Welcome To Trump World

[bust]

Some parts of an analysis by Peter Baker at the New York Times:

John Bolton’s Account Upends Trump’s Denials, but Will It Upend Trump?

A president who has survived one revelation after another the last three years now faces perhaps the most serious disclosure of his political career at the very moment he is on trial in the Senate.

In his book, Mr. Bolton writes that Mr. Trump told him in August that he wanted to continue freezing $391 million in congressionally approved security assistance to Ukraine until its government helped with investigations into Democrats including former Vice President Joseph R. Biden Jr. and his son Hunter Biden — exactly what Mr. Trump is on trial for.

What’s perhaps even more shocking is that the White House knew what Mr. Bolton had to say at least as far back as Dec. 30, when he sent his manuscript to the National Security Council for standard pre-publication review to ensure that no classified information would be released, yet continued to promote a completely opposite narrative.

At first glance, at least, John R. Bolton’s account of President Trump’s private remarks sounds like an echo of the so-called smoking gun tape that proved that President Richard M. Nixon really had orchestrated the Watergate cover-up and ultimately forced him from office. But this is Mr. Trump’s era and Mr. Trump’s Washington, and the old rules do not always apply.

The reality show star who was elected president even after he was captured on an “Access Hollywood” tape boasting about sexual assault has gone on to survive one revelation after another in the three years since, proving more durable than any national politician in modern American history. So will this be the turning point or just one more disclosure that validates his critics without changing other minds? Will it be another smoking gun or another “Access Hollywood”?

Mr. Bolton has been one of the most intriguing figures in the Ukraine matter for weeks, ever since other former officials testified that he opposed the pressure campaign, calling it a “drug deal” he wanted no part of and warning that Rudolph W. Giuliani, the president’s personal attorney organizing the pressure, was a “hand grenade who’s going to blow everybody up.” He told aides to report what they learned about the pressure campaign to a White House lawyer.

Until now, Mr. Bolton has remained publicly silent and, in fact, despite the Times report about his book, has remained so. His lawyer blamed the report on a leak by the White House.

House Democrats requested his testimony during their hearings last month, but they ultimately did not subpoena him, reasoning that a court fight would only prolong the investigative process for months.

Once the House impeached Mr. Trump and the case reached the Senate, Mr. Bolton announced that he would testify if subpoenaed. But Senate Republicans voted against subpoenaing him at the start of the trial, putting off a final decision until after arguments are complete, which could come later this week.

Another witness sought by the House managers, Mick Mulvaney, the acting White House chief of staff, has already publicly confirmed to reporters that Mr. Trump suspended the security aid in part to get Ukraine to investigate a conspiracy theory involving Democrats during the 2016 election campaign, although he later issued a statement trying to take that back.

As damaging as Mr. Bolton’s account would seem to be, it was too early to judge its effect. Unlike the Nixon smoking gun tape, there is no recording — and events of the last three years have suggested even that may not matter.

Mr. Trump has endured so many scandals that would have brought down an ordinary politician not even counting “Access Hollywood.”

Just weeks before moving into the White House, he agreed to pay $25 million to settle fraud claims against Trump University. Since becoming president, he repaid hush money given to Stormy Daniels, the pornographic film actress, to keep quiet about an alleged affair. Another woman has sued him for rape and more than a dozen others have accused him of sexual misconduct.

His son, son-in-law and campaign chairman met with Russians offering “dirt” on his opponent that they said came from the Russian government. A special counsel investigation identified 10 instances when the president may have obstructed justice. His family foundation was forced to shut down after authorities found “a shocking pattern of illegality.” His businesses have benefited from foreign patrons with cause to curry favor with the president despite the Constitution’s emoluments clause.

Investigative reporting found that he engaged in dubious tax schemes during the 1990s, including instances of outright fraud. A wide swath of people around him have been convicted of various crimes, including his campaign chairman, his deputy, first national security adviser, longtime political adviser, longtime personal lawyer and others. And now Mr. Giuliani and a couple of his longtime associates are under federal investigation.

