patrick.net
An Antidote to Corporate Media
1,364,387 comments by 15,735 users - gabbar, HANrongli, KgK one online now
Today Trump Became President ... again
2017 Oct 30, 11:49pm 21,590 views 66 comments
by Rew follow (0)
Comments 1 - 25 of 66 Next » Last » Search these comments
1
curious2
@
2017 Oct 31, 12:41am
curious2
@
2017 Oct 31, 12:41am
Rew says
...pardon. FTFY.
Read your Constitution:
The President "shall have Power to grant Reprieves and Pardons for Offenses against the United States, except in Cases of Impeachment."
I don't understand how anyone can seriously believe the President would quit if his family were threatened. He would much more likely pardon his family, and counter-attack against his opponents. He might even pardon Manafort.
He will
...pardon. FTFY.
Read your Constitution:
The President "shall have Power to grant Reprieves and Pardons for Offenses against the United States, except in Cases of Impeachment."
I don't understand how anyone can seriously believe the President would quit if his family were threatened. He would much more likely pardon his family, and counter-attack against his opponents. He might even pardon Manafort.
2
CBOEtrader
@
2017 Oct 31, 1:37am
CBOEtrader
@
2017 Oct 31, 1:37am
Rew says
Every word of that statement is a lie.
Manaforts corruption is all in regards to his swamp behavior from many years before his 9 weeks working on Trumps campaign.
The Pap kid played a minor role in the campaign and wasn't indicted for corruption.
Neither of these tards are part of trumps administration, nor are their crimes in any way related to the Trump administration.
High, low, and everywhere in between it seems like corruption oozes forth from that administration.
Every word of that statement is a lie.
Manaforts corruption is all in regards to his swamp behavior from many years before his 9 weeks working on Trumps campaign.
The Pap kid played a minor role in the campaign and wasn't indicted for corruption.
Neither of these tards are part of trumps administration, nor are their crimes in any way related to the Trump administration.
3
MrMagic
@
2017 Oct 31, 7:34am
MrMagic
@
2017 Oct 31, 7:34am
Rew says
TDS TDS TDS TDS TDS TDS TDS TDS TDS TDS
TDS TDS TDS TDS TDS TDS TDS TDS TDS TDS
TDS TDS TDS TDS TDS TDS TDS TDS TDS TDS
Trump's multi-dimensional always one step ahead chess (snicker) is getting very simplistic now:
TDS TDS TDS TDS TDS TDS TDS TDS TDS TDS
TDS TDS TDS TDS TDS TDS TDS TDS TDS TDS
TDS TDS TDS TDS TDS TDS TDS TDS TDS TDS
4
FNWGMOBDVZXDNW
@
2017 Oct 31, 8:11am
FNWGMOBDVZXDNW
@
2017 Oct 31, 8:11am
CBOEtrader says
The money laundering extended through 2016, which was when he was campaign manager. The lies and false statements continued through 2017 (page 18). He also was avoiding taxes during that time by filing false tax returns. That activity would be to date, presumably. He was fraudulently applying for a mortgage during early 2016, about the time he was working with Trump. On page 23, it states that he is charged with conspiring against the United States from 2006 through 2017. Manafort pushed 75 million through those accounts and spent 18 million on himself. That's Clinton fund money without any of the charitable work. It appears that most of the money came from a pro Russia party in the Ukraine.
The indictment is here.
https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2017/10/30/us/politics/document-paul-manafort-rick-gates-indictment.html
Just because Trump says this all took place long before Manafort worked for his campaign doesn't mean that it didn't also take place during that time.
Manaforts corruption is all in regards to his swamp behavior from many years before his 9 weeks working on Trumps campaign.
The money laundering extended through 2016, which was when he was campaign manager. The lies and false statements continued through 2017 (page 18). He also was avoiding taxes during that time by filing false tax returns. That activity would be to date, presumably. He was fraudulently applying for a mortgage during early 2016, about the time he was working with Trump. On page 23, it states that he is charged with conspiring against the United States from 2006 through 2017. Manafort pushed 75 million through those accounts and spent 18 million on himself. That's Clinton fund money without any of the charitable work. It appears that most of the money came from a pro Russia party in the Ukraine.
The indictment is here.
https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2017/10/30/us/politics/document-paul-manafort-rick-gates-indictment.html
Just because Trump says this all took place long before Manafort worked for his campaign doesn't mean that it didn't also take place during that time.
