How the Mueller Investigation Could Play Out for Trump

[tigermud]

https://theintercept.com/2019/01/14...nger-but-j-edgar-hoover-pioneered-the-tactic/

 

[tigermud]

Mueller plows ahead, issuing more subpoenas to associates of conservative commentator

https://abcnews.go.com/beta-story-c...es-conservative-commentator/story?id=60391636

no end in sight, trumps being played IMO with all the yip yap about it wrapping up soon, not going to happen. Mueller hell bent on taking stone down.

 

[tigermud]

Former top FBI lawyer James Baker subject of criminal media leak probe, transcript reveals

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/fo...f-federal-media-leak-probe-transcript-reveals

 

[tigermud]

AG Nominee Promises to Look Into Whether a Counter Intelligence Probe Was Improperly Opened Against Trump

https://www.cnsnews.com/news/articl...s-look-whether-counter-intelligence-probe-was

 

[Gulo Blue]

AG Nominee Promises to Look Into Whether a Counter Intelligence Probe Was Improperly Opened Against Trump

https://www.cnsnews.com/news/articl...s-look-whether-counter-intelligence-probe-was

That seems like a tough argument to make. Trump's Russian ties (or efforts to have ties) and his foot dragging on sanctions against them requiring congress to push him seems like proper reason enough.

 

[Spartanmack]

https://www.americanlibertyreport.com/articles/trump-vs-obama-whos-been-tougher-on-russia/


https://thehill.com/opinion/white-h...er-on-russia-in-18-months-than-obama-in-eight


https://www.npr.org/2018/07/20/630659379/is-trump-the-toughest-ever-on-Russia


from the NPR piece:

"There's never been a president as tough on Russia as I have been," Trump told reporters on Wednesday.

That might sound like hyperbole, but in this case, there's actually some basis for the president's boast.

"When you actually look at the substance of what this administration has done, not the rhetoric but the substance, this administration has been much tougher on Russia than any in the post-Cold War era," said Daniel Vajdich, senior fellow at the Atlantic Council.

 

[Gulo Blue]

https://www.fastcompany.com/40540056/goldman-sachs-trumps-tariffs-will-benefit-russia-and-china

Goldman wrote: ?By imposing across-the-board tariffs to all steel and aluminum imports, the larger economic impact is on Canada, Mexico and the EU, and it ironically eases the economic impact to China and Russia.?

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-...ew-russia-sanctions-despite-law-idUSKBN1FI2V7

Trump administration holds off on new Russia sanctions, despite law

https://www.usatoday.com/story/news...et-union-right-invade-afghanistan/2466897002/

Trump says former Soviet Union was 'right' to invade Afghanistan, prompting ridicule

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-44852812

Trump sides with Russia against FBI at Helsinki summit

 

[Spartanmack]

"When you actually look at the substance of what this administration has done, not the rhetoric but the substance, this administration has been much tougher on Russia than any in the post-Cold War era," said Daniel Vajdich, senior fellow at the Atlantic Council.


But it's the rhetoric that counts.

 

[Gulo Blue]

"When you actually look at the substance of what this administration has done, not the rhetoric but the substance, this administration has been much tougher on Russia than any in the post-Cold War era," said Daniel Vajdich, senior fellow at the Atlantic Council.

But it's the rhetoric that counts.

This quote you just posted twice - how is that not rhetoric?


I posted 4 substantive articles. Not a quote about unnamed substance. I didn't even need to make a point or carefully pick an article with certain wording.

 

[Gulo Blue]

So the steel and aluminum tarrifs were an indirect end around to make up for the direct sanctions on Russia? Seems awfully clever for someone who is so dumb.

And I was actually thinking of soybeans when I googed for an article about tariffs. I recall reading that in reaction to tariffs, China replaced us from Russian soybeans.

 

[Spartanmack]

So the steel and aluminum tarrifs were an indirect end around to make up for the direct sanctions on Russia? Seems awfully clever for someone who is so dumb. The steel tarrifs weren't designed to only or even mostly target Russia and didn't someone post data in a prior thread that indicated Russia was one of our smallest trade partners when it comes to steel? Sorry Goldman, this one falls pretty flat.

One of the first pieces of legislation Trump ever signed was the new sanctions on Russia, which Obama wouldn't sign even after Russia annexed Crimea. Obama also wouldn't help to arm the Ukraine after Putin's aggression in the region, Trump increased military equipment sales to Ukraine by 41%. He was reluctant (apparently dragging his feet) to sign the bill because wording in it took power from the executive branch and transferred it to Congress - seems reasonable to be weary of that. Another sign of his foot dragging is his mentioning or complaining that Europe should be taking the lead on many of these measures, particularly those related to Crimea/Ukraine - and he's right. Europe is a far bigger trading partner with Russia than the US and there is far more at stake for them in the region, but they want cheap natural gas, so to heck with the Ukraine, let the US deal with it.


Trump's actions have led to Russians being killed. He's kicked out 60 Russian diplomats for a murder that took place in the UK (the Germans booted 3).

 

[Spartanmack]

This quote you just posted twice - how is that not rhetoric?

seemed like it was missed the first time.

 

[Gulo Blue]

seemed like it was missed the first time.

Well, maybe try posting it again and see if it becomes something other than rhetoric.

 

[Spartanmack]

Third time's a charm...

"When you actually look at the substance of what this administration has done, not the rhetoric but the substance, this administration has been much tougher on Russia than any in the post-Cold War era," said Daniel Vajdich, senior fellow at the Atlantic Council.

 

[Spartanmack]

Since we're concerned with being rhetorical, of the 4 substantive articles you posted, why did you highlight quotes from 2 of them that were more about rhetoric than sanctions, or foot dragging on sanctions?

 

[Gulo Blue]

Since we're concerned with being rhetorical, of the 4 substantive articles you posted, why did you highlight quotes from 2 of them that were more about rhetoric than sanctions, or foot dragging on sanctions?

I didn't. The bolding was part of the copy/paste.


When talking about Trump's attitude towards Russia, things Trump says about Russia isn't automatically rhetoric.

 

[Gulo Blue]

You don't have to be settled on where Trump stands to see that there's good reason to look into it.

 

[Spartanmack]

I didn't. The bolding was part of the copy/paste.


When talking about Trump's attitude towards Russia, things Trump says about Russia isn't automatically rhetoric.

I was referring to the substance of the quotes and by highlighting I meant that you took them from the article and put them in the body of your post - it had nothing to do with the formatting. You're right, quotes aren't automatically rhetoric, but 2 of those quotes are more evidential of his rhetoric than of any foot dragging on sanctions.

 

[sggatecl]

Cohen on poll rigging report: 'What I did was at the direction of and for the sole benefit of' Trump

Not shocking at this point. Would mean a lot more if this came before he was under The Mueller's thumb.

 

[Gulo Blue]

https://www.nytimes.com/2019/01/17/us/politics/giuliani-collusion.html


Giuliani is saying that he never said there was no collusion from the campaign, just no collusion from Trump.