally Posted by LA Ute View Post
    Disclaimer: You All know I can’t stand Trump, and that I also think the Russian collusion narrative may turn out to be the most cynical ploy in the history of American politics. Now this from Andrew McCarthy, a former DOJ prosecutor.

    I don’t like this, and my Democratic friends here won’t like it when it’s done to their side. It’s a horrible precedent.
    Were those Michelins or Goodyear tracks on Mueller? Remember when he wasn't thought to be a toady of Hillary?

    I see lots and lots of "I've seen nothing of substance, so this is all a fishing expedition" responses from the right. When was the full release of all the evidence? (And why would the Treasury Department be involved in evidence collection, just prior to Inauguration Day?) It could all be an amazingly orchestrated conspiracy by lots of public servants... or... maybe there's more to come.

    Very interesting that Trump's lawyer today admitted he wrote Trump's tweet yesterday about Flynn being fired because he lied to the FBI (as opposed to being fired for lying to Pence, Trump's previous narrative). The lawyer must have been watching Joy Reid of MSNBC, who explained the obstruction of justice case being assembled, ironically, by Trump himself.

  4. #64
    Tweetstorm underway!

    Trump: "I never asked Comey to stop investigating Flynn!"

    https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/...=.bb873c142614

    "
    Are you ADMITTING you knew Flynn had lied to the FBI when you asked Comey to back off Flynn?” Walter Shaub, the former head of the U.S. Office of Government Ethics, asked in a tweet Saturday afternoon.
    Last edited by Ma'ake; 12-03-2017 at 12:09 PM.

  5. #65
    Sam the Sheepdog LA Ute's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Location
    Los Angeles, California
    Posts
    15,193
    Quote Originally Posted by Ma'ake View Post
    Tweetstorm underway!

    Trump: "I never asked Comey to stop investigating Flynn!"

    https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/...=.bb873c142614

    "
    Are you ADMITTING you knew Flynn had lied to the FBI when you asked Comey to back off Flynn?” Walter Shaub, the former head of the U.S. Office of Government Ethics, asked in a tweet Saturday afternoon.
    Trump has no idea how to be president.

    "It is only with the heart that one can see rightly; what is essential is invisible to the eye."
    --Antoine de Saint-Exupery

    "Things fall apart; the centre cannot hold."
    --Yeats

    “True, we [lawyers] build no bridges. We raise no towers. We construct no engines. We paint no pictures - unless as amateurs for our own principal amusement. There is little of all that we do which the eye of man can see. But we smooth out difficulties; we relieve stress; we correct mistakes; we take up other men's burdens and by our efforts we make possible the peaceful life of men in a peaceful state.”

    --John W. Davis, founder of Davis Polk & Wardwell

  6. #66
    Sam the Sheepdog LA Ute's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Location
    Los Angeles, California
    Posts
    15,193
    Alan Dershowitz:

    The first question is, why did Flynn lie? People who lie to the FBI generally do so because, if they told the truth, they would be admitting to a crime. But the two conversations that Flynn falsely denied having were not criminal. He may have believed they were criminal but, if he did, he was wrong....

    The second question is why did Mueller charge Flynn only with lying? The last thing a prosecutor ever wants to do is to charge a key witness with lying.

    A witness such as Flynn who has admitted he lied — whether or not to cover up a crime — is a tainted witness who is unlikely to be believed by jurors who know he’s made a deal to protect himself and his son. They will suspect that he is not only “singing for his supper” but that he may be “composing” as well — that is, telling the prosecutor what he wants to hear, even if it is exaggerated or flat-out false. A “bought” witness knows that the “better” his testimony, the sweeter the deal he will get. That’s why prosecutors postpone the sentencing until after the witness has testified, because experience has taught them that you can’t “buy” a witness; you can only “rent “ them for as long as you have the sword of Damocles hanging over them.
    Read the whole thing.

    http://thehill.com/opinion/white-hou...him-with-lying

    "It is only with the heart that one can see rightly; what is essential is invisible to the eye."
    --Antoine de Saint-Exupery

    "Things fall apart; the centre cannot hold."
    --Yeats

    “True, we [lawyers] build no bridges. We raise no towers. We construct no engines. We paint no pictures - unless as amateurs for our own principal amusement. There is little of all that we do which the eye of man can see. But we smooth out difficulties; we relieve stress; we correct mistakes; we take up other men's burdens and by our efforts we make possible the peaceful life of men in a peaceful state.”

