If this is your first visit, be sure to
check out the FAQ by clicking the
link above. You may have to register
before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages,
select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.
If you are having difficulty logging in, please REFRESH the page and clear your browser cache and try again.
If you still can't get logged in, please try using Microsoft Edge, Google Chrome, Firefox, Opera, or Safari to login. Also be sure you are using the latest version of your browser. Internet Explorer has not been updated in over seven years and will no longer work with the Forum software. Thanks
Notable that former RNC chair, former National Review writer, and mainstream Republican Ed Gillespie appears to have just barely squeaked out a victory over a Confederate-flag supporting, too-crazy-for-Trump looney named Corey Stewart.
A moderate Dem beat the Sanders/Warren-supported candidate by double digits.
Macron's new party dominated the competition as much as Macron dominated Trump in the handshake showdown. Maybe he can hand out some electoral maps at the next G7 meeting.
1. There is no evidence that Trump personally colluded with Russians or ordered anyone to collude with Russians, there’s now evidence that he hasn’t been under personal investigation by the FBI.
2. There is absolutely zero available evidence that Jeff Sessions colluded with the Russians.
3. Similarly, there is so far no evidence that even Trump’s more unsavory aides – men like Paul Manafort and Michael Flynn — colluded to influence the election
4. To the extent that there is evidence of wrongdoing connected with a foreign power, it deals not with the election itself but rather with Flynn’s alleged failures to disclose foreign payments and contacts.
There is, of course, the obstruction of justice case that no one is willing to actually make in the context of, well, obstruction of justice.
Finally, all of the above hardly matters. The narrative and public perception has been set. The only thing, IMO, that can stem that back to something DJT and the Rs can handle (say, less than 40%) is Mueller clearing him. That would also stop impeachment. But, absent something from Mueller, I can't imagine the Ds not impeaching DJT if they win the House in 2018. I can't imagine 67 Senators voting for it, either.
Dan Patrick: What was your reaction to [Urban Meyer being hired]? Brady Hoke: You know.....not....good.
If the U.K. is destined by geography to be embedded in global value chains, the new economic geography suggests that it should hitch its wagon to North America, not Western Europe.
Dan Patrick: What was your reaction to [Urban Meyer being hired]? Brady Hoke: You know.....not....good.
Well, you and I seem to agree as far as the law is concerned.
The problem remains that reasonable voices in Congress continue to raise the specter of political wrong doing for DJT and his associates without differentiating between the law with respect to obstruction of justice and the rules set forth in the Constitution with regard to impeachment.
IMO, DJT in particular, has not committed an impeachable offense as it is defined (this was linked to up thread) in the rules for impeachment. Indeed, as you point out, the narrative coming from the press has not made this clear either. It's out there but you have to look hard to find it and then read/listen carefully. It's not hard to understand the difference but, folks, one way or the other, seem to have their minds made up on this subject. Trump's detractors in particular, having the biggest political ax to grind, won't let go of their positions even though the facts are plainly understandable.
This should surprise no one reading this here.
Mission to CFB's National Championship accomplished. JH chased Saban from Alabama and caused Day, at the point of the OSU AD's gun, to make major changes to his staff just to beat Michigan. Love it. It's Moore!!!! time
Tweet
Comment