Trump Told Attorney to Lie to Congress on Moscow Tower Project

[zephcom]

The whole is suffering already........

Oh, and we are heading for what could be the perfect storm in two weeks. People will be heading to Atlanta for the Superbowl. Most will be flying in and back out. That Atlanta airport is one of the major hubs already and airlines are scheduling more flights in and out for the Super Bowl.

There seems to be a lot of planning around the air traffic, TSA, Securtiy and all the rest of the law enforcement for something the size of the Super Bowl. And that planning stopped with the shutdown.

Let's keep our fingers crossed.

 

[Michael]

The whole nation is suffering already........

The top one percent is probably quite happy with Trump at the moment for saving them millions of dollars in taxes, but he's about to destroy our economy and rip our nation apart, and that's not good for anyone.

 

[dgiharris]

You are right of course, but Putin, Trump and Foxnews have invested an enormous amount of time, money, energy and effort into dividing our nation in every conceivable way. The way that Trump and Foxnews treat the Democratic party is simply shameful at this point. Meanwhile 800,000 Americans are forced to go without a paycheck or work without pay while Trump holds them hostage over a wall that the he promised that Mexico would pay for. It's just shameful.

It would be better to impeach President Pinocchio rather than to leave him in power. I shudder to think about how much damage Trump could do to our nation over the next two years. If he's willing to collude with Russia by giving them polling data to help him get elected, and obstruct justice by firing someone like Jeff Sessions simply for showing some ethics and recusing himself from the investigation, is there anything that Trump won't do to hang onto power?

If Trump isn't impeached soon, the whole nation will suffer.

The problem with impeachment quite frankly is that it would hurt future Presidents of the US.

Now, if we have smoking gun Proof of Trump doing something illegal or impeachable while in office then sure, we impeach him.

If we have smoking gun proof of Trump doing anything treasonous during the elections then I guess you can make a case for impeaching him.

however, we can't impeach him because he is an incompetent lying bullying President.
The Office of the Presidency is supposed to have a lot of power so that said person has the power to lead the country. If we elect someone like Trump then as a nation that is on us, we have to own that mistake and suffer through 4 years. We can't just replace him because we don't like him... And I say that as someone who really really hates Trump.

We have to look beyond Trump and look at the Office of the Presidency as a whole. We have to protect that Office and all the power that Office holds so that future presidents can properly lead the country.

I haven't been following the Russia stuff too closely, but from what I glean, we just don't have enough smoking gun proof to impeach him and/or there is too much plausible deniability to impeach him. He is the President after all, and the courts should side with him in any he said vs he said disputes...

Basically, I'm for a thorough investigation and if we can find smoking gun proof then yes, remove him from office. But barring that, we have to grin and bear it for 2 more years.

 

[Hank77]

"After Cohen pleaded guilty to lying to Congress" but after he changes his tune, well then, now he speaks God's honest truth. Sorry but credibility calls for truthfulness when a person lies to Congress, or even in a local courtroom, I do believe it blows their credibility. In the case of the President, I think the crucial importance of credibility is higher than the ordinary average citizen such as you or I. Cohen made a deal for a reduced sentence only because they threw the book at him...gee that's a clever idea when you're wanting a specific outcome.

IF it's true that Trump told Cohen to lie to Congress then he, Trump, has got to be really concerned. We know and Trump knows that Cohen, at least on one occasion, recorded their conversation that proved Trump was lying. Maybe there are more recorded conversations?

 

[zephcom]

IF it's true that Trump told Cohen to lie to Congress then he, Trump, has got to be really concerned. We know and Trump knows that Cohen, at least on one occasion, recorded their conversation that proved Trump was lying. Maybe there are more recorded conversations?

That Trump lies has to be accepted fact. He is a compulsive liar who will lie even when the truth is a better answer.

 

[Apologetic_Warrior]

IF it's true that Trump told Cohen to lie to Congress then he, Trump, has got to be really concerned. We know and Trump knows that Cohen, at least on one occasion, recorded their conversation that proved Trump was lying. Maybe there are more recorded conversations?

Why make those assumptions? Why presume guilt where it has not been proven? I'm not in love with our President, sometimes at some points I do not agree, at times I do not like his characteristics or tactics, but that's all besides the point. The legal implications of presuming guilt before innocence will trickle down from the President to every US citizen. Our justice system cannot function properly under such a presumption.

 

[Hank77]

That Trump lies has to be accepted fact. He is a compulsive liar who will lie even when the truth is a better answer.

Lying to Congress is a felony. IF Trump told his paid attorney to lie to Congress, Trump is also guilty of a felony. However, the evidence would have to be absolute, not just the word of Cohen, who is also a liar.

 

[zephcom]

Lying to Congress is a felony. IF Trump told his paid attorney to lie to Congress, Trump is also guilty of a felony. However, the evidence would have to be absolute, not just the word of Cohen, who is also a liar.

That would only true if one is going to be prosecuted in a court of law.

However if Congress were to choose to remove him from office, the evidence would not have to be absolute because removal from office is a political rather than a legal action.