    --John W. Davis, founder of Davis Polk & Wardwell

  7. #67
    Quote Originally Posted by LA Ute View Post
    Alan Dershowitz:
    I read the whole thing, but my bullshit detector got set off on this mangled claim:

    Many Americans of both parties, including me, urged the lame-duck Obama not to tie the hands of the president-elect by allowing the passage of a resolution that would make it more difficult to achieve a negotiated peace in the Middle East. - Dershowitz


    (So... presumably Obama did this only because he dislikes Netanyahu, or because he really is a Muslim, after all. There's no other reason to apply pressure to Israel? The rest of the world are Jew-hating Nazis? This blithe assumption/dismissal of a complex topic aside...)

    As for Mueller ostensibly botching the whole investigation because he undermined Flynn as a witness by getting him to admit to lying - is this a Law and Order episode? - Dershowitz seems like he's focused on details and is missing large parts of the bigger picture. Absent access to whatever other evidence Mueller is uncovering, the obvious thrust at the moment seems to be obstruction of justice. But Dershowitz is preoccupied with the Logan Act?


    It feels like he's doing an audition for Fox News, or to be Hannity's and Limbaugh's legal guest. (For all I know, this is already the case. lol)
    Last edited by Ma'ake; 12-03-2017 at 01:57 PM.

  8. #68
    Watching a panel on Fox News:

    "If Mike Flynn did nothing wrong, why did he lie to the FBI, or at least admit to lying, even if he didn't?"

    - Panelist: "I think he ran out of money. He's been in the military his whole career, and it's really unfortunate, but he just ran out of money to defend himself."

    Wow. (I'm not making this up, this is what some "expert" on FN said.) This narrative is getting just flat out crazy.

    How will this storyline evolve moving forward?

    "Jared was under a lot of pressure. He knew it was up to him to achieve peace in the Middle East, Obama the Kenyan Muslim was trying to make his job tougher, he may have had advance notice about the Neo Nazis coming to Charlottesville, and... well, he panicked, and that he made a fortune on Russian business ties is really not at all part of this tragedy".

  9. #69
    Sam the Sheepdog LA Ute's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Location
    Los Angeles, California
    Posts
    15,193
    Quote Originally Posted by Ma'ake View Post
    Watching a panel on Fox News:

    "If Mike Flynn did nothing wrong, why did he lie to the FBI, or at least admit to lying, even if he didn't?"

    - Panelist: "I think he ran out of money. He's been in the military his whole career, and it's really unfortunate, but he just ran out of money to defend himself."

    Wow. (I'm not making this up, this is what some "expert" on FN said.) This narrative is getting just flat out crazy.

    How will this storyline evolve moving forward?

    "Jared was under a lot of pressure. He knew it was up to him to achieve peace in the Middle East, Obama the Kenyan Muslim was trying to make his job tougher, he may have had advance notice about the Neo Nazis coming to Charlottesville, and... well, he panicked, and that he made a fortune on Russian business ties is really not at all part of this tragedy".
    It’s a mistake to watch any of those panels. The members are actually assigned the positions they must take. (At least that’s how CNN does it but I’m sure Fox News isn’t much different.)

    "It is only with the heart that one can see rightly; what is essential is invisible to the eye."
    --Antoine de Saint-Exupery

    "Things fall apart; the centre cannot hold."
    --Yeats

    “True, we [lawyers] build no bridges. We raise no towers. We construct no engines. We paint no pictures - unless as amateurs for our own principal amusement. There is little of all that we do which the eye of man can see. But we smooth out difficulties; we relieve stress; we correct mistakes; we take up other men's burdens and by our efforts we make possible the peaceful life of men in a peaceful state.”

    --John W. Davis, founder of Davis Polk & Wardwell

  10. #70
    Trump will be here in SLC today for a quick meeting with LDS leaders, a tour of Welfare Square, and an announcement about bears ears.

    As a practicing Mormon and staunch anti trump voter, there is a small part of me that is hoping one of the LDS apostles will chastise Trump on his twitter behavior. I then hope that Trump will take to twitter to call the LDS church 'fake news!'. It won't happen, obviously. But think about it.....if it did, would ANYONE be shocked? Thats the world we live in....

    And can you imagine the meltdown of the folks who are so deeply devoted to the LDS church and the Republican party that they think of the two as one in the same? Their minds would be going crazy!

  11. #71
    Quote Originally Posted by LA Ute View Post
    Trump has no idea how to be president.

