Trump Tapes

[astonmartin708]

We now have audio of the president discussing cash payment (hush money) to one of his mistresses.

When is enough going to be enough and say this activity is unbecoming of the commander in chief. Lewinski was bad enough and they raked Clinto through the coals for that. Trump needs to be gone even if that means replacing him with Pence (who’s politics are even worse in my opinion).

Never again will any Republican be able to bully anyone about the Kennedy family or Clinton’s philandering. They’ve officially lost the moral high ground for the foreseeable future.

 

[lawpoke87]

So he was a Democrat when he had the affair and a Pub when he paid her to keep it quiet . Look...Trump is a bafoon. However, having an affair over a decade ago then paying the porn star to keep it confidential is rather meh in today’s world. It’s not like he’s banging an intern in the Oval Office then lying to the nation about it in national TV. For the record, I didn’t care what Clinton did in the White House and likewise don’t care if Trump banged a hoe in 2006. Not sure how Dems can embrace Clinton and have an issue with Trump on this issue. Same goes for Pubs and Clinton. Although the President having an affair with a subordinate obviously touches on other sensitive issues

Maybe Hillary will be consistent on go on a full out attack on Stormy.

There’s a lot of things to criticize Trump for imo. Don’t see this as one of the bigger ones.

 

[aTUfan]

It's hush money for the giver.
It's extortion for the taker

 

[URedskin54]

More concerned about Trump's new policy of crushing farmers with tariffs and then making them welfare dependent. That's some Ayn Rand level cartoonish central government stupidity

 

[Watu3]

The point is that Trump is a committed liar with no regard for the truth. We are expected to believe his lies about how great everything is just because he says so, regardless od the facts or reality or common sense?
Dictators get away with that, but in a democracy?

Trade wars are not good for the economy regardless of Trump’s claims.

 

[TUMe]

So he was a Democrat when he had the affair and a Pub when he paid her to keep it quiet . Look...Trump is a bafoon. However, having an affair over a decade ago then paying the porn star to keep it confidential is rather meh in today’s world. It’s not like he’s banging an intern in the Oval Office then lying to the nation about it in national TV. For the record, I didn’t care what Clinton did in the White House and likewise don’t care if Trump banged a hoe in 2006. Not sure how Dems can embrace Clinton and have an issue with Trump on this issue. Same goes for Pubs and Clinton. Although the President having an affair with a subordinate obviously touches on other sensitive issues

Maybe Hillary will be consistent on go on a full out attack on Stormy.

There’s a lot of things to criticize Trump for imo. Don’t see this as one of the bigger ones.

I believe this was about the playmate not the porn star. And this was a longer affair.

 

[lawpoke87]

Playmates, porn stars, hookers...who can keep up?

 

[aTUfan]

"It was just sex"

 

[astonmartin708]

More concerned about Trump's new policy of crushing farmers with tariffs and then making them welfare dependent. That's some Ayn Rand level cartoonish central government stupidity

Essentially making the American taxpayer pay for his tariffs... twice!

 

[astonmartin708]

So he was a Democrat when he had the affair and a Pub when he paid her to keep it quiet . Look...Trump is a bafoon. However, having an affair over a decade ago then paying the porn star to keep it confidential is rather meh in today’s world. It’s not like he’s banging an intern in the Oval Office then lying to the nation about it in national TV. For the record, I didn’t care what Clinton did in the White House and likewise don’t care if Trump banged a hoe in 2006. Not sure how Dems can embrace Clinton and have an issue with Trump on this issue. Same goes for Pubs and Clinton. Although the President having an affair with a subordinate obviously touches on other sensitive issues

Maybe Hillary will be consistent on go on a full out attack on Stormy.

There’s a lot of things to criticize Trump for imo. Don’t see this as one of the bigger ones.

Paying her to keep it quiet is the big thing. What would Republicans have done if this had come out from Obama? Fox News would be talking about it from the day it leaked to the end of his tenure. This would have destroyed the administration of any other president.

 

[lawpoke87]

Paying her to keep it quiet is the big thing. What would Republicans have done if this had come out from Obama? Fox News would be talking about it from the day it leaked to the end of his tenure. This would have destroyed the administration of any other president.

If having an affair IN THE OVAL OFFICE with a very young intern and then lying to the nation about it doesn’t destroy an Administration then I can’t see paying a woman to keep quiet about an affair you had years before you took office takes down a President. As I said above...don’t really care about either thing. Much more concerned about this stupid trade war.

