Donald Trump - FLAWLESS VICTORY

[Brownsfan]

Watergate itself was sooo stupid, he won forty nine of fifty states, why bug a Democrat office?

Actually, Nixon was not aware of the Watergate break-in until after it occurred. It is a common misconception that Nixon ordered the break-in although the evidence is clear that he knew nothing of it until after news reports of the break-in and the burglars had been identified.

Also, although the election wound up a landslide, it was not clear at the time that this would be the case. Also, if the connection between the burglars and his administration had been known before the election, the election may well have gone in a different direction. At least, that was the concern. The purpose of the coverup had to do with the ongoing political campaign. Unfortunately for him, and arguably for the country, he was forced into unsavory and illegal acts such as paying hush money in order to maintain the coverup until after the election--which eventually brought him down.

However, it is something of a surprise that you could be so misinformed after reading hours of Nixon tapes.

I am not convinced that Trump is a lock to win reelection. I do think that the high handed methodology the Democrats are using in their impeachment strategy will tend to increase the chances of his reelection, but I do not think it is a lock. Although I fully agree with his China policy, I think the chances of it undercutting the economy in the late summer just before the election may pose a significant danger to his reelection.

 

[Danamal]

Nixon, started “the plumbers”over Ellsworth and the pentagon papers and while he wasn’t actually telling them what to do he passed on his “thoughts”to
Erlichman for plausible deniability.
Don’t color me ignorant,Nixon knew, that’s
why the eighteen minute gap in the tape
exist’s!
When you listen to the Nixon tapes he was
a very petty man who couldn’t control his
contempt for those who dared question
him.
Once he got in bed so to speak with Anna Chennault to blow up any chance for peace he was breaking the law but he just
had to have an edge and at any moment
Johnson could have crushed Nixon but
it was considered by Johnson as bad form
and had no benefit to destroy our electoral
process.
Trump and China is a huge issue because
China as well as Iran and Russia support
one another and it has been Putin himself
who would love to blame Ukraine so they can invade further into there country and
Trump Moscow becomes a reality.

 

[Brownsfan]

Once he got in bed so to speak with Anna Chennault to blow up any chance for peace he was breaking the law but he just
had to have an edge and at any moment
Johnson could have crushed Nixon but
it was considered by Johnson as bad form
and had no benefit to destroy our electoral
process.

If you really believe that Johnson could have caused Nixon's defeat by revealing interference with the peace process in Vietnam and declined to do so because it would have been "bad form," I have a bridge in San Francisco you might be interested in.

Holding up Johnson as a paragon of virtue is a new one on me. There is no doubt that Nixon thought he was being bugged by the Johnson administration during the campaign in 1968, just as Trump apparently believes that he was bugged by the Obama administration in 2016, and certainly there have been extensive reporting of such in both cases, just as there have been reports of Johnson's participation in the JFK assassination in association with the Mob and Cubans, both pro- and anti-Castro and just as there has been extensive reporting of Trump colluding with the Russians to steal the election of 2016 from Hillary Clinton.

I found out a long time ago that just because something is written down does not necessarily make it reliable. I think you have been reading too much of the Huffington Post and other such conspiratorial tripe.

 

[Danamal]

Johnson was a tough guy,I wasn’t defending him as
much as you think, I’m just saying what is readily
available as fact.
Look up Johnson Nixon and you can here it play out.
Johnson was involved in 22Nov63 only as wanting
America needing to believe it was Oswald so we
didn’t get involved any deeper into Cuba
or Russia and let sleeping dogs lie.
Hoover even sent a written message to Johnson
stating “we need the public to believe LHO did it
alone with no accomplice’s.”
Nixon wasn’t bugged but Anna Chennault was,Nixon
was told from day one he had recording devices on
the phone in the Oval Office, his private office just
outside of the Oval Office and the phone in the
Lincoln sitting room.
the bottom line with JFK’s death was made possible
by making Bobby the head of the DOJ and he attacked
The mob after they helped him get elected.
CIA in conjunction with the mob killed Kennedy and
made RFK powerless.

 

[Brownsfan]

Johnson was a tough guy,I wasn’t defending him as
much as you think, I’m just saying what is readily
available as fact.

Dan, I watched your video and tried to take it seriously. However, in my opinion, that particular Robert Parry theory is, in my opinion, in the realm of JFK assasination conspiracy theory stuff or the Trump impeachment BS.

I think it may be time for us to retire this thread and move to the Investigate the Investigators thread to discuss the Horowitz Report. You game for that?

Cheers,
Cliff

 

[thebeast0449]

your president is about to be impeached
an I got
life starts at ejaculation in 1 ear
and the mob killed JFK in the other ear
back to topic

trump is 100% trailer park
proof you dont have to be rich to have class
and vice versa

so its party before..everything now
before god
before country
before the american people
before the constitution
before personal morality and loyalty
before law and order
before your soul

partisan.its a word I've heard now 1000 times regarding this.
yes it is partisan.why? because its party before everything.theres the proof

this upcoming fiasco in the senate might be the time
americans understand all the above is sadly true

I hope so
If not? you might as well throw away the current constitution and start again
as suggested by its authors If it has been corrupted or misused
which it most certainly already has.
this is going to be a huge body blow to the (apparently redundant) constitution of the U.S

 

[madmadworld]

Constitution

The Dem's have wanted to rip it up for years. them having any reverence for it is as laughable as any talking points they speak about the budget deficit.
How is that MMW ?

First Amendment
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press, or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

This must be the must important.. as it's #1

Religion - note it does not says Freedom from religion. but that has been supported by the Dem's the past 50 years

Freedom of speech - they have supported hate speech laws since these 2 words together have been used.

Second Amendment
A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.

This must be the second most important.. as it's #2
Show me a gun control law.... I'll show you a Democrat right next to it.

Since they dislike the 2 most important parts of the Constitution they have little standing with it. imo

 

[Brownsfan]

The Dem's have wanted to rip it up for years. them having any reverence for it is as laughable as any talking points they speak about the budget deficit.
How is that MMW ?

First Amendment
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press, or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

This must be the must important.. as it's #1

Religion - note it does not says Freedom from religion. but that has been supported by the Dem's the past 50 years

Freedom of speech - they have supported hate speech laws since these 2 words together have been used.

Second Amendment
A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.

This must be the second most important.. as it's #2
Show me a gun control law.... I'll show you a Democrat right next to it.

Since they dislike the 2 most important parts of the Constitution they have little standing with it. imo

Regarding the First Amendment, as a confirmed atheist, I am as interested in my right for freedom from religion as your right to practice the religion of your choice. The First Amendment does not say that the people shall have the freedom to practice the religion of their choice. Instead, it says that "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof."

I think that means that the government can not establish a state religion which everyone must adhere to. Since there is no religion for which I must adhere, it means that I have the freedom to practice no religion at all if I so choose and I do.

 

[madmadworld]

Tolerance

Regarding the First Amendment, as a confirmed atheist, I am as interested in my right for freedom from religion as your right to practice the religion of your choice. The First Amendment does not say that the people shall have the freedom to practice the religion of their choice. Instead, it says that "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof."

I think that means that the government can not establish a state religion which everyone must adhere to. Since there is no religion for which I must adhere, it means that I have the freedom to practice no religion at all if I so choose and I do.

On a personal level persons should and do imo the right to worship nothing. at the same time those persons who choose non/other religions should have respect for our traditions, as we show tolerance of their views. this not only makes simple sense but not doing so will create intolerance towards them. there is no Freedom without tolerance.

 

[Brownsfan]

A month ago, I predicted that the House would not vote articles of impeachment:

https://www.barkinghard.com/forums/threads/275596-Donald-Trump-FLAWLESS-VICTORY?p=649855#post649855

It appears that I will be proven wrong next week.

My reasoning at the time was that if the Democrats voted articles of impeachment, it would pose significant problems for the Democrats when the case was transferred to the Senate where the Republicans have control. I thought the Democrat would take note of that and back off while they had a chance. In other words, I expected them to act rationally.

It also now appears that my mistake was twofold. In addition to predicting that the Democrats would act rationally, I predicted that if the Democrats provided the Republicans with an opening, the Republicans would make the Democrats pay by holding a trial in the Senate exposing the Bidens, Schiff and the whistleblower for being the partisan hacks that they are. But it appears now that that won't happen. Senate leadership is trying to convince Trump to take a quick win and let it go.

It is beginning to look like they will be able to convince the President. Apparently, after the IG hearings, Senators like Lindsey Graham are telling the president that investigations of his tormentors can be dealt with separately from an impeachment. The other night on Hannity, Lindsey Graham indicated that Rod Rosenstein will be the next to testify before the Judiciary Committee. That must have been music to the President's ears.

Separately, Graham has wondered out loud why it took Mueller two years to discover that Trump was innocent of Russian collusion. Presumably, this was in reference to the fact that the Mueller investigation occurred after the FBI had interviewed the sub-source for the Steele Dossier and learned that it could not be verified and indeed was disavowed by the sub-source. Mueller had all of this and all the other exculpatory information available to him from the very beginning of his investigation.

So why did it take two years and the appointment of an Attorney General like William Barr who would take a look and wonder what was going on.

 

[Stray Dawg]

On the tweet, BDU: It's just that it was after the fact. He did it all wrong at the mike, twice, before tweeting that.

He has a history of that kind of philosophizing AND telling other players he wants to be on their team next season. It's not great.

Darn it Shep? I was trying to blame the libs for fake news again! Who do I blame now? Trump? Bush? shrug

 

[Shep]

Darn it Shep? I was trying to blame the libs for fake news again! Who do I blame now? Trump? Bush? shrug

I'd say Nazis, who created the phrase "fake news?" And it's only used in aspiring totalitarian regimes? And nobody really believes "real news" (newspapers, network news) is fake or that reporters are all colluding to make shit up and torpedo their own careers they worked so hard to get.

It's what you tell people when you don't want them to believe their eyes or ears, just you.

 

[Danamal]

Sorry your prediction didn’t pan out.
My prediction is happening just as I
said it would, McConnell already said
We’re not going to convict in the senate.

So we are emboldening future presidents
to do whatever they want and that’s really
wrong for the country and a shitty plan by
Democrats.
They should have let it play out in the courts
to build a more solid case because he is going to
win re-election, it won’t even be close!
So waiting to force WH staff to testify and Trump
give up his tax returns and evidence he is withholding
was the better option because there is plenty of
witness testimony that corroborates exactly what
Mulvaney admitted to!
Mueller for better or worse is a republican and his
mandate was very clear and his conclusion was he
couldn’t charge a sitting a President nor could he
clear him and sent it to Barr who read the almost
five hundred pages in two days and wrote a BS
four page summary making the president look
innocent when he has been guilty and proof of
his misdeeds is the trail of all the convicted felons
that have gone to jail over his misguided attempt
to give a shit about anyone but himself and Lindsay
can’t talk Trump into anything and trump can’t let
a slight get by him, he has to retaliate, it’s what he
does.
Both sides couldn’t be further apart on every issue
and we’re allowing a totalitarian government to take
control.
Trump for life!!!!

 

[Stray Dawg]

I'd say Nazis, who created the phrase "fake news?" And it's only used in aspiring totalitarian regimes? And nobody really believes "real news" (newspapers, network news) is fake or that reporters are all colluding to make shit up and torpedo their own careers they worked so hard to get.

It's what you tell people when you don't want them to believe their eyes or ears, just you.

Real news? I had no idea you watched Fox. There's hope for you afterall

 

[hammertime]

So it looks like Trump will get a third term.:snoop:

 

[Shep]

DF, it's not calling someone a Nazi. It's the fact that the term was coined by Hitler in a 1933 speech telling his followers to stop believing what they see or hear ("lugenpresse").

He also popularized calling the press "the enemy of the people." It's a fairly undisputed fact that this is never a good thing to hear from your leaders. Never ever.

These are very serious times. I'm sorry I can't stop bringing it up but it's pretty damn dire. We should all be worried, regardless of party, unless you like the idea of no oversight, not separation of powers, elections at the incumbent's leisure, and opponents who always seem to become mired in scandal just when the incumbent needs it. Lock him/her/them up!!

This isn't "political." It's a friendly reminder. Kasich? Romney? Have at it. This is not that.

 

[ToastedPagel]

Pretty sure the Constitution says otherwise.

 

[Shep]

Hitler's literally means "fake news." And he repeated it over and over again, like a mantra. Like "enemy of the people" for free press. It's not good. Rationalizing and hiding from it will not make it more palatable.

I'll stop if you really think it's best. It's not, but I will. Letting it happen is objectively not the answer.

BTW: I hate, hate, hate the "old white men" thing. My point on the people who own almost all U.S. media is that as older white gentlemen, they're statistically more likely to be Conservatives, which makes the notion of liberal media kinda unlikely. Beyond "brands," like MSNBC and Fox News, which are open about their "brand," for the most part, the news is just trying to do what they wanted to do their whole lives: report. And win/scoop, of course.

I think referring to people by age, gender, race, or sexual preference as if that's all you need to know is a uniformly bad idea, even when sometimes it feels okay (like for white men). It's the language of racists and it perpetuates a cycle of distrust.

Note that I'm not some partisan hacky dickhead. I like plenty of Republicans including most of y'all, honestly and from the heart. I'm nostalgic for when that was just shits and giggles stuff for the most part, me and my brother-in-laws.

Again, this is not that. I think we can agree on that much.

 

[DawgFan]

Let's take this to church and state to the thread SHEP VS DAWGFAN...mods, please move our garbage there.

Thank you

 

[Shep]

It's far from garbage but I'm totally cool with that. And I have no idea what your politics are, you seem fine to me (!).

Hitler did coin the phrase, though. It's big in that community, if you know what I'm saying. Far Right media has a way of leaking into our president's language, including his adoption of "nationalist," coyly leaving off the first part. We know what he is. He's not vague about it.