The Pit of Knoxville

Status
Not open for further replies.
FrankyVols said:
I honestly thought that was the purpose of the "Pit of Misery," which was the politics thread on Rivals.
Click to expand...


That was how we had it on Rivals. But was hard to moderate because it became hard to figure out who was talking to whom about what topic or who was stirring what pot.

Having a separate board like the water cooler for just politics ends that. One of things I did really like about the hoop over Rivals. Helped keep the BS where it belonged. I didn’t like having a separate forum for every single topic. But for that one it was handy
 
FrankyVols said:
Most of Part II. Here is a good summary I found in an article of the highlights. Listen, I don't really care about collusion. Collusion isn't a federally defined crime. I do think he's guilty of obstruction for sure, but at this stage in his Presidency, we can just let November of 2020 be the path to remove the worst President in our country's history.

1. Trump was receptive to a Campaign national security adviser’s (George Papadopoulos) pursuit of a back channel to Putin.
2. Kremlin operatives provided the Campaign a preview of the Russian plan to distribute stolen emails.
3. The Trump Campaign chairman and deputy chairman (Paul Manafort and Rick Gates) knowingly shared internal polling data and information on battleground states with a Russian spy; and the Campaign chairman worked with the Russian spy on a pro-Russia “peace” plan for Ukraine.
4. The Trump Campaign chairman periodically shared internal polling data with the Russian spy with the expectation it would be shared with Putin-linked oligarch, Oleg Deripaska.
5. Trump Campaign chairman Manafort expected Trump’s winning the presidency would mean Deripaska would want to use Manafort to advance Deripaska’s interests in the United States and elsewhere.
6. Trump Tower meeting: (1) On receiving an email offering derogatory information on Clinton coming from a Russian government official, Donald Trump Jr. “appears to have accepted that offer;” (2) members of the Campaign discussed the Trump Tower meeting beforehand; (3) Donald Trump Jr. told the Russians during the meeting that Trump could revisit the issue of the Magnitsky Act if elected.
7. A Trump Campaign official told the Special Counsel he “felt obliged to object” to a GOP Platform change on Ukraine because it contradicted Trump’s wishes; however, the investigation did not establish that Gordon was directed by Trump.
8. Russian military hackers may have followed Trump’s July 27, 2016 public statement “Russia if you’re listening …” within hours by targeting Clinton’s personal office for the first time.
9. Trump requested campaign affiliates to get Clinton’s emails, which resulted in an individual apparently acting in coordination with the Campaign claiming to have successfully contacted Russian hackers.
10. The Trump Campaign—and Trump personally—appeared to have advanced knowledge of future WikiLeaks releases.
11. The Trump Campaign coordinated campaign-related public communications based on future WikiLeaks releases.
12. Michael Cohen, on behalf of the Trump Organization, brokered a secret deal for a Trump Tower Moscow project directly involving Putin’s inner circle, at least until June 2016.
13. During the presidential transition, Jared Kushner and Eric Prince engaged in secret back channel communications with Russian agents. (1) Kushner suggested to the Russian Ambassador that they use a secure communication line from within the Russian Embassy to speak with Russian Generals; and (2) Prince and Kushner’s friend Rick Gerson conducted secret back channel meetings with a Putin agent to develop a plan for U.S.-Russian relations.
14. During the presidential transition, in coordination with other members of the Transition Team, Michael Flynn spoke with the Russian Ambassador to prevent a tit for tat Russian response to the Obama administration’s imposition of sanctions for election interference; the Russians agreed not to retaliate saying they wanted a good relationship with the incoming administration.
Click to expand...
48f91e50dfbec0cc81ddcc4bf369ed57.jpg
 
Irishblooded said:
Dear mods


Since we have a new board and are just getting it up and going.

Can we have a completely separate forum for politics and crap? Is that possible
Click to expand...
What part of "Pit" confused you?

Oh wait, my bad my meat smoking brother from another mother. :ROFLMAO:
 
FrankyVols said:
I make no promises.
Click to expand...
I'm sincerely glad you're here. So, now that the Mueller report is out, and he's testified before congress, do you still maintain he's a hero? Or are you swayed by the fact that his years long report found no Russian collusion and no obstruction?

Edit: never mind, I see where you weighed in on another page. Damn, you're consistent, I'll give you that.
 
Last edited:
Toadman005 said:
I'm sincerely glad you're here. So, now that the Mueller report is out, and he's testified before congress, do you still maintain he's a hero? Or are you swayed by the fact that his years long report found no Russian collusion and no obstruction?

Edit: never mind, I see where you weighed in on another page. Damn, you're consistent, I'll give you that.
Click to expand...
Untitled-4.jpg

512

what-day-is-f96f8771a0.jpg
 
FrankyVols said:
That’s not a very American attitude. When things go wrong just leave? Nah. We’re almost through this embarrassment.
Click to expand...
My friend, how do you honestly believe Trump won't easily win re-election? I mean, I know it's a proven fact Google is interfering to prevent his re-election (I notice the Russian conspiracy theorists have no problem with the reality that Silicon Valley is medeling and interfering), but, seriously, how do you think he's not gonna win? There's not one viable democratic candidate.
 