However, there still is the relative level of lying. It is rare, if not impossible, for someone to have never lied in their life. If I am going to have to decide between someone who lies every time he opens his mouth or someone who is known to occasionally lie, all things being equal, I am usually going to go with the guy who occasionally lies.

My odds of being right are much better.

 

[Hank77]

Why make those assumptions? Why presume guilt where it has not been proven? I'm not in love with our President, sometimes at some points I do not agree, at times I do not like his characteristics or tactics, but that's all besides the point. The legal implications of presuming guilt before innocence will trickle down from the President to every US citizen. Our justice system cannot function properly under such a presumption.

Because this discussion must take into consideration that it just might turn out that Cohen is telling the truth and based on Cohen's previous actions, of recording a conversation with Trump, it's something to consider.
I'm not presuming guilt, or I wouldn't have out 'IF' in caps. I would have simply said that Trump probably lied, Cohen is probably telling the truth, etc.

 

[Apologetic_Warrior]

Because this discussion must take into consideration that it just might turn out that Cohen is telling the truth and based on Cohen's previous actions, of recording a conversation with Trump, it's something to consider.
I'm not presuming guilt, or I wouldn't have out 'IF' in caps. I would have simply said that Trump probably lied, Cohen is probably telling the truth, etc.

I think if Cohen had a damaging recording with the President, it would have been leaked already. It's a great political tool though for establishing and maintaining doubt, obviously it works with some people, the anti-Trump press revel in it, and it serves to distract from things like our boarder situation.

 

[Hank77]

That would only true if one is going to be prosecuted in a court of law.

???

 

[zephcom]

???

Having absolute proof.

 

[zephcom]

I think if Cohen had a damaging recording with the President, it would have been leaked already. It's a great political tool though for establishing and maintaining doubt, obviously it works with some people, the anti-Trump press revel in it, and it serves to distract from things like our boarder situation.

Most likely any tapes Cohen had haven't leaked would be because they are now in the custody of the Special Prosecutor instead of being available for Cohn or anyone else to 'leak'.

 

[Hank77]

I think if Cohen had a damaging recording with the President, it would have been leaked already. It's a great political tool though for establishing and maintaining doubt, obviously it works with some people, the anti-Trump press revel in it, and it serves to distract from things like our boarder situation.

Do you remember who leaked the Cohen and Trump discussion about the payment to Daniels? I don't remember, was it Cohen's attorney?

 

[hedrick]

Why on Earth don't the Republicans today do what the Republicans did during the Nixon fiasco and demand that Trump resign at this point? Trump has already cost them the House. At this rate the Republicans will lose the Presidency, and the Senate in the next election too.

A few decades ago, and I think when Nixon was president, people were complaining that on most issues there was no real difference between the parties. I saw a game theory argument for why parties had to choice but to land very near the center.

Today things are different. It may well be true for elections, but it's not true for nominations. The problem Republicans have is that they have a lot of (by US standards) extreme conservatives in their party, particularly supplying funding. They depend upon those people to get nominated. If they don't stick with Trump, they'll find rich conservatives funding a primary challenge, which they'll lose. I don't believe this was such an issue during Nixon's time.

This is why moderate conservatives have been leaving.

I don't think Republicans today will push Trump to resign for anything that's likely to be proven, unless collusion with Russia can be proven for more than the election. If you could prove that Trump was blackmailed by Putin to pull out of Syria, maybe Republicans would act, but I'm not sure even that would be enough.

 

[Michael]

The problem with impeachment quite frankly is that it would hurt future Presidents of the US.

Now, if we have smoking gun Proof of Trump doing something illegal or impeachable while in office then sure, we impeach him.

If we have smoking gun proof of Trump doing anything treasonous during the elections then I guess you can make a case for impeaching him.

however, we can't impeach him because he is an incompetent lying bullying President.
The Office of the Presidency is supposed to have a lot of power so that said person has the power to lead the country. If we elect someone like Trump then as a nation that is on us, we have to own that mistake and suffer through 4 years. We can't just replace him because we don't like him... And I say that as someone who really really hates Trump.

We have to look beyond Trump and look at the Office of the Presidency as a whole. We have to protect that Office and all the power that Office holds so that future presidents can properly lead the country.

I haven't been following the Russia stuff too closely, but from what I glean, we just don't have enough smoking gun proof to impeach him and/or there is too much plausible deniability to impeach him. He is the President after all, and the courts should side with him in any he said vs he said disputes...

Basically, I'm for a thorough investigation and if we can find smoking gun proof then yes, remove him from office. But barring that, we have to grin and bear it for 2 more years.

I do hear what you're saying about the effect on the Office of the President, however.....

I don't know what more "proof" I need other than the fact the campaign provided polling data to a foreign government (the Russians) while the Russians were heavily engaged in trying to affect the outcome of a US election through Facebook, twitter, and social media. That's treason IMO.

If I needed more, there's the fact that Trump did his best to *undermine* US intelligence while protecting Putin at every turn. A President should have been*outraged* at the Russians for what they did, not going out of his way to make excuses, and downplaying the value of US intelligence on that matter.