To Mr. Trump’s most fervent supporters, all of that is proof not that he is corrupt but that he has struck a nerve in Washington’s “swamp” and the establishment is coming after him, manufacturing “hoaxes” to tear him down. That unwavering support within the Republican Party, which he telegraphs on Twitter regularly, has hardly gone unnoticed by Republican senators as they sit in judgment of him.

But polls also show that two-thirds of the public wanted to hear from new witnesses in the trial now underway on Capitol Hill. Given the latest revelations, Mr. Bolton stands ready to testify with the fate of the president on the line.

---

I don't like to share such large parts of an article.. But this is in the public interest.

Let's reflect on the serious issues of the day. And support journalism that keeps them in focus.

Next, distractions from Richard in 3, 2, 1...

Putting this here for posterity's sake.
Sorry Meddle, but I think you get why I did it.
Richard: anytime.

[Richard]

Richard, admit it: you get an alert when there is an update to this thread.
You so reliably appear here just after.
It's been like that for years, even as your writing style has changed.
Your tactics are the same.
Whataboutism is distracting.
It won't be enough this time.

Interesting word - Whataboutism

What is also interesting is the ones that have used it the most in this thread always ends up on the losing end.

Your tactics are predictable,if I watch cnn,cbs or any other liberal media I could most likely write your posts for you,because your whole supporting argument is based on parroting what has been told to you.

The heat of the moment never works well and some have a narrow minded view of things,try looking at the big picture sometime.

Bolton is irrelevant,if the house would have subpoenaed him they could have had his testimony.

You know why they did not ?

They screwed up on purpose.

Poliski announced the start of the impeachment hearings at a press conference.

They were legally supposed to have a vote in the house to move forward and start the process,then after that vote they could have submitted subpoenas.

They did not follow the constitutional law and that is why Trumps lawyers were able to deny the subpoenas,because the house did not follow due process.

You may say,so what.

Because in the future if a cop decides he wants to arrest you,he can just go to your house and pick you up.

As it stands now they cannot,they have to follow the legal process,a process the Democrats feel they can alter when it suits them best.

Sense you seem to think like the rest of the Dems up there answer the question of,why is it that you feel it is okay for one party to deny constitutional rights to people while at the same time repeatedly saying it is thier duty to protect the constitution?

You put a post up in a discussion and claim it is for posterity reasons,did you have anything new to add or just repeating things that have already been covered multiple times in the thread?

It kinda looked more like a post of desperation or a last grasp of air before the ship goes down again,and again,and again,and again.

I wrote again 4 times because this is actually the fifth time that the Dems have lost their case and the 7th impeachment attempt.

The first one started when Trump was a candidate,before even he WON the election.

[Richard]

Putting this here for posterity's sake.
Sorry Meddle, but I think you get why I did it.
Richard: anytime.

Why did you apologize to Meddle?

She has not posted in this thread in awhile,you make it sound like she is your handler and your posts have to meet her approval before submitting.

[Zacha341]

...and now a message from our sponsors [[LOL):

John Bolton’s impeachment bombshell, explained

A new report makes clear he’d provide a key piece of testimony Democrats had been missing

https://www.vox.com/2020/1/27/210831...ak-impeachment

[Richard]

...and now a message from our sponsors [[LOL):

John Bolton’s impeachment bombshell, explained

A new report makes clear he’d provide a key piece of testimony Democrats had been missing

https://www.vox.com/2020/1/27/210831...ak-impeachment

But Bolton and his publisher certainly seem to have been prepared for this. Hours after the Times story broke, the Amazon preorder page for the book went live. It is titled The Room Where It Happened [[an apparent reference to a song from the musical Hamilton) and is scheduled for a March 2020 release.


Bolton will come across as a disgruntled war monger that was angry with Trump for not taking aggressive actions in the Middle East and angry because he was pulling troops out.

He can say Trump said this or that but at the end of the day it is his word against Trumps,still no documented proof.

Like most of the other witnesses it will boil down to their interpretation of a alleged conversation.

The timing of the disclosure of the bombshell and the book sales preorder on Amazon does not bode well for his cause,Stormy Daniels redux.