Toadman005 said:
I'm sincerely glad you're here. So, now that the Mueller report is out, and he's testified before congress, do you still maintain he's a hero? Or are you swayed by the fact that his years long report found no Russian collusion and no obstruction?

Edit: never mind, I see where you weighed in on another page. Damn, you're consistent, I'll give you that.
Click to expand...

Listen, you may disagree entirely, but to categorize the Mueller report as showing "no Russian collusion and no obstruction" is disingenuous in my opinion. I read that (terribly boring at times) report. We just live in a different time. 20 years ago, a sitting President never would have survived it. Hell, probably just 4 years ago with a Republican led House and Senate.
 
FrankyVols said:
Listen, you may disagree entirely, but to categorize the Mueller report as showing "no Russian collusion and no obstruction" is disingenuous in my opinion. I read that (terribly boring at times) report. We just live in a different time. 20 years ago, a sitting President never would have survived it. Hell, probably just 4 years ago with a Republican led House and Senate.
Click to expand...
The report proved there was no collusion. Yours, Schiff's, Nadler's or anyone else's desires to interpret it differently are irrelevant. None transpired. As such, there was no crime, and Trump could not commit obstruction by definition, to say nothing of the fact that he in no way attempted to even under the premise of a possible hypothetical crime.
 
Toadman005 said:
My friend, how do you honestly believe Trump won't easily win re-election? I mean, I know it's a proven fact Google is interfering to prevent his re-election (I notice the Russian conspiracy theorists have no problem with the reality that Silicon Valley is medeling and interfering), but, seriously, how do you think he's not gonna win? There's not one viable democratic candidate.
Click to expand...

Biden, Harris and Warren are certainly viable. I think it'll be a razor thin margin again, coming down to a few key areas in Pennsylvania, Michigan, Florida. Also, a few other reasons--continued fallout from this bizarre trade war that Republicans used to be against (can you imagine how Obama would be railed if he kept saying we're making money off tarriffs?), and the fact he keeps making embarrassing gaffes. Like each and every day.

Tennessee is safely Trump, as you know, but I have extended family who farm, and they're starting to really feel the pinch. And the reality is, if Trump needs to do another subsidy, that'll probably piss off a whole other group of people.

www.cnbc.com

'Trump is ruining our markets': Struggling farmers are losing a huge customer to the trade war — China

China's exit piles on to a devastating year for farmers, who've struggled through record flooding and droughts that destroyed crop yields, and trade war escalations that have lowered prices and profits down this year.
www.cnbc.com www.cnbc.com
 
Toadman005 said:
Trump could not commit obstruction by definition
Click to expand...

That's just not true. See Martha Stewart. And 50 million other legal "experts" that answered this 50 million times when released. Proving intent is the tough piece with an obstruction case.

Edit: See this summary from Politifact. But all this is a waste of time man. The election is how we should judge this piece of shit.

Obstruction of a non-crime?
Legal experts told us that a president (or anyone) could still be prosecuted for obstructing justice if they believed they might be prosecuted — even if they ultimately never are.
"You can obstruct justice even if a prosecutor ultimately finds you were not guilty of committing the crime that was the focus of the underlying investigation," said Miriam Baer, a professor at Brooklyn Law School. "Even if a prosecutor ultimately concluded that you weren’t guilty of crime X, that says nothing as to whether you thought that you might be indicted for crime X, or, for that matter, if you thought one of your friends of family members would be indicted for crime X."
Eric Posner, a professor at the University of Chicago Law School, agreed that an obstruction prosecution could have been argued in this case.
"Suppose Trump knew that no crime had been committed but believed that the investigation would uncover politically or personally embarrassing information, or if he believed that the investigation would embarrass or implicate an ally, aide, or family member," Posner said. "Then interfering with the investigation is a crime. The reason is that the purpose of the investigation is to find the truth, and if people obstruct an investigation, then the investigation becomes more difficult, wasting government resources."
That said, an obstruction case is naturally going to be stronger if there is an underlying crime that’s being prosecuted, said Ric Simmons, a professor at the Ohio State University Moritz College of Law.
It is "technically possible, but the legal and practical challenges in winning such an obstruction case would be great," Simmons said. "A prosecutor would have to prove that the president believed there was a collusion case ‘contemplated’ against him even when he did not engage in collusion. That is theoretically possible, but hard to prove to a jury."
 
Wunder.Noid said:
@FrankyVols should bet the house on Trump not getting elected imo. Do it Franky so you can buy us all a round as we tell you how smart and wonderful you are. 😎
Click to expand...

Hard pass. I've learned my lesson. I mean, it made me lose faith in humanity and our country, but I definitely learned my lesson. I'm still optimistic for 2020. But it is way too fucking early to handicap.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top