 

[astonmartin708]

If having an affair IN THE OVAL OFFICE with a very young intern and then lying to the nation about it doesn’t destroy an Administration then I can’t see paying a woman to keep quiet about an affair you had years before you took office takes down a President. As I said above...don’t really care about either thing. Much more concerned about this stupid trade war.

It got him impeached! How effective do you think the Clinton admin would have been had that even come in 1993 instead of December 1998?

 

[lawpoke87]

It got him impeached! How effective do you think the Clinton admin would have been had that even come in 1993 instead of December 1998?

The impeachment was symbolic....and utterly one of the most stupid exercises I’ve ever witnessed. Dude got re-elected and is still the darling of the Democratic Party. I’m a fan too btw. My second favorite Pres of my lifetime. Voted for him twice.

 

[astonmartin708]

The impeachment was symbolic....and utterly one of the most stupid exercises I’ve ever witnessed. Dude got re-elected and is still the darling of the Democratic Party. I’m a fan too btw. My second favorite Pres of my lifetime. Voted for him twice.

As demonstrated by the Clinton impeachment, it's not the act that is especially bad. It's the cover up. Which both Clinton and now Trump were caught in. If we can impeach Clinton "symbolically" then shouldn't we be expected to at least explore that avenue with Trump, who has a host of other (worse) scandals against him at the same time? He's just a guy that should have never stepped foot in the White House. And the American populous, and the world at large need to see that our other elected leaders recognize that.

 

[lawpoke87]

As demonstrated by the Clinton impeachment, it's not the act that is especially bad. It's the cover up. Which both Clinton and now Trump were caught in. If we can impeach Clinton "symbolically" then shouldn't we be expected to at least explore that avenue with Trump, who has a host of other (worse) scandals against him at the same time? He's just a guy that should have never stepped foot in the White House. And the American populous, and the world at large need to see that our other elected leaders recognize that.

I do think it's different when the "coverup" occurred prior to taking office. Not sure we can impeach a President for paying a woman to keep quiet about an affair before he took office. Such an action would open up Pandora's box where we set a precedent on being able to impeach Presidents' for actions (which aren't illegal) prior to taking office. There are much more compelling issues for the impeachment discussion imo. As you know I try to look at the larger picture and consider precedents and how they effect us going forward. (See EOs, nuclear option in the Senate, voting on Supreme Court Justices, etc...). Far too many people are short-sighted by partisanship when it comes to precedent.

 

[astonmartin708]

I do think it's different when the "coverup" occurred prior to taking office. Not sure we can impeach a President for paying a woman to keep quiet about an affair before he took office. Such an action would open up Pandora's box where we set a precedent on being able to impeach Presidents' for actions (which aren't illegal) prior to taking office. There are much more compelling issues for the impeachment discussion imo.

It was during the election cycle, and it was just about as major of a campaign finance violation as you'll see. Candidates are (and should be) under major scrutiny and regulation in the months leading up to election day. If you only slap them on the hand, then things like this are only going to keep happening and getting worse. Remember that the only reason Clinton was able to perjure himself while in office was because he was giving sworn testimony in a (Paula Jones) case relevant to accusations from BEFORE his tenure as POTUS.

 

[Gmoney4WW]

"It was just sex"

Says all the Bible Thumpers supporting his Christian cause.

 

[lawpoke87]

If he broke campaign finance laws then that's another matter all together. My argument is based on the assumption that no federal laws were broken by the payment. Clinton's public statement denying the affair was far more damaging politically then lying under oath imo. Not sure he gets symbolically impeached without the on air lie about the affair. As I stated above....the impeachment was the most ridiculous thing I've ever witnessed. The reaction to the hush payment is predictable on both sides...and depressing. Far too many sheep out there.

 

[astonmartin708]

If he broke campaign finance laws then that's another matter all together. My argument is based on the assumption that no federal laws were broken by the payment. Clinton's public statement denying the affair was far more damaging politically then lying under oath imo. Not sure he gets symbolically impeached without the on air lie about the affair. As I stated above....the impeachment was the most ridiculous thing I've ever witnessed. The reaction to the hush payment is predictable on both sides...and depressing. Far too many sheep out there.

Well, as we've witnessed with Trump... repeatedly lying to the American people means nothing these days. It use to mean you got impeached. Now it's just any other another Wednesday at 1600 Pennsylvania.

