|
Post by luanne on Aug 7, 2018 15:06:42 GMT
lani , he clearly has no concept of CA and the fires there. It would be laughable if it were not so very serious. This JA has gutted environmental regulations, but this CA fire of course has nothing to do with even that. He continues to deny climate change even with indisputable evidence. But then, he denies everything based in fact. It's going to be interesting to see how the OH congressional race goes today. On a personal note, HAPPY 70TH ANNIVERSARY to my mom and dad today! Not many couples ever see that milestone. Happy Anniversary to your mom and dad!!!!
I'm sure Trump thinks he knows more than the firefighters, just like he says he knows more than the generals. Douche.
|
|
|
Post by nashville11 on Aug 8, 2018 14:15:00 GMT
Did we learn anything from yesterday's elections? Maybe that the GOP is going to have a tough fight on its hands in November. At least I hope that's the case. Not sure if the JA's support helped the Ohio-12 R pull it out of the fire or not. Some pundits are speculating that Kasich did him more good than the JA did, and that in fact the JA may have even hurt. Who knows? Either way, what is normally a deep red district just barely got the GOP candidate elected and that doesn't bode well for them in November. Still in 3 months a lot can change in both directions.
|
|
|
Post by luanne on Aug 8, 2018 15:38:42 GMT
Did we learn anything from yesterday's elections? Maybe that the GOP is going to have a tough fight on its hands in November. At least I hope that's the case. Not sure if the JA's support helped the Ohio-12 R pull it out of the fire or not. Some pundits are speculating that Kasich did him more good than the JA did, and that in fact the JA may have even hurt. Who knows? Either way, what is normally a deep red district just barely got the GOP candidate elected and that doesn't bode well for them in November. Still in 3 months a lot can change in both directions. Last night, even before a win had been announced (and as far as I know it still hasn't) Trump supporters were crowing about a "victory" in Ohio. They'd better open their eyes. If the GOP candidate wins (which he probably will unless the provisional ballots are enough to push the Dem over the top) it's not a race that should have been that close. This IS a referendum on the GOP, the party of Trump. And who knows what will happen in 3 months when this seat has to be voted on all over again.
But yay to Missouri for voting down the "right to work".
|
|
|
Post by nashville11 on Aug 8, 2018 16:59:34 GMT
Once in awhile I check out Fox just to see what they are saying. Completely opposite take on yesterday from what all reputable news sources are saying, but then that's to be expected. They're right about one thing, "Close Doesn't Count." At least it doesn't put you into a congressional seat, but it surely does speak volumes about the fact that Rs spent a LOT of money fighting for a seat that should have easily been GOP in the Ohio-12 and even brought in the big guns of Kasich and the JA yet they most likely just barely squeaked by and there's still a possibility that they could lose. They should have won by a wide margin, yet they couldn't pull that off. We'll see what happens when it all has to be fought again in three months, but if I was the GOP I'd be worried. Fox can try to spin it all they want, but facts are facts and Rs are definitely on a slippery slope.
|
|
|
Post by nashville11 on Aug 9, 2018 15:25:56 GMT
Isn't saying your client won't answer "perjury trap" questions the same thing as admitting that your client lies every time he opens his mouth, and therefore would be expected to perjure himself? What the heck is a perjury trap? You tell the truth to a question or you lie. Seems pretty simple to me. If you tell the truth, why worry about possible perjury? Although I suppose when your client tends to offer multiple answers to the same question within a period of minutes, it might get confusing to those who deal in "alternative facts." Liar, liar pants on fire . . . As my grandmother would have said, they seem to be terrified that the JA's "chickens are going to come home to roost." Miss my grandmother and her words of wisdom.
|
|
|
Post by DotRen on Aug 9, 2018 16:18:28 GMT
He's a loose cannon whenever he feels like he's being "disrespected", and it's obvious that's how he feels about the entire investigation. I can imagine he's a total nightmare for any legal counsel, since he pretty much says whatever pops into his head, truth or lies.
|
|
|
Post by nashville11 on Aug 9, 2018 17:29:36 GMT
Nice seeing your picture DotRen ,! Unfortunately the truth doesn't pop into his head very often.
|
|
|
Post by luanne on Aug 9, 2018 19:27:50 GMT
nashville11, I heard someone explain a "perjury trap" this morning on MSNBC. I'm still not sure I completely understand it. What he said (I think) is that asking a question (that Mueller most likely knows the answer to already) that relates to this investigation is not a perjury trap. But, if he were to ask a question that had nothing to do with the current investigation, that could be. So, as I said, I still don't really understand it.
|
|
|
Post by nashville11 on Aug 9, 2018 22:01:44 GMT
luanne, thanks for the explanation, but it still seems to me you either tell the truth or you lie. I see very few issues in life in black and white and usually see lots of shades of gray, but this to me seems like one of the few black and white things--you answer the question truthfully or you answer the question with a lie, or else you don't answer it at all. To me it just seems pretty straightforward. So if Mueller asks a question that in the JA team's opinion doesn't relate to this investigation for me it still comes down to truth or a lie whether the question is did you conspire with Putin to win the election, or if the question is did you cheat on your taxes, or is Melania very p*ssed at you for cavorting around with Playboy Bunnies and porn stars. You tell the truth or you lie, one or the other, or else you just don't answer the question at all. In the case of the JA, if I had to bet I would put my money on he doesn't answer the question at all. I'll be very surprised if he ever sits down with Mueller. If he does, however, I'd bet my last nickel that he will lie, lie, lie . . . He just can't help himself. Lying seems to be part of his DNA.
|
|
|
Post by luanne on Aug 9, 2018 22:08:52 GMT
nashville11, oh yeah, the guy who explained perjury trap, or maybe it was another commentator, said the easiest thing to do to avoid perjury is to tell the truth. It will be interesting to see if Trump ever voluntarily talks to Mueller. He (Trump) seems to want to make it look like he wants to talk, but I'm betting will find some reason not to ("My lawyers said I couldn't, but I really, really wanted to.") And if he won't talk, will Mueller issue a subpoena? Nixon and Clinton both had subpoenas issued so I don't know that the stance that a president can't be subpoenaed would hold up.
|
|
|
Post by nashville11 on Aug 9, 2018 22:49:12 GMT
luanne, it is going to be very interesting to see if Mueller would issue a subpoena. And, if he should issue a subpoena what would happen. I agree with you that it's not likely Trump will ever voluntarily sit down with Mueller, and even with a subpoena it might not happen.
|
|
|
Post by DotRen on Aug 10, 2018 14:11:18 GMT
|
|
|
Post by nashville11 on Aug 10, 2018 14:29:45 GMT
Omarosa is a real jewel alright. Seems she was a perfect fit for the current WH crowd. That is until they kicked her out. Like her mentor the JA, she'll squeeze every dime and every ounce of spotlight she possibly can from the experience.
|
|
|
Post by nashville11 on Aug 10, 2018 16:16:27 GMT
|
|
|
Post by DotRen on Aug 11, 2018 11:20:47 GMT
Chairman OK'd Manafort loans, eyed Trump cabinet job "Dennis Raico, an executive at Federal Saving Bank who testified under an immunity agreement, detailed for jurors how he grew uncomfortable by the actions of bank chairman Stephen Calk in the handling of Manafort's loans. Prosecutors have said that despite red flags, Calk pushed through the loans for Manafort because he wanted a job in the Trump administration." Stephen Calk"Stephen Calk is founder and CEO of the mortgage lender Federal Savings Bank of Chicago and was an economic advisor to Donald Trump during the 2016 election campaign."
|
|