5
MrMagic
@
2017 Oct 31, 8:53am
MrMagic
@
2017 Oct 31, 8:53am
YesYNot says
And that, how, implicates Trump and Trump's campaign? What Manafort does with HIS own money and personal finances is HIS business, considering the bulk of that was BEFORE Trump even announced he was running.
he lies and false statements continued through 2017 (page 18). He also was avoiding taxes during that time by filing false tax returns. That activity would be to date, presumably. He was fraudulently applying for a mortgage during early 2016, about the time he was working with Trump. On page 23, it states that he is charged with conspiring against the United States from 2006 through 2017. Manafort pushed 75 million through those accounts and spent 18 million on himself.
And that, how, implicates Trump and Trump's campaign? What Manafort does with HIS own money and personal finances is HIS business, considering the bulk of that was BEFORE Trump even announced he was running.
7
FNWGMOBDVZXDNW
@
2017 Oct 31, 8:56am
FNWGMOBDVZXDNW
@
2017 Oct 31, 8:56am
Sniper says
It doesn't really. It just shows Trump's tweet about it to be a lie, and it shows that all of Trump's supporters who mindlessly repeat the lie are useful pawns.
And that, how, implicates Trump and Trump's campaign?
It doesn't really. It just shows Trump's tweet about it to be a lie, and it shows that all of Trump's supporters who mindlessly repeat the lie are useful pawns.
8
anonymous
2017 Oct 31, 9:02am
YesYNot says
I believe Patrick considers these types of truths to be uncivil
Sniper saysAnd that, how, implicates Trump and Trump's campaign?
It doesn't really. It just shows Trump's tweet about it to be a lie, and it shows that all of Trump's supporters who mindlessly repeat the lie are useful pawns.
I believe Patrick considers these types of truths to be uncivil
10
anonymous
2017 Oct 31, 9:08am
Trump is indistinguishable from any other Republican at this point, so I can see why Christians support him so strongly.
So it begs the question, why do Trump/Republicans /Christians hate America and our Constitution?
So it begs the question, why do Trump/Republicans /Christians hate America and our Constitution?
11
CBOEtrader
@
2017 Oct 31, 9:10am
CBOEtrader
@
2017 Oct 31, 9:10am
errc says
Uncivil? no. but this is the type of BS that degenerates the conversation, over and over and over again. Be better
YesYNot saysSniper saysAnd that, how, implicates Trump and Trump's campaign?
It doesn't really. It just shows Trump's tweet about it to be a lie, and it shows that all of Trump's supporters who mindlessly repeat the lie are useful pawns.
I believe Patrick considers these types of truths to be uncivil
Uncivil? no. but this is the type of BS that degenerates the conversation, over and over and over again. Be better
12
FNWGMOBDVZXDNW
@
2017 Oct 31, 9:16am
FNWGMOBDVZXDNW
@
2017 Oct 31, 9:16am
CBOEtrader says
I think it is accurate. Look at the indictment. Look at the dates. This was ongoing through the time he was at the Trump campaign. IMO, people who repeat Trumps lie without checking them out are mindlessly repeating them. I saw what the left and right were saying, so I just looked it up. It took 5 minutes.
Uncivil? no. but this is the type of BS that degenerates the conversation, over and over and over again. Be better
I think it is accurate. Look at the indictment. Look at the dates. This was ongoing through the time he was at the Trump campaign. IMO, people who repeat Trumps lie without checking them out are mindlessly repeating them. I saw what the left and right were saying, so I just looked it up. It took 5 minutes.
13
FNWGMOBDVZXDNW
@
2017 Oct 31, 9:17am
FNWGMOBDVZXDNW
@
2017 Oct 31, 9:17am
lostand confused says
Do pigs wear gloves?
No that would be uncivil if I specified who I was calling a pig.
This is getting interesting. Gloves off.
Do pigs wear gloves?
No that would be uncivil if I specified who I was calling a pig.
14
CBOEtrader
@
2017 Oct 31, 9:20am
CBOEtrader
@
2017 Oct 31, 9:20am
YesYNot says
Ofc he was LYING recently. That doesn't change the fact that his theft and corruption were from years prior. OFC he was laundering the $75 million he stole recently. You cant just plop that into a BoA account.
This doesn't change the fundamental truth that his (known) corruption crimes are from years earlier. It has nothing to do with Trump, or his 9 weeks working with the campaign.