    He is not a good person and a bad president.
    Obama was a good person and a bad president.
    Bush was a good person and a bad president.
    Clinton was a bad person and a good president.
    41 was a good person and a bad president.
    Reagan was a good person and a good president.

    The Repubs bookend the two extremes.
    “Children and dogs are as necessary to the welfare of the country as Wall Street and the railroads.” -- Harry S. Truman

    "You never soar so high as when you stoop down to help a child or an animal." -- Jewish Proverb

    "Three-time Pro Bowler Eric Weddle the most versatile, and maybe most intelligent, safety in the game." -- SI, 9/7/15, p. 107.

  12. #72
    Sam the Sheepdog LA Ute's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Location
    Los Angeles, California
    Posts
    15,193
    Quote Originally Posted by mUUser View Post
    He is not a good person and a bad president.
    Obama was a good person and a bad president.
    Bush was a good person and a bad president.
    Clinton was a bad person and a good president.
    41 was a good person and a bad president.
    Reagan was a good person and a good president.

    The Repubs bookend the two extremes.
    Sad but true.

    "It is only with the heart that one can see rightly; what is essential is invisible to the eye."
    --Antoine de Saint-Exupery

    "Things fall apart; the centre cannot hold."
    --Yeats

    “True, we [lawyers] build no bridges. We raise no towers. We construct no engines. We paint no pictures - unless as amateurs for our own principal amusement. There is little of all that we do which the eye of man can see. But we smooth out difficulties; we relieve stress; we correct mistakes; we take up other men's burdens and by our efforts we make possible the peaceful life of men in a peaceful state.”

    --John W. Davis, founder of Davis Polk & Wardwell

  13. #73
    I actually thought 41 was a good President.


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

  14. #74
    Sam the Sheepdog LA Ute's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Location
    Los Angeles, California
    Posts
    15,193
    Quote Originally Posted by Sullyute View Post
    I actually thought 41 was a good President.


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro
    Yeah, I do too. He ran the Gulf War brilliantly. He was practically made for that conflict. But the economy went bad on him and he got caught in its wake.

    "It is only with the heart that one can see rightly; what is essential is invisible to the eye."
    --Antoine de Saint-Exupery

    "Things fall apart; the centre cannot hold."
    --Yeats

    “True, we [lawyers] build no bridges. We raise no towers. We construct no engines. We paint no pictures - unless as amateurs for our own principal amusement. There is little of all that we do which the eye of man can see. But we smooth out difficulties; we relieve stress; we correct mistakes; we take up other men's burdens and by our efforts we make possible the peaceful life of men in a peaceful state.”

    --John W. Davis, founder of Davis Polk & Wardwell

  15. #75
    Quote Originally Posted by LA Ute View Post
    Yeah, I do too. He ran the Gulf War brilliantly. He was practically made for that conflict. But the economy went bad on him and he got caught in its wake.
    He is the last president I really respected. His number one mistake was the no new taxes pledge. While the economy went into recession, it was the least bad recession we have had in 40 years.
    "It'd be nice to please everyone but I thought it would be more interesting to have a point of view." -- Oscar Levant

  16. #76
    Quote Originally Posted by LA Ute View Post
    It’s a mistake to watch any of those panels. The members are actually assigned the positions they must take. (At least that’s how CNN does it but I’m sure Fox News isn’t much different.)
    I get that. It's like sport broadcasters figuring out who's going to take which position in a discussion beforehand.

    But is Fox *that* bereft of plausible explanations? Geez, I could do better than that!

  17. #77
    Sam the Sheepdog LA Ute's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Location
    Los Angeles, California
    Posts
    15,193
    Mueller’s Credibility Problem

    Donald Trump is his own worst enemy, as his many ill-advised tweets on the weekend about Michael Flynn, the FBI and Robert Mueller’s Russia probe demonstrate. But that doesn’t mean that Mr. Mueller and the Federal Bureau of Investigation deserve a pass about their motives and methods, as new information raises troubling questions.

    The Washington Post and the New York Times reported Saturday that a lead FBI investigator on the Mueller probe, Peter Strzok, was demoted this summer after it was discovered he’d sent anti- Trump texts to a mistress. As troubling, Mr. Mueller and the Justice Department kept this information from House investigators, despite Intelligence Committee subpoenas that would have exposed those texts. They also refused to answer questions about Mr. Strzok’s dismissal and refused to make him available for an interview.