 

[lawpoke87]

Our acceptance with our elected officials lying to the American people is worrisome. Obama repeatedly lied to the American public about the biggest piece of legislation to come down the pike in years and something as important and fundamental as one's health insurance and doctor and most didn't care. Trump has obviously kicked that up a notch. It's become so commonplace that's it's accepted..."oh he's just a politician, that's what they do". Our elected officials lying to us (especially about important items) shouldn't be tolerated.

 

[astonmartin708]

Our acceptance with our elected officials lying to the American people is worrisome. Obama repeatedly lied to the American public about the biggest piece of legislation to come down the pike in years and something as important and fundamental as one's health insurance and doctor and most didn't care. Trump has obviously kicked that up a notch. It's become so commonplace that's it's accepted..."oh he's just a politician, that's what they do". Our elected officials lying to us (especially about important items) shouldn't be tolerated.

I find lying about WMD's / the reason we were going to war and lying about treasonous activity in your campaign (even if you weren't the one doing it!) is worse than lying about having to change your doctor (which didn't happen for a lot of people) or about a BJ in the oval.

Call me crazy though.

 

[lawpoke87]

I find lying about WMD's / the reason we were going to war and lying about treasonous activity in your campaign (even if you weren't the one doing it!) is worse than lying about having to change your doctor (which didn't happen for a lot of people) or about a BJ in the oval.

Call me crazy though.

Crazy. I wouldn't call repeating our intelligence report about WMDs a lie unless you know our intelligence is wrong and are repeating the erroneous info. ( I opposed the invasion of Iraq at the time and still do today...even if he had WMDs). I'm certainly not a blank check for any political party when it comes to policy. Obama not only lied about getting to keep your doctor but more damning he promised we could keep our current insurance knowing full well that he was cancelling the coverage for millions of Americans. Cancelling insurance coverage for millions of people is a huge deal. Lying to them about it is worse.

 

[TUMe]

Bengazi was really caused by a video ?

Now here is the thing, normally it is almost impossible to be REMOVED after being impeachment. However, last week and Russia hit a nerve. Trump really went too far. He is and should be in danger. If he is impeached he could actually be removed.

 

[Gmoney4WW]

If Trump gets impeached there is a seriously real chance he gets removed. There are a lot of republicans congressmen masking their distaste for him due to their constituency. It won't take much of a swing in one direction for them to go against him, expecting the constituencies opinions to swing even further with a massive wave of negative support against him. Russia, at the moment would be the crux of this movement.

 

[lawpoke87]

Ironic that one of the negatives that stuck with Hillary throughout the election was that she would say anything (lie) when put on the spot. Now Trump does the same if not worse.

 

[astonmartin708]

Crazy. I wouldn't call repeating our intelligence report about WMDs a lie unless you know our intelligence is wrong and are repeating the erroneous info. ( I opposed the invasion of Iraq at the time and still do today...even if he had WMDs). I'm certainly not a blank check for any political party when it comes to policy. Obama not only lied about getting to keep your doctor but more damning he promised we could keep our current insurance knowing full well that he was cancelling the coverage for millions of Americans. Cancelling insurance coverage for millions of people is a huge deal. Lying to them about it is worse.

The effort wasn't just to cancel people's insurance. It was to replace it with something better. There were just tons of efforts to undercut the something better so people would support a certain party.

 

[lawpoke87]

The effort wasn't just to cancel people's insurance. It was to replace it with something better. There were just tons of efforts to undercut the something better so people would support a certain party.

I have no idea what that means. Obama knew millions of people would lose their insurance coverage yet outright lied about the same. The replacement was a higher cost higher deductible policy for almost all of those who had their insurance cancelled by the ACA. The fact that WATU3 is now concerned about rising rates after watching our rates in Oklahoma triple under the ACA and posting nothing is comical...yet predictable. I swear Libs think someone is going to take away their "Lib Card" if they say anything critical of a fellow Dem.

 

[astonmartin708]

I have no idea what that means. Obama knew millions of people would lose their insurance coverage yet outright lied about the same. The replacement was a higher cost higher deductible policy for almost all of those who had their insurance cancelled by the ACA. The fact that WATU3 is now concerned about rising rates after watching our rates in Oklahoma triple under the ACA and posting nothing is comical...yet predictable. I swear Libs think someone is going to take away their "Lib Card" if they say anything critical of a fellow Dem.

