Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My guess:
Mueller's extremely damning report comes out in September of 2018---putting Congress in the position of having to defend a decision NOT to impeach on the campaign trail.
Either the House flips D, in which case impeachment proceeds, or the House stays R and impeachment stalls.
Either way, there are not enough Senate votes to convict---unless the Senate Republicans remember that the Senate is a co-equal branch of government and grow a spine (or see a now blue House and get concerned about their own hides).
If the report is damning enough (serious money-laundering and thorough evidence of collusion with Russia to influence the 2016 elections) and Congress still stalls on impeachment, then there is a possibility of a direct criminal indictment.
There is no legal precedent saying a president can't be indicted---just a memo suggesting that is the case written by a self-serving Nixonian justice department. Politically, indictment of a sitting president is the least palatable option because of the precedent it would set. However, given Trump's intransigence and overwhelming narcissism, it might come down to that. In that event, SCOTUS would probably hold that a president CAN be indicted.
At that point, we are deep into 2019.

Omg these liberal fantasies are hilarious. Please keep them coming.

Spot on! I am a liberal and some of these scenarios are so ludicrous that it makes one wonder if these posters have any concept of reality or whether all the blather they post is just based on their hatred of Trump.

I don't care for Trump but one needs to be grounded in some sense of what is likely to happen.

Yes. You’re "liberal." Literally none of the scenarios laid out above are ludicrous at all. From the little bit that we know for a fact Trump has done, it’s already far worse than Nixon. That’s a fact. The GOP is actively obstructing justice. We know for a fact that many of them took a lot of questionable money from people with Russian ties, and they also accepted NRA money which turns out to also have been accepting Russian money. Trump has capped all over behavioral norms and the checks and balances - at least in regards to the GOP - are not functioning at all. We are in uncharted waters.

You really are a moron. Just read through the claptrap that you just wrote: you should be embarrassed to write such nonsense.. Every sentence you wrote is just over the top tripe.

Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
My guess:
Mueller's extremely damning report comes out in September of 2018---putting Congress in the position of having to defend a decision NOT to impeach on the campaign trail.
Either the House flips D, in which case impeachment proceeds, or the House stays R and impeachment stalls.
Either way, there are not enough Senate votes to convict---unless the Senate Republicans remember that the Senate is a co-equal branch of government and grow a spine (or see a now blue House and get concerned about their own hides).
If the report is damning enough (serious money-laundering and thorough evidence of collusion with Russia to influence the 2016 elections) and Congress still stalls on impeachment, then there is a possibility of a direct criminal indictment.
There is no legal precedent saying a president can't be indicted---just a memo suggesting that is the case written by a self-serving Nixonian justice department. Politically, indictment of a sitting president is the least palatable option because of the precedent it would set. However, given Trump's intransigence and overwhelming narcissism, it might come down to that. In that event, SCOTUS would probably hold that a president CAN be indicted.
At that point, we are deep into 2019.


Omg these liberal fantasies are hilarious. Please keep them coming.


Spot on! I am a liberal and some of these scenarios are so ludicrous that it makes one wonder if these posters have any concept of reality or whether all the blather they post is just based on their hatred of Trump.

I don't care for Trump but one needs to be grounded in some sense of what is likely to happen.

Yes. You’re "liberal." Literally none of the scenarios laid out above are ludicrous at all. From the little bit that we know for a fact Trump has done, it’s already far worse than Nixon. That’s a fact. The GOP is actively obstructing justice. We know for a fact that many of them took a lot of questionable money from people with Russian ties, and they also accepted NRA money which turns out to also have been accepting Russian money. Trump has capped all over behavioral norms and the checks and balances - at least in regards to the GOP - are not functioning at all. We are in uncharted waters.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My guess:
Mueller's extremely damning report comes out in September of 2018---putting Congress in the position of having to defend a decision NOT to impeach on the campaign trail.
Either the House flips D, in which case impeachment proceeds, or the House stays R and impeachment stalls.
Either way, there are not enough Senate votes to convict---unless the Senate Republicans remember that the Senate is a co-equal branch of government and grow a spine (or see a now blue House and get concerned about their own hides).
If the report is damning enough (serious money-laundering and thorough evidence of collusion with Russia to influence the 2016 elections) and Congress still stalls on impeachment, then there is a possibility of a direct criminal indictment.
There is no legal precedent saying a president can't be indicted---just a memo suggesting that is the case written by a self-serving Nixonian justice department. Politically, indictment of a sitting president is the least palatable option because of the precedent it would set. However, given Trump's intransigence and overwhelming narcissism, it might come down to that. In that event, SCOTUS would probably hold that a president CAN be indicted.
At that point, we are deep into 2019.

Omg these liberal fantasies are hilarious. Please keep them coming.