    The news about Mr. Strzok leaked only when the Justice Department concluded it couldn’t hold out any longer, and the stories were full of spin that praised Mr. Mueller for acting “swiftly” to remove the agent. Only after these stories ran did Justice agree on Saturday to make Mr. Strzok available to the House.

    This is all the more notable because Mr. Strzok was a chief lieutenant to former FBI Director James Comey and played a lead role investigating alleged coordination between the Trump campaign and Russia during the 2016 election. Mr. Mueller then gave him a top role in his special-counsel probe. And before all this Mr. Strzok led the investigation into Hillary Clinton’s emails and sat in on the interview she gave to the FBI shortly before Mr. Comey publicly exonerated her in violation of Justice Department practice.

    Oh, and the woman with whom he supposedly exchanged anti-Trump texts, FBI lawyer Lisa Page, worked for both Mr. Mueller and deputy FBI director Andrew McCabe, who was accused of a conflict of interest in the Clinton probe when it came out that Clinton allies had donated to the political campaign of Mr. McCabe’s wife. The texts haven’t been publicly released, but it’s fair to assume their anti-Trump bias must be clear for Mr. Mueller to reassign such a senior agent.

    There is no justification for withholding all of this from Congress, which is also investigating Russian influence and has constitutional oversight authority. Justice and the FBI have continued to defy legal subpoenas for documents pertaining to both surveillance warrants and the infamous Steele dossier that was financed by the Clinton campaign and relied on anonymous Russian sources.
    https://www.wsj.com/articles/mueller...lem-1512432318

    "It is only with the heart that one can see rightly; what is essential is invisible to the eye."
    --Antoine de Saint-Exupery

    "Things fall apart; the centre cannot hold."
    --Yeats

    “True, we [lawyers] build no bridges. We raise no towers. We construct no engines. We paint no pictures - unless as amateurs for our own principal amusement. There is little of all that we do which the eye of man can see. But we smooth out difficulties; we relieve stress; we correct mistakes; we take up other men's burdens and by our efforts we make possible the peaceful life of men in a peaceful state.”

    --John W. Davis, founder of Davis Polk & Wardwell

  18. #78
    Administrator U-Ute's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Location
    Salt Lake City
    Posts
    4,709
    How do the lawyers on the board feel about the argument of "Technically, the President can't obstruct justice"?

  19. #79
    Sam the Sheepdog LA Ute's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Location
    Los Angeles, California
    Posts
    15,193
    Quote Originally Posted by U-Ute View Post
    How do the lawyers on the board feel about the argument of "Technically, the President can't obstruct justice"?
    Technical arguments only get you so far.

    Nixon.jpg

    Politico gathered a bunch of legal experts to comment on the proposition that the President can't obstruct justice:

    https://www.politico.com/magazine/st...justice-216008

    "It is only with the heart that one can see rightly; what is essential is invisible to the eye."
    --Antoine de Saint-Exupery

    "Things fall apart; the centre cannot hold."
    --Yeats

    “True, we [lawyers] build no bridges. We raise no towers. We construct no engines. We paint no pictures - unless as amateurs for our own principal amusement. There is little of all that we do which the eye of man can see. But we smooth out difficulties; we relieve stress; we correct mistakes; we take up other men's burdens and by our efforts we make possible the peaceful life of men in a peaceful state.”

    --John W. Davis, founder of Davis Polk & Wardwell

  20. #80

  21. #81
    Quote Originally Posted by LA Ute View Post
    Technical arguments only get you so far.

    Nixon.jpg

    Politico gathered a bunch of legal experts to comment on the proposition that the President can't obstruct justice:

    https://www.politico.com/magazine/st...justice-216008
    That's bs. He is sworn to uphold the Constitution. IMO, that includes promoting and not obstructing justice.

    On a side note, I am currently watching the Ken Burns series on the Viet Nam War. I just finished the part where LBJ discovered through a tap on the South Viet Nam President's phone that prior to the 1968 election, someone on Nixon's team contacted them and told them to refuse to attend peace talks until after the election because it would help Nixon get elected. If Nixon were elected, he would give them greater protection than Humphrey. The documentary then plays a tape of Dick calling Lyndon to tell him that the rumors Lyndon was hearing about Dick's team having done that were false, that he would never do something like that. LBJ couldn't call Nixon out publicly, because it would disclose his use of taps on the South Vietnamese government. If you have not watched that series, you should.