I feel like we need a fact check on that...

https://www.factcheck.org/2014/04/millions-lost-insurance/

 

[lawpoke87]

I feel like we need a fact check on that...

https://www.factcheck.org/2014/04/millions-lost-insurance/

Talk about trying to back into a defense of Obama. My statement..."Millions would lose their insurance coverage" is absolutely correct. Our insurance plan was cancelled. We lost that coverage. To comply with the law we were forced to find a different more expensive plan with higher deductibles. I can't believe you are still contesting this point. I posted the letter from the insurance company my company received at the time stating that "pursuant to the ACA your current company insurance coverage is no longer available and has been CANCELLED". I also posted a comparison of the options and cost of the available plans and compared to our old plan.

Your continued defense and attempt to rationalize Obama's lie regarding the ACA is rather amazing. Again....they won't strip your Liberal card if you call a spade a spade. This is why extreme partisanship is dangerous. It clouds judgment as well as rational thoughts.
Next issue.

 

[astonmartin708]

Talk about trying to back into a defense of Obama. My statement..."Millions would lose their insurance coverage" is absolutely correct. Our insurance plan was cancelled. We lost that coverage. To comply with the law we were forced to find a different more expensive plan with higher deductibles. I can't believe you are still contesting this point. I posted the letter from the insurance company my company received at the time stating that "pursuant to the ACA your current company insurance coverage is no longer available and has been CANCELLED". I also posted a comparison of the options and cost of the available plans and compared to our old plan.

Your continued defense and attempt to rationalize Obama's lie regarding the ACA is rather amazing. Again....they won't strip your Liberal card if you call a spade a spade. This is why extreme partisanship is dangerous. It clouds judgment as well as rational thoughts.
Next issue.

We all know your plight. Your insurance was canceled and you had to get a new version. That sucks. But it's not comparable. It's not like Obama recklessly sent you to war to have your leg (needlessly) blown off by an IED or to come back with PTSD.

If you would like to argue that it is, I suggest going down to the VA to talk to an injured Iraq war vet and argue that your plight is worse than his. See what he says.

 

[lawpoke87]

We all know your plight. Your insurance was canceled and you had to get a new version. That sucks. But it's not comparable. It's not like Obama recklessly sent you to war to have your leg (needlessly) blown off by an IED or to come back with PTSD.

If you would like to argue that it is, I suggest going down to the VA to talk to an injured Iraq war vet and argue that your plight is worse than his. See what he says.

Since I came out against the Iraq war from the beginning and feel like my position has been proven correct I'm not sure of your point. My only statement regarding the war is if the intelligence community reports that there are WMDs then when a President restates that finding it's hard to fault him for lying. He's repeating bad intelligence.

 

[astonmartin708]

Since I came out against the Iraq war from the beginning and feel like my position has been proven correct I'm not sure of your point. My only statement regarding the war is if the intelligence community reports that there are WMDs then when a President restates that finding it's hard to fault him for lying. He's repeating bad intelligence.

There's a difference between repeating bad intelligence and making it the hinge point on an entire military invasion. And, as you know... there was plenty of people who were against a war with Iraq. He could have easily waited on better intelligence. Is it better to be a liar or just completely incompetent regarding thousands of American souls and millions more foreign nationals that have died due to him. If I were going to argue for the invasion of another country, I better be 100% positive I knew the reason I was doing it ACTUALLY EXISTED.

Or, maybe he knew they didn't exist, lied about it, and he just wanted energy security... which is the more plausible case.

 

[lawpoke87]

There's a difference between repeating bad intelligence and making it the hinge point on an entire military invasion. And, as you know... there was plenty of people who were against a war with Iraq. He could have easily waited on better intelligence. Is it better to be a liar or just completely incompetent regarding thousands of American souls and millions more foreign nationals that have died due to him. If I were going to argue for the invasion of another country, I better be 100% positive I knew the reason I was doing it ACTUALLY EXISTED.

Seeing as I would have been against it even it Iraq had WMDs I obviously agree. I think one must set a very high standard in order to invade a sovereign country. I would have put boots on the ground to stop ISIS btw....but I never considered them a sovereign country.

 

[TUMe]

These are worn out arguments. Bush and Obama. Reagan and Carter.
Let's talk about now.

I think we may see more push back from Coates, Haley, Sessions (no genius), Mattis, and Pompeo. Maybe Kelley.

Haley was outspoken on Reuters today. Coates apologized but he was visibly laughing at the idea of inviting Putin. Sessions has nothing to lose. Mattis is slow walking the Space Force as a new branch. Pompeo has twice been caught flat footed by major announcements. Kelly was brought in to bring discipline in the White House. Yeah right.

It is worth a try for the six of them to tell him how the cow ate the cabbage. Would he fire all six? He's not on the Apprentice anymore.