You are being pedantic in that I didn't fully explain every caveat in a fricken forum post, and you are using that to degenerate the conversation like a troll. Be better.
I saw what the left and right were saying, so I just looked it up.
Ofc he was LYING recently. That doesn't change the fact that his theft and corruption were from years prior. OFC he was laundering the $75 million he stole recently. You cant just plop that into a BoA account.
This doesn't change the fundamental truth that his (known) corruption crimes are from years earlier. It has nothing to do with Trump, or his 9 weeks working with the campaign.
You are being pedantic in that I didn't fully explain every caveat in a fricken forum post, and you are using that to degenerate the conversation like a troll. Be better.
15
FNWGMOBDVZXDNW
@
2017 Oct 31, 9:45am
FNWGMOBDVZXDNW
@
2017 Oct 31, 9:45am
CBOEtrader says
Sure it does. He was offering to update his Russian colleagues during the campaign and trying to figure out how best to monetize his position. That wasn't in the indictment, but that doesn't mean that Manafort has changed his stripes. Do you seriously think that Manafort had reformed and was no longer up to no good? He was hiding money from the US and not reporting that money on relevant forms. Those forms are specifically to show that you don't have a conflict of interest / are not working as or for a foreign agent. Those were ongoing crimes, and cannot be dismissed as having a colorful past. I don't think that's pedantic at all. It gets to the meat of the matter. Who was Manfort working for? Getting to the central point is not troll-like. It moves the conversation forward. Repeatedly posting half-truth talking points does not.
This doesn't change the fundamental truth that his (known) corruption crimes are from years earlier. It has nothing to do with Trump, or his 9 weeks working with the campaign.
Sure it does. He was offering to update his Russian colleagues during the campaign and trying to figure out how best to monetize his position. That wasn't in the indictment, but that doesn't mean that Manafort has changed his stripes. Do you seriously think that Manafort had reformed and was no longer up to no good? He was hiding money from the US and not reporting that money on relevant forms. Those forms are specifically to show that you don't have a conflict of interest / are not working as or for a foreign agent. Those were ongoing crimes, and cannot be dismissed as having a colorful past. I don't think that's pedantic at all. It gets to the meat of the matter. Who was Manfort working for? Getting to the central point is not troll-like. It moves the conversation forward. Repeatedly posting half-truth talking points does not.
16
Heraclitusstudent
@
2017 Oct 31, 10:12am
Heraclitusstudent
@
2017 Oct 31, 10:12am
Rew says
Collusion means he was helping the Russians. In what sense? What did the Russian need from Trump to do what they were doing, and have been doing long before there was a Trump in the picture?
Too many democrats are guided by their wishful thinking.
The perspective of getting rid of the president at any cost makes them drool like pit bulls.
Papadopoulos, a low ranking nobody, errand boy, who sang like a canary and is on the Russian collusion track.
Collusion means he was helping the Russians. In what sense? What did the Russian need from Trump to do what they were doing, and have been doing long before there was a Trump in the picture?
Too many democrats are guided by their wishful thinking.
The perspective of getting rid of the president at any cost makes them drool like pit bulls.
17
FNWGMOBDVZXDNW
@
2017 Oct 31, 10:18am
FNWGMOBDVZXDNW
@
2017 Oct 31, 10:18am
Heraclitusstudent says
https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/global-opinions/trump-campaign-guts-gops-anti-russia-stance-on-ukraine/2016/07/18/98adb3b0-4cf3-11e6-a7d8-13d06b37f256_story.html?utm_term=.b713b0e5f275
If Trump signaled to the Russians that he was OK with them hacking DNC and HRC campaigns in exchange for favorable positions regarding Russia, that's collusion. Even signaling that he was OK with it is collusion in my opinion. Because if Trump doesn't see it as a problem, and it helps Trump, then he sees it as favorable, and will want to return the favor.
Collusion means he was helping the Russians.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/global-opinions/trump-campaign-guts-gops-anti-russia-stance-on-ukraine/2016/07/18/98adb3b0-4cf3-11e6-a7d8-13d06b37f256_story.html?utm_term=.b713b0e5f275
If Trump signaled to the Russians that he was OK with them hacking DNC and HRC campaigns in exchange for favorable positions regarding Russia, that's collusion. Even signaling that he was OK with it is collusion in my opinion. Because if Trump doesn't see it as a problem, and it helps Trump, then he sees it as favorable, and will want to return the favor.