    As someone born in 1956, I spent my years through high school (1975 Skyline grad) in SLC largely oblivious and unaffected by the war or the war protests. I remember when I was 9 or so a boy in our Sugarhouse neighborhood being arrested for burning his draft card and his family being ostracized because of it. I vaguely remember new reports on the television with the numbers of US and enemy killed that day, week or month. I remember stories of dirty hippies protesting the war. I remember signing my draft registration when I turned 18 in 1974. That was about it. Watching this series I have gratitude that I wasn't born in 1950. I am impressed by those who chose to fight the war, particularly those who were drafted and went against their will. They were screwed. I understand those who obtained and used deferments to avoid service. Had it been necessary, I probably would have used one. I abhor the existence of such deferments and believe the war would have been much shorter without them. I am also impressed by those who actively opposed the war when it became increasingly clear that the Johnson and Nixon administrations were lying through their teeth. From a religious perspective, I wonder about the eternal consequences to those making the decisions to send boys to their deaths and thereby causing the deaths of truly innocents when they knew the war was not winnable and the cause unjustifiable. I don't wonder about the soldier on the ground who killed, even when he killed the innocent in the normal course of events. I wonder about those in suits and ties who lied about the conduct of the war.

  22. #82
    Quote Originally Posted by UTEopia View Post
    That's bs. He is sworn to uphold the Constitution. IMO, that includes promoting and not obstructing justice.

    On a side note, I am currently watching the Ken Burns series on the Viet Nam War. I just finished the part where LBJ discovered through a tap on the South Viet Nam President's phone that prior to the 1968 election, someone on Nixon's team contacted them and told them to refuse to attend peace talks until after the election because it would help Nixon get elected. If Nixon were elected, he would give them greater protection than Humphrey. The documentary then plays a tape of Dick calling Lyndon to tell him that the rumors Lyndon was hearing about Dick's team having done that were false, that he would never do something like that. LBJ couldn't call Nixon out publicly, because it would disclose his use of taps on the South Vietnamese government. If you have not watched that series, you should.

    As someone born in 1956, I spent my years through high school (1975 Skyline grad) in SLC largely oblivious and unaffected by the war or the war protests. I remember when I was 9 or so a boy in our Sugarhouse neighborhood being arrested for burning his draft card and his family being ostracized because of it. I vaguely remember new reports on the television with the numbers of US and enemy killed that day, week or month. I remember stories of dirty hippies protesting the war. I remember signing my draft registration when I turned 18 in 1974. That was about it. Watching this series I have gratitude that I wasn't born in 1950. I am impressed by those who chose to fight the war, particularly those who were drafted and went against their will. They were screwed. I understand those who obtained and used deferments to avoid service. Had it been necessary, I probably would have used one. I abhor the existence of such deferments and believe the war would have been much shorter without them. I am also impressed by those who actively opposed the war when it became increasingly clear that the Johnson and Nixon administrations were lying through their teeth. From a religious perspective, I wonder about the eternal consequences to those making the decisions to send boys to their deaths and thereby causing the deaths of truly innocents when they knew the war was not winnable and the cause unjustifiable. I don't wonder about the soldier on the ground who killed, even when he killed the innocent in the normal course of events. I wonder about those in suits and ties who lied about the conduct of the war.
    https://youtu.be/deU_uwlNpOo

  23. #83
    Quote Originally Posted by LA Ute View Post

    Politico gathered a bunch of legal experts to comment on the proposition that the President can't obstruct justice:

    https://www.politico.com/magazine/st...justice-216008
    TL;DR: Yes, the prez can obstruct justice.

  24. #84
    Sam the Sheepdog LA Ute's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Location
    Los Angeles, California
    Posts
    15,193
    My question is, Why would any POTUS want to do anything that even looks like obstructing justice? It's idiotic.

    "It is only with the heart that one can see rightly; what is essential is invisible to the eye."
    --Antoine de Saint-Exupery

    "Things fall apart; the centre cannot hold."
    --Yeats

    “True, we [lawyers] build no bridges. We raise no towers. We construct no engines. We paint no pictures - unless as amateurs for our own principal amusement. There is little of all that we do which the eye of man can see. But we smooth out difficulties; we relieve stress; we correct mistakes; we take up other men's burdens and by our efforts we make possible the peaceful life of men in a peaceful state.”

    --John W. Davis, founder of Davis Polk & Wardwell

  25. #85
    Quote Originally Posted by LA Ute View Post
    My question is, Why would any POTUS want to do anything that even looks like obstructing justice? It's idiotic.
    Because powerful people don’t think rationally. They often get wrapped up in the idea they can do anything as they’re too powerful for anyone to say no.