 

[astonmartin708]

Seeing as I would have been against it even it Iraq had WMDs I obviously agree. I think one must set a very high standard in order to invade a sovereign country. I would have put boots on the ground to stop ISIS btw....but I never considered them a sovereign country.

Last thing I'll say on this is, I hope that in the next 20 or so years, we get a Bush era version of Kennedy's XCOMM tapes. I want to know what was said when the NSC gathered and what information they were dealing with / how they evaluated it as well as the possibilities of war.

 

[URedskin54]

We all know your plight. Your insurance was canceled and you had to get a new version. That sucks. But it's not comparable. It's not like Obama recklessly sent you to war to have your leg (needlessly) blown off by an IED or to come back with PTSD.

If you would like to argue that it is, I suggest going down to the VA to talk to an injured Iraq war vet and argue that your plight is worse than his. See what he says.

I have, and always will, push back against this line of argument. Dems said this while Bush was president, and Republicans said it during Obama's second term. Trump said it about both.

We have no draft. Any military member injured or killed in any of our recent wars was there because they decided it was worth it to be there. There are plenty of good arguments that our mission in Afghanistan has been pointless for about a decade, but I would be pretty pissed off if I had lost a leg and then people went and blamed Obama for it because we were still there. My two best friends from high school were in Iraq and Afghanistan as well. We wanted to be there and are glad we did it. If you want to blame anyone, blame us for always being willing participants

 

[astonmartin708]

I have, and always will, push back against this line of argument. Dems said this while Bush was president, and Republicans said it during Obama's second term. Trump said it about both.

We have no draft. Any military member injured or killed in any of our recent wars was there because they decided it was worth it to be there. There are plenty of good arguments that our mission in Afghanistan has been pointless for about a decade, but I would be pretty pissed off if I had lost a leg and then people went and blamed Obama for it because we were still there. My two best friends from high school were in Iraq and Afghanistan as well. We wanted to be there and are glad we did it. If you want to blame anyone, blame us for always being willing participants

Afghanistan was different. It was retaliatory. Iraq was aggressive, and needlessly aggressive as we've since come to find out (but a lot of people were arguing that in the first place). Additionally, it led to the ability of ISIS to rise up, and one could argue that the fact we went to war in Iraq actually gave RISE to more global terrorism than we would have had if Sadaam were still there. Not that I liked Sadaam. It was just needless violence for the sake of our energy security which, if Bush would have waited a couple of years, we had a technology boom in anyways.

 

[URedskin54]

Afghanistan was different. It was retaliatory. Iraq was aggressive, and needlessly aggressive as we've since come to find out (but a lot of people were arguing that in the first place). Additionally, it led to the ability of ISIS to rise up, and one could argue that the fact we went to war in Iraq actually gave RISE to more global terrorism than we would have had if Sadaam were still there. Not that I liked Sadaam. It was just needless violence for the sake of our energy security. Which, if Bush would have waited a couple of years, we had a technology boom in anyways.

And it could be argued that Obama's choice to pull out against the advice of practically everyone just to fulfill a campaign promise caused the rise of ISIS. And it could be argued that the choice of Obama to rapidly increase the number of troops in Afghanistan in 2010 caused needless American deaths(this is what some Republicans cynically did). It could go round and round.

If people want to make the case that the number of civilian deaths caused by the choice to go to (or continue) war makes a president morally reprehensible, have at it. I'm saying that I don't like the idea of blaming military war deaths/injuries on anyone but the people who enthusiastically signed up to participate in those wars and risk death/injury.

 

[aTUfan]

Paying her to keep it quiet is the big thing. What would Republicans have done if this had come out from Obama? Fox News would be talking about it from the day it leaked to the end of his tenure. This would have destroyed the administration of any other president.

Congressional sex slush fund, paid for by american taxpayers; Authorized by congress male and female.

 

[astonmartin708]

And it could be argued that Obama's choice to pull out against the advice of practically everyone just to fulfill a campaign promise caused the rise of ISIS. And it could be argued that the choice of Obama to rapidly increase the number of troops in Afghanistan in 2010 caused needless American deaths(this is what some Republicans cynically did). It could go round and round.

If people want to make the case that the number of civilian deaths caused by the choice to go to (or continue) war makes a president morally reprehensible, have at it. I'm saying that I don't like the idea of blaming military war deaths/injuries on anyone but the people who enthusiastically signed up to participate in those wars and risk death/injury.

We would have never had to pull out had we not been there in the first place. Who does the buck stop with?