18
HEY YOU
@
2017 Oct 31, 10:22am
curious2 says
Hey Republicans,the states can lock up criminals & the president has nothing.
The President "shall have Power to grant Reprieves and Pardons for Offenses against the United States, except in Cases of Impeachment."
Hey Republicans,the states can lock up criminals & the president has nothing.
19
HEY YOU
@
2017 Oct 31, 10:38am
Let Trump pardon whoever.
If the Dems had a backbone the next Dem Pres. should pardon anyone in prison that the Republicans hate.
Republicans pardon lying,treasonous,traitors. Dems can pardon liberal leftists & Brown people.
The spineless Progressives & Independents could Boycott/form a 3rd Party, DOH!
Collusion! Bullshit!
Lock up these evil slime for state tax evasion & other state crimes.
State prisons might not be as nice as Federal pens.
Who's this Trump guy with a bucket full of nothing.
If the Dems had a backbone the next Dem Pres. should pardon anyone in prison that the Republicans hate.
Republicans pardon lying,treasonous,traitors. Dems can pardon liberal leftists & Brown people.
The spineless Progressives & Independents could Boycott/form a 3rd Party, DOH!
Collusion! Bullshit!
Lock up these evil slime for state tax evasion & other state crimes.
State prisons might not be as nice as Federal pens.
Who's this Trump guy with a bucket full of nothing.
20
anonymous
2017 Oct 31, 10:50am
YesYNot says
So paying some Russians for dirt on Trump is not collusion.
Getting some money in exchange for "access" is not obvious corruption by foreign powers. (it's "charity").
But expressing a favorable opinion of making some shady DNC dealing public... that is collusion and an impeachable offense...
Give me a break.
Democrats need to take a step back and try to look at this objectively.
If Trump signaled to the Russians that he was OK with them hacking DNC and HRC campaigns in exchange for favorable positions regarding Russia, that's collusion. Even signaling that he was OK with it is collusion in my opinion. Because if Trump doesn't see it as a problem, and it helps Trump, then he sees it as favorable, and will want to return the favor.
So paying some Russians for dirt on Trump is not collusion.
Getting some money in exchange for "access" is not obvious corruption by foreign powers. (it's "charity").
But expressing a favorable opinion of making some shady DNC dealing public... that is collusion and an impeachable offense...
Give me a break.
Democrats need to take a step back and try to look at this objectively.
21
bob2356
@
2017 Oct 31, 10:53am
CBOEtrader says
So you are saying hiring criminals for your campaign is cleaning up the swamp?
This doesn't change the fundamental truth that his (known) corruption crimes are from years earlier. It has nothing to do with Trump, or his 9 weeks working with the campaign.
So you are saying hiring criminals for your campaign is cleaning up the swamp?
22
anonymous
2017 Oct 31, 11:27am
bob2356 says
Are you confusing a political blow and an impeachment?
So you are saying hiring criminals for your campaign is cleaning up the swamp?
Are you confusing a political blow and an impeachment?
23
Rew
@
2017 Oct 31, 11:28am
Rew
@
2017 Oct 31, 11:28am
bob2356 says
Only the best Bob. Only the best.
Happy Halloween all ...
So you are saying hiring criminals for your campaign is cleaning up the swamp?
Only the best Bob. Only the best.
Happy Halloween all ...
24
Rew
@
2017 Oct 31, 11:36am
Rew
@
2017 Oct 31, 11:36am
anon_b2f35 says
Oh, I think Dems are seeking to protect and ensure all leads are chased: Dem, Ind, Repub, or Trumptard.
You will only see hand-waving, excuse making, and pleading for the investigation to stop from one side: Trump and the base.
The small fish are starting to fall inline now with pleas and cooperation already ...
https://www.politico.com/story/2017/10/31/sam-clovis-senate-russia-investigation-244370
... at this pace, we just sit back, and watch things unwind.
Trump is pleading to the void "DO SOMETHING!" ... because he cannot. ;)
Democrats need to take a step back and try to look at this objectively.
Oh, I think Dems are seeking to protect and ensure all leads are chased: Dem, Ind, Repub, or Trumptard.
You will only see hand-waving, excuse making, and pleading for the investigation to stop from one side: Trump and the base.
The small fish are starting to fall inline now with pleas and cooperation already ...
https://www.politico.com/story/2017/10/31/sam-clovis-senate-russia-investigation-244370
... at this pace, we just sit back, and watch things unwind.
Trump is pleading to the void "DO SOMETHING!" ... because he cannot. ;)
25
Rew
@
2017 Oct 31, 11:47am
Rew
@
2017 Oct 31, 11:47am
Heraclitusstudent says
The most Pro-Russian president of my lifetime? One bending over in Ukraine? One loathe to level sanctions unanimously passed by Congress against Russia? An America retrenching to isolationism, alienating allies, and running from its spot of "leader of the free world"? Civil unrest and divisiveness in the US itself? The gift of an ineffectual government in your largest adversary?
If you are wondering what Russia got, I don't think you are paying attention at all.
Collusion means he was helping the Russians. In what sense? What did the Russian need from Trump to do what they were doing, and have been doing long before there was a Trump in the picture?
The most Pro-Russian president of my lifetime? One bending over in Ukraine? One loathe to level sanctions unanimously passed by Congress against Russia? An America retrenching to isolationism, alienating allies, and running from its spot of "leader of the free world"? Civil unrest and divisiveness in the US itself? The gift of an ineffectual government in your largest adversary?
If you are wondering what Russia got, I don't think you are paying attention at all.
Comments 1 - 25 of 66 Next » Last » Search these comments
The 4:37am tweet, before the charges were leveled, and all was made known, was very presidential. Classic. :)
In light of the indictment, and especially the plea, here is what I think some of the sharpest analysis has been so far, and what we can expect to watch in messaging.
Mueller & Team:
They sent a clear message today that there are two roads. The road of non-compliance is a path to indictment and every charge they can find (Manafort). This is the path of pain. The road Papadopoulos chose, via plea deals, leads to light sentencing and much more favorable personal outcomes. The plea deal is by far more significant in many ways as well. It's also interesting that Manafort is a much larger fish than many predicted be an initial charge in something like this. He is very well known. The charges are not collusion, but corruption. Contrast that with Papadopoulos, a low ranking nobody, errand boy, who sang like a canary and is on the Russian collusion track. Mueller is signaling "I think these are connected, and given time, I will connect the dots." Also, if someone like Papadopoulos is dirty, there must be a lot to find in camp Trump. High, low, and everywhere in between it seems like corruption oozes forth from that administration.
Then there are things like this ...
https://www.rawstory.com/2017/10/george-papadopoulos-lied-to-fbi-agents-the-same-day-trump-asked-comey-for-loyalty-pledge/ ... which you just have to chalk up to coincidence, or realize, "Oh, Trump wasn't asking Comey for the pledge of loyalty. It was Pap' all along."
We have a President who fired Comey, is Pro-Russia without a pro-stance on virtually any other country, begrudgingly enforced Russian sanctions because he was forced to, walked away from the Ukraine day 1, his son Jr.'s meeting ... I mean, look ... we don't even NEED hard evidence of collusion. The politics just have to line up enough and Trump is gone. The GOP is counting the favorability ratings, watching the dumpster fire, and waiting for their chance ... and you can see it ...
Watch the messaging close this week:
GOP: The majority will be silent on the indictment and plea. That's significant as that means they are not supporting Trump. Again, they are waiting to see if they can bury him.
"The Base" & Right Wing Media: pretty quiet today as they circled the wagons. I expect a lot more crazy like the "Mueller will charge Hillary" stuff. It is getting beyond tin-foil hat now. Mueller might get a few more smear campaigns against him from this arm as well.
Edit: Nice one from today ...
https://www.mediamatters.org/video/2017/10/31/alex-jones-there-plot-install-robert-mueller-first-king-america/218401
Trump Administration: spin spin spin. It's going to be about getting distance, "Mana-who?". Above all, you will see, "But that isn't about the President. The President isn't charged. That's not collusion."
Dems/Libs/Resistance: smiles, laughing, and looking to stick the dagger in where they can. No real movement on the political scale or investigative track will be had here. This will be inconsequential, like the Trump administration's reaction and actions.
Longer Term:
Trump's multi-dimensional always one step ahead chess (snicker) is getting very simplistic now: is there more embarrassment and pain if I stay or if I go? Can I fire Mueller, as the ultimate gambit? Will the GOP and public call me on it? Can I protect my family more?
I expect more fun in 3-6 months here from Mueller and crew. I also think if Jr. gets near the sights it is game over for Trump. He will quit.