He offered to testify in front of the house and the house choose not to send it to the courts in order to force the subpoena,Shiff sent it to the judge then retracted it because they wanted to tie it all up before Christmas.

At the end of the day the republicans can refuse to allow his testimony but as they said if they start calling witnesses it will be Shiff,Biden,and Bidens son,the Democrats were supposed to have all of thier evidence in line before going to the senate,they have not been able to back up their claims with facts and actual evidence.

The senate was supposed to present their case based on the evidence the house provided and not go down the path of trying to prove the Democrats case for them.

This is another case of the Democrats circumventing the constitution and trying to mingle the separate powers of the house,senate and White House.

The senates duty is to try the case put before them provided by the house,nothing more.

[canuck]

But Bolton and his publisher certainly seem to have been prepared for this. Hours after the Times story broke, the Amazon preorder page for the book went live. It is titled The Room Where It Happened [[an apparent reference to a song from the musical Hamilton) and is scheduled for a March 2020 release.


Bolton will come across as a disgruntled war monger that was angry with Trump for not taking aggressive actions in the Middle East and angry because he was pulling troops out.

He can say Trump said this or that but at the end of the day it is his word against Trumps,still no documented proof.

Like most of the other witnesses it will boil down to their interpretation of a alleged conversation.

The timing of the disclosure of the bombshell and the book sales preorder on Amazon does not bode well for his cause,Stormy Daniels redux.

He offered to testify in front of the house and the house choose not to send it to the courts in order to force the subpoena,Shiff sent it to the judge then retracted it because they wanted to tie it all up before Christmas.

At the end of the day the republicans can refuse to allow his testimony but as they said if they start calling witnesses it will be Shiff,Biden,and Bidens son,the Democrats were supposed to have all of thier evidence in line before going to the senate,they have not been able to back up their claims with facts and actual evidence.

The senate was supposed to present their case based on the evidence the house provided and not go down the path of trying to prove the Democrats case for them.

This is another case of the Democrats circumventing the constitution and trying to mingle the separate powers of the house,senate and White House.

The senates duty is to try the case put before them provided by the house,nothing more.

You're not saying anything, and yet summed it up in so many words.

[Richard]

You're not saying anything, and yet summed it up in so many words.

Thats okay,I understand that it must be frustrating and all you really have is the ability to attack.

Over 4 years of throwing things against the wall in order to see what sticks and what have you achieved?

You are Canadian so I do not expect you to understand the whole democracy aspect that some seem to claim to be protecting,but at the end of the day,Trump is still the president of the United States and stands a good chance of continuing to be there for another 4 years come fall,it would appear as though democracy is actually working in the best interests of the country.

Maybe the concept of constant attacks verses actually looking at the bigger picture is not a winning or productive solution?

Listen to Nadler back during the 1998 Clinton impeachment.

Notice how views change like the wind.

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=7tbpyhkFfcg

You can find the same with Schumer and several other House Democrats.

[Maof]

https://twitter.com/AngelaBelcamino/status/1224173209479675906/photo/1

[canuck]

https://twitter.com/AngelaBelcamino/status/1224173209479675906/photo/1

His tweets are a gold mine of tin foil.

[bust]

Speaking of gold, have you seen this tragicomedy floating about the internets?

ALL THE WITNESSES: Ok we all agree. This is what happened.

REPUBLICANS: None of you were in the room!

BOLTON: *raises hand* Well I was in the...

REPUBLICANS: Who asked you?! Shut up! You’re a liberal pawn!

BOLTON: Um... I’m actually I’m a lifelong Republican and I was literally Trump’s national security advi...

REPUBLICANS: Shut your mustache! Somebody bring back the first national security advisor.

FLYNN: *in orange jumpsuit* Hey sorry guys I’m in jail lol.

REPUBLICANS: What? Why?

FLYNN: For lying to the FBI about the Russia investigation.

REPUBLICANS: Well what idiot told you to do that?!

FLYNN: The Pres...

REPUBLICANS: Shut up! No one believes either of you!

KELLY: *raises hand* I believe them. And I was Trump’s Chief of sta...

REPUBLICANS: Shut up! Let’s talk to the real chief of staff. Who is he?