    Trump is a unique case because he’s believed that for years...adding the title of President merely was the feather in his cap.


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

  26. #86
    LOL. Both for the fact that it's Flake making some PR out of this and that it's only $100.


  27. #87
    Quote Originally Posted by Diehard Ute View Post
    Because powerful people don’t think rationally. They often get wrapped up in the idea they can do anything as they’re too powerful for anyone to say no.

    Trump is a unique case because he’s believed that for years...adding the title of President merely was the feather in his cap.
    Nailed it. Trump has been in a cocoon without accountability for decades. I thought it was funny/scary that Hope Hicks described Trump as a "father figure". (Did she actually have a father, or was her own father some kind of borderline personality madman that Trump reminds her of?)

  28. #88
    Sam the Sheepdog LA Ute's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Location
    Los Angeles, California
    Posts
    15,193
    This is about the Kate Steinle murder/manslaughter case in San Francisco:

    Kate Steinle’s killer is not the poster child for illegal immigration, despite Mr. Trump’s efforts to turn him into one. The research consistently has shown that immigrants here both legally and illegally are less likely than their native counterparts to be arrested and imprisoned. And that holds true whether the immigrant hails from Japan, India or Ecuador. America’s violent-crime rates are driven mostly by Americans. But neither is every immigrant a blameless Dreamer, and too often immigration activists and liberal politicians are as unwilling as the president to make a distinction.
    Sorry, I think the entire piece is behind the paywall:

    https://www.wsj.com/articles/san-fra...Pos=1#cxrecs_s

    I guess the jury bought the defendant’s story that he found the gun under a bench and it went off accidentally. I can’t shake the feeling that what really went on here was jury nullification, a jury taking a shot at Trump. Trump owns some of this result due to his making a campaign issue of a pending criminal case. Not our justice system’s finest hour.

    "It is only with the heart that one can see rightly; what is essential is invisible to the eye."
    --Antoine de Saint-Exupery

    "Things fall apart; the centre cannot hold."
    --Yeats

    “True, we [lawyers] build no bridges. We raise no towers. We construct no engines. We paint no pictures - unless as amateurs for our own principal amusement. There is little of all that we do which the eye of man can see. But we smooth out difficulties; we relieve stress; we correct mistakes; we take up other men's burdens and by our efforts we make possible the peaceful life of men in a peaceful state.”

    --John W. Davis, founder of Davis Polk & Wardwell

  29. #89
    I wonder how many Trumpista Utahns who were feeling so victorious at Trump slashing Bears Ears & GSE on Monday will make the connection at how Trump's political soulmate Bannon so viciously ripped apart Romney in Alabama last night, even taking a swipe at his missionary service and his whole family (while ignoring Trump's own 5 deferments to avoid Vietnam).

    (Romney is the last high-profile Republican who has the audacity to speak out against Trump, therefore he needed to be torn apart.)

    A big question is what exactly happens to the Republican party in the next couple of years. Does it become more explicitly a white Christian nationalist party? Or will the Mueller investigation and a possible loss of the House and/or Senate next year signal a turn back toward a more conventional conservative American party?

    Ordinarily, I would cheer for a return of Democratic power, but I don't think rational Republicans are going to be able to put the cat back in the bag this time, and the resulting chasm will make the Cougar Ute Forum breakup look like a squabble at cub scout camp.

  30. #90
    Quote Originally Posted by LA Ute View Post
    This is about the Kate Steinle murder/manslaughter case in San Francisco:



    Sorry, I think the entire piece is behind the paywall:

    https://www.wsj.com/articles/san-fra...Pos=1#cxrecs_s

    I guess the jury bought the defendant’s story that he found the gun under a bench and it went off accidentally. I can’t shake the feeling that what really went on here was jury nullification, a jury taking a shot at Trump. Trump owns some of this result due to his making a campaign issue of a pending criminal case. Not our justice system’s finest hour.
    Newsflash. Juries often come up with crazy verdicts.

    Did you notice most of the accused officers in Baltimore chose bench trials? In law enforcement there’s often a belief that guilty people love juries, innocent people prefer a judge.

    I’ve seen all kinds of completely crazy jury verdicts. I also know I’ve yet to see a single police officer be empaneled for a jury...although a sitting judge recently made it on a jury in Utah.



    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •