Yeah but part of his bet was if Trump resigns. What’s the over under Trump will pardon Jr (if it comes to that), which even republicans in Congress can’t ignore as impeachable, step down and allow Pence to pardon him?
I would be really surprised.
Too easy to spin out of what we have so far. Although this officially (or at least should) ends the idea that nothing happened (I mean how many more meetings do we need between Trump and those close to him) it isn’t impeachable yet. I mean maybe it is but impeachable in terms of it actually happening. Republicans aren’t sinking the ship anytime soon and they hold the cards really.
I think you are going to see some insane Trump deflect tweets coming. Look out female celebrities and news anchors it is time for Trump to shift the discussion again. Salma Hayeck is an illeal immigrant with a fake nose is my prediction.
That or you’re going to see something like my fake Hannity spin. “Very honest Donald Trump Jr. shows e-mails unlike Crooked Hilary who still hasn’t found them. Very unfair media coverage.”
Sad!
1 Like
I mean, it is pretty hilarious that an email might sink Trump.
3 Likes
Evolution of this thread is going to end up being great reading material once all is said and done. We’ve moved from:
- definitely nothing happened
- ok maybe something happened
- to how can we trust the intelligence communities opinions
- Ok so Russia did influence the election but Trump campaign didn’t work with them
- Ok Trump Jr. worked with them but not Trump therefore who cares (I think this is our current spot although hard to ask Raj now).
2 Likes
There’s a certain amount of cosmic justice in Trump Jr tweeting something like this RIGHT as the talks about collusion were winding down.
Bonus cosmic justice for Trump asking Russia to dig up lost emails, only to have the king of leaker’s son release something like this that would hurt him so bad.
4 Likes
Ya’ll will love these
3 Likes
TRUMP: Russia did not interfere
CIA: Yes it did
FBI: Yes it did
NSA: Yes it did
TRUMP JR: Yes it did
That has to be my favorite.
3 Likes
It’s like someone said “Trump’s own tweets were used to delay his Muslim ban, that’s got to be the greatest tweet of the year.” Jr. then goes “hold my beer.”
Like father like son?
5 Likes
Before Trump, I believed that a POTUS and Emin “my father-in-law sometimes boils people alive to send a message” Alagarov could be in the same sentence only if it included the phrase “…ordered a drone strike to take out…”
2 Likes
You made me laugh (again), HH.
usmc:
That would be the ULTIMATE in Karma…
This is terrible. I really am curious about how it will be spun…and even though what some of you wrote was a little “tongue-in-cheek”…it may not be far from the truth.
Let’s see how it all shakes out
FTR, I’ve only entertained the last one this entire time. But this is all just the tip of the iceberg. If this is what’s made it to the press, just think what Mueller’s sitting on.
One other thing, and this is important: Mueller has added 15 absolute top prosecutors to his team with a history of prosecuting cases involving money laundering, corruption, RICO, terrorism and fraud. One’s an appellate expert, another prosecuted Watergate, another has argued 100 SC cases, and another is Fulbright Scholar in Russia. Most have left extremely lucrative jobs to be a part of this team.
And the most important piece to underscore here is that he has hired prosecutors, not investigators. You don’t stack your team with prosecutors unless you think you’ve got something to go after.
2 Likes
I just didn’t see Jr. being part of the massive witch hunt. The swamp just doesn’t want Trump to drain them!
But seriously I’m exhausted from all this winning.
Okay…I’m starting to get a “feel” for where the spin is going.
TrumpJr. thought the meeting was for “Political Opposition Research”. (Which is done all the time).
Usually it’s not done as high as a Candidates Inner Circle…and we certainly need to have this all placed in the context of everything else that is going on (like the forgetting of meetings/“nothing to do with the Russians” stuff…but it looks like that is where the spin is headed.
Mine was “Donald Trump Jr. would like you to know that you’re goddamn right he ordered the code red.”
4 Likes
That one is awesome. I also liked “Can’t run incriminating email story about me if I run it first”, accompanied by the pic of the guy sagely tapping himself on the temple.
I’m thinking that this “lawyer” at the center if this Jr. e-mail thing is going to come up “missing”.
Thoughts?
I feel dirty just reading that. Shudder.
My vote is on the latter lol.
The colossal idiocy… absolutely colossal.
I cannot stomach the thought that this is all easy to spin out of. It churns my stomach (no that’s not the hangover). This is absolutely impeachable!! It’s just that the goppers have no spine and no balls.
This is Wikipedia, but I think it gives an excellent summary:
[quote]
“High” in the legal and common parlance of the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries of “high crimes” signifies activity by or against those who have special duties acquired by taking an oath of office that are not shared with common persons.[1] A high crime is one that can only be done by someone in a unique position of authority, which is political in character, who does things to circumvent justice. The phrase “high crimes and misdemeanors” when used together was a common phrase at the time the U.S. Constitution was written and did not mean any stringent or difficult criteria for determining guilt. It meant the opposite. The phrase was historically used to cover a very broad range of crimes.[2]
…
Since 1386, the English parliament had used the term “high crimes and misdemeanors” to describe one of the grounds to impeach officials of the crown. Officials accused of “high crimes and misdemeanors” were accused of offenses as varied as misappropriating government funds, appointing unfit subordinates, not prosecuting cases, not spending money allocated by Parliament, promoting themselves ahead of more deserving candidates, threatening a grand jury, disobeying an order from Parliament, arresting a man to keep him from running for Parliament, losing a ship by neglecting to moor it, helping “suppress petitions to the King to call a Parliament,” granting warrants without cause, and bribery.[4] Some of these charges were crimes. Others were not. The one common denominator in all these accusations was that the official had somehow abused the power of his office and was unfit to serve.[citation needed]
As can be found in[5] historical references of the period, the phrase in its original meaning is interpreted as “for whatever reason whatsoever”. This phrase covers all or any crime that abuses office. Benjamin Franklin asserted that the power of impeachment and removal was necessary for those times when the Executive “rendered himself obnoxious,” and the Constitution should provide for the “regular punishment of the Executive when his conduct should deserve it, and for his honorable acquittal when he should be unjustly accused.” James Madison said, “…impeachment… was indispensable” to defend the community against “the incapacity, negligence or perfidy of the chief Magistrate.” With a single executive, Madison argued, unlike a legislature whose collective nature provided security, “loss of capacity or corruption was more within the compass of probable events, and either of them might be fatal to the Republic.”[6][/quote]
Abuse? Check. Corruption? Check.
2 Likes
This is golden. It got an actual LOL from me…may have snorted a little…
1 Like