MULVANEY: *raises hand* It’s me.

REPUBLICANS: Shit. Never mind.

PARNAS: *raises hand* I was also in the room. In fact, here’s a cell phone video of the President saying that...

REPUBLICANS: Wait what?! How in hell did you sneak a cell phone into a meeting with the President?

PARNAS: It was easy I just walked right in and...

REPUBLICANS: Shut up! You’re a criminal!

PARNAS: Correct. And I just walked right into...

TRUMP: I don’t know him.

PARNAS: And here’s 500 pictures of me with the President because we’re besties.

REPUBLICANS: Wait... What idiot introduced you to the President??

PARNAS: His personal lawyer.

REPUBLICANS: Cohen??

COHEN: *also in orange jumpsuit* Hey no sorry guys I’m in jail too.

REPUBLICANS: Why?

COHEN: For campaign finance violations.

REPUBLICANS: Whose campaign?

COHEN: The Pres...

REPUBLICANS: Shut up! Who was the campaign chair??

MANAFORT: *jumpsuit* Yeah. Me. Also in jail.

REPUBLICANS: IS EVERYBODY IN JAIL?!?

PARNAS: It was Giuliani.

YOVANOVITCH: Giuliani! That’s the guy who had me fired from my job!

REPUBLICANS: Who are you??

YOVANOVITCH: I was the ambassador to Ukraine.

REPUBLICANS: Wait, you had her fired? Do you work for the government??

GIULIANI: Nope.

REPUBLICANS: Well who is the ambassador to the European Union??

SONDLAND: *raises hand* Me. I was also in the roo...

REPUBLICANS: F@$&!!!

PUTIN: *rubs his bare chest*

[canuck]

^^^^^^^

Wow!

Sweet job of it.

[jcole]

https://www.miamiherald.com/news/pol...239918518.html

[Gistok]

Hey Bust.... that was a beauty...

Now who's going to pay for my keyboard....

I laughed so hard when I was reading that, that I sprayed pop all over my keyboard!!

[Maof]

https://www.miamiherald.com/news/pol...239918518.html

What an asshole. And of course, there'll be some that will find nothing wrong with it.

[Richard]

What an asshole. And of course, there'll be some that will find nothing wrong with it.

And some will be triggered by the headline without even watching the video,or a small segment of one that shows little context.

Nobody in the room was standing with their hand over their heart,the clip does not show enough to pass judgment on anybody either way.

you guys are funny,in one thread you complain about a sh*t show thread,but yet here y’all are neck deep in it.

[Richard]

Hey Bust.... that was a beauty...

Now who's going to pay for my keyboard....

I laughed so hard when I was reading that, that I sprayed pop all over my keyboard!!

Just great,now you have created another campaign freebie promise for the left.

We are the richest country in the world and everybody deserves a free keyboard replacement.

[jcole]

And some will be triggered by the headline without even watching the video,or a small segment of one that shows little context.


Nobody in the room was standing with their hand over their heart,the clip does not show enough to pass judgment on anybody either way.

you guys are funny,in one thread you complain about a sh*t show thread,but yet here y’all are neck deep in it.

How did you miss a 51 second video of both Melania and Baron singing the national anthem with their hands over their hearts while Donald lead the band? Fidgeted around, waved at people and then pulled out his chair to sit down? Put on your reading glasses Richard and try it again

[Maof]

How did you miss a 51 second video of both Melania and Baron singing the national anthem with their hands over their hearts while Donald lead the band? Fidgeted around, waved at people and then pulled out his chair to sit down? Put on your reading glasses Richard and try it again

It almost reminds of Giuliani's son when he was being sworn in as mayor.

[Maof]

And some will be triggered by the headline without even watching the video,or a small segment of one that shows little context.

Nobody in the room was standing with their hand over their heart,the clip does not show enough to pass judgment on anybody either way.

you guys are funny,in one thread you complain about a sh*t show thread,but yet here y’all are neck deep in it.

Nope, just a little something to remind you what an idiot he is. Another reminder though, for someone who was in the service, aren't you ashamed that he was more concerned about sitting down and chowing, instead of respectfully standing with his hand over his heart during our national anthem? And then you come up with B.S. that "nobody in the room was standing...." No Richard, YOU are funny.

[Richard]

Nope, just a little something to remind you what an idiot he is. Another reminder though, for someone who was in the service, aren't you ashamed that he was more concerned about sitting down and chowing, instead of respectfully standing with his hand over his heart during our national anthem? And then you come up with B.S. that "nobody in the room was standing...." No Richard, YOU are funny.

Show me on the snippet of the video clip presented where others were standing with their hand over their heart,you cannot,but yet you claim my comments as a b.s. argument.

Just like you posted that he was sitting down chowing,you apparently just read the title and did not watch the video in the enclosed link.

I was not there,you were not there, you did not even watch the enclosed video,and all you have to pass judgment on is a 15 second clip with zero context.

Show me the video where he was sitting down chowing while the anthem was being played in the background,like you posted,otherwise it looks like you are posting fake information and trying to use that fake information to discredit somebody that you do not agree with.

No surprise there.

[Richard]

How did you miss a 51 second video of both Melania and Baron singing the national anthem with their hands over their hearts while Donald lead the band? Fidgeted around, waved at people and then pulled out his chair to sit down? Put on your reading glasses Richard and try it again

Its a 51 second video that was looped to play twice,so at best 25 seconds,my heart is on my left,Who in the video has their hand over their heart?

[DeLemur]

Can't be a fair trial without witnesses. Can't even be a trial then.
No witnesses needed folks. Let's play politics and protect this egotistical idiot in the White House. The party that wanted to Impeach Bill Clinton for sleeping with an intern doesn't think disobeying Congress and trying to trade foreign aid for personal gain doesn't deserve a serious look.

Well done GOP, you're killing the fundamentals of our Democracy. No...no witnesses needed.

...and now a message from our sponsors [[LOL):

John Bolton’s impeachment bombshell, explained

A new report makes clear he’d provide a key piece of testimony Democrats had been missing

https://www.vox.com/2020/1/27/210831...ak-impeachment

[Maof]

Show me on the snippet of the video clip presented where others were standing with their hand over their heart,you cannot,but yet you claim my comments as a b.s. argument.

Just like you posted that he was sitting down chowing,you apparently just read the title and did not watch the video in the enclosed link.

I was not there,you were not there, you did not even watch the enclosed video,and all you have to pass judgment on is a 15 second clip with zero context.

Show me the video where he was sitting down chowing while the anthem was being played in the background,like you posted,otherwise it looks like you are posting fake information and trying to use that fake information to discredit somebody that you do not agree with.

No surprise there.

https://emojipedia-us.s3.dualstack.u...palm_1f926.png

[Richard]

Can't be a fair trial without witnesses. Can't even be a trial then.
No witnesses needed folks. Let's play politics and protect this egotistical idiot in the White House. The party that wanted to Impeach Bill Clinton for sleeping with an intern doesn't think disobeying Congress and trying to trade foreign aid for personal gain doesn't deserve a serious look.

Well done GOP, you're killing the fundamentals of our Democracy. No...no witnesses needed.

The house handed off the impeachment to the senate after claiming they had damning and solid evidence,all they had was hearsay and what people told them with 3 hand knowledge.

They could have had a full house investigation and call witnesses as it was their job to do,they were the ones that were supposed to have the facts to present.

They presented no facts or proof at trial and claim it is the gops fault for not calling the witnesses that they were supposed to?

They rushed it in order to be finished by Christmas,57 days,they submitted then retracted a direct witness request because they did not want to wait for the judge.

Next time you go to court,tell the prosecutor that you will be in charge of acquiring the evendence against you.

The Dems only goal was to impeach the president,any means necessary.

Democracy won because she said people are innocent until proving them guilty,you just not make it up as you go along because it is what you think it is.

Shiff repeated multiple times that Trump colluded with the Russians in order to win the 2016 elections,during the hearings,even after it was disproved he was still basing it on because he believed so it happened.

[Richard]

https://emojipedia-us.s3.dualstack.u...palm_1f926.png

your skin tone is yellow there and you call the other one the orange guy?