Then there's his request of a "pledge of allegiance" to Trump personally which he demanded of James Comey (a Republican I might add). When Comey made it clear he was obligated to uphold the law and protect the constitution, not Trump personally, Trump fired him.

Then there's the election fraud he committed with his personal lawyer with his mistresses (plural), and the fact he asked his personal lawyer to lie before Congress (a felony offense) over this Moscow tower deal.

Then there's the fact that he fired Jeff Sessions, one of Trumps earliest and biggest supporters (and another Republican), only because Sessions did the right thing by recusing himself from the investigation. The obstruction of justice has been over the top in terms of it's blatancy. Even a blind person can see it because Trump does it out in the open.

I'm sorry, but even Nixon didn't commit treason to get himself elected, and he would have been impeached for his obstruction of justice had he not resigned.

Trump will *never* do the "right thing" and resign for his illegal behaviors, so Congress has no other option IMO. I could care less about his party affiliation. Nobody should be above the law, not even the President.

I haven't even seen Mueller's report yet, and I might never be allowed to read it in it's entirety, but I've already seen enough to know that Trump's campaign committed treason by sharing sensitive polling data with the Russians, and Trump has obstructed justice on numerous occasions. I've seen enough. He should be impeached IMO, sooner rather than later too.

Keep in mind that I do agree with you that impeachment isn't something that should be done lightly. What happened to Clinton was utterly ridiculous IMO. What started out as an investigation over a real estate deal gone bad (Whitewater) ended up being a witch hunt involving his personal sex life. That was utterly absurd IMO.

However, treason and obstruction of justice are a completely different issue IMO and they absolutely do warrant impeachment. I don't feel bad about Nixon, and I won't feel bad if they impeach Trump either, in fact I think it would go a long way to healing this country.

I haven't liked the policies of many previous Presidents, but I've only felt that impeachment was warranted twice in my lifetime, first with Nixon, and now with Trump. Enough is enough and nobody is above the law, not even a US President.

 

[Michael]

I don't think Republicans today will push Trump to resign for anything that's likely to be proven, unless collusion with Russia can be proven for more than the election. If you could prove that Trump was blackmailed by Putin to pull out of Syria, maybe Republicans would act, but I'm not sure even that would be enough.

Why do you feel that collusion for *more* than trying to steal the election with the help from a foreign government is necessary for impeachment? If one commits treason to get themselves elected to the office, shouldn't that be enough to impeach him, in and of itself? How about the blatant obstruction of justice since he's been in office? What did Jeff Sessions ever do that wasn't ethical or logical? Why fire James Comey simply for doing his job and investigating the illegal behaviors of a now convicted felon?

I'm sorry, but virtually everyone around Trump and involved in Trumps campaign has now been convicted or has plead guilty of committing felony offenses. Trump is already an un-indited co-conspirator over campaign finance fraud, and he most likely violated federal and state tax laws in the process which got Agnew tossed out of office. Trump even asked his personal lawyer to commit perjury in front of the Congress too during their investigation. That's more than enough to warrant impeachment IMO.

He's also been consistently obstructing justice while in office starting with his firing of James Comey for investigating Michael Flynn, his firing of Jeff Session for recusing himself in the investigation, and his request to get his lawyer to commit perjury over his financial ties to Russia.

Holy cow! Nobody should be above the law. If Trump wasn't the President, he'd already be indited.

 

[hedrick]

Why do you feel that collusion for *more* than trying to steal the election with the help from a foreign government is necessary for impeachment?
...
I'm sorry, but virtually everyone around Trump and involved in Trumps campaign has now been convicted or has plead guilty of committing felony offenses. Trump is already an un-indited co-conspirator over campaign finance fraud, and he most likely violated federal and state tax laws in the process which got Agnew tossed out of office. Trump even asked his personal lawyer to commit perjury in front of the Congress too during their investigation. That's more than enough to warrant impeachment IMO.

It's precisely because of the second half of your post. Everyone knew he was a swindler before he was elected, and that didn't bother people who voted for him. They already know he was at least implicitly working with the Russians, and that doesn't bother anyone. I think it's going to take a lot more than is currently visible to have any effect on Republicans.

 

[SummerMadness]

If you're saying a smoking gun is enough for you, then what level of circumstantial evidence is acceptable to you? I think there is more than enough circumstantial evidence to demonstrate a crime was committed both with conspiring with members of the Russian government and paying off women to hide stories of infidelity. Are we really arguing that there isn't enough evidence out there? How many charges and guilty pleas do you need before the rottenness of the core is no longer ignored?

 

[SummerMadness]

It's precisely because of the second half of your post. Everyone knew he was a swindler before he was elected, and that didn't bother people who voted for him. They already know he was at least implicitly working with the Russians, and that doesn't bother anyone. I think it's going to take a lot more than is currently visible to have any effect on Republicans.

I don't think he will be removed from office because the current Republican Party only cares about power, they don't care about rule of law at all (unless it's in the form of rigging systems in their favor). The real corruption is not Donald Trump, it's the Republican Party and it began when they vowed to make Obama a one-term president, signaling that they would approach all forms of governance in bad faith. Donald Trump is simply a byproduct of this corruption.