Spot on! I am a liberal and some of these scenarios are so ludicrous that it makes one wonder if these posters have any concept of reality or whether all the blather they post is just based on their hatred of Trump.

I don't care for Trump but one needs to be grounded in some sense of what is likely to happen.

Yes. You’re "liberal." Literally none of the scenarios laid out above are ludicrous at all. From the little bit that we know for a fact Trump has done, it’s already far worse than Nixon. That’s a fact. The GOP is actively obstructing justice. We know for a fact that many of them took a lot of questionable money from people with Russian ties, and they also accepted NRA money which turns out to also have been accepting Russian money. Trump has capped all over behavioral norms and the checks and balances - at least in regards to the GOP - are not functioning at all. We are in uncharted waters.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My guess:
Mueller's extremely damning report comes out in September of 2018---putting Congress in the position of having to defend a decision NOT to impeach on the campaign trail.
Either the House flips D, in which case impeachment proceeds, or the House stays R and impeachment stalls.
Either way, there are not enough Senate votes to convict---unless the Senate Republicans remember that the Senate is a co-equal branch of government and grow a spine (or see a now blue House and get concerned about their own hides).
If the report is damning enough (serious money-laundering and thorough evidence of collusion with Russia to influence the 2016 elections) and Congress still stalls on impeachment, then there is a possibility of a direct criminal indictment.
There is no legal precedent saying a president can't be indicted---just a memo suggesting that is the case written by a self-serving Nixonian justice department. Politically, indictment of a sitting president is the least palatable option because of the precedent it would set. However, given Trump's intransigence and overwhelming narcissism, it might come down to that. In that event, SCOTUS would probably hold that a president CAN be indicted.
At that point, we are deep into 2019.

Omg these liberal fantasies are hilarious. Please keep them coming.

Spot on! I am a liberal and some of these scenarios are so ludicrous that it makes one wonder if these posters have any concept of reality or whether all the blather they post is just based on their hatred of Trump.

I don't care for Trump but one needs to be grounded in some sense of what is likely to happen.

Yes. You’re "liberal." Literally none of the scenarios laid out above are ludicrous at all. From the little bit that we know for a fact Trump has done, it’s already far worse than Nixon. That’s a fact. The GOP is actively obstructing justice. We know for a fact that many of them took a lot of questionable money from people with Russian ties, and they also accepted NRA money which turns out to also have been accepting Russian money. Trump has capped all over behavioral norms and the checks and balances - at least in regards to the GOP - are not functioning at all. We are in uncharted waters.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Trump won't testify in person - maybe answer questions in writing.

If Mueller issues a subpoena he will likely invoke the 5th Amendment arguing that it is a witch hunt, etc and that his lawyer has advised him not to do so.

I'm starting to think you might be right about this. Trump has so far claimed he's happy to not only be interviewed, but even testify under oath! But we all know he's a liar, and he routinely flip-flops on everything he says, so his public claims mean nothing. Trump will make up a bunch of excuses and refuse to talk.

Anonymous wrote:Liberals will go nuts when that happens. Republicans and his supporters will be fine with it because the only downside is political damage and Trump has already laid the groundwork for why Mueller is biased, the FBI is corrupt, etc so the fallout among those whose opinions count, will not matter.

Liberal opinion and rants don't matter one iota to Trump and most Republicans. What matters is whether the conservative agenda is being implemented and that is happening in spades .... it is all that matters to Republicans.

Not only "liberals," but also all moderates and many Republicans will go nuts. Gutless wonders like Paul Ryan and Mitch McConnell will express "deep concern" without taking any position either way. What's going to be frustrating though is that even those Republicans who know Trump's doing a terrible thing will refuse to hold him accountable.

But ... there is a silver lining. It's pretty obvious at this point that Trump and others around him have committed crimes. Whether or not Trump himself testifies, there's a good chance Special Counsel Mueller will have enough evidence to bring more indictments, maybe even against Trump himself. So while Trump may be willing to accept the political heat and just general appearance of guilt and weakness that comes from pleading the 5th, that doesn't shield him from getting charged with crimes.

Mueller won’t seek an indictment of a sitting president. That battle would only result in legal proceedings and delay. He will lay out his evidence to the House for Articles of Impeachment.

Finally, an intelligent comment.

It is questionable if one can indict a sitting president - remember Nixon was declared an "unindicted co-conspirator". The proper recourse is impeachment and Trump will not be impeached by a Republican controlled House unless it is something really blatant and egregious. Even if he is impeached there are not 67 votes in the senate to remove him from office.
co
The other likelihood, is that Trump - really his attorneys - may seek to quash any subpoena demanding his testimony claiming constitutional constraints ostensibly making a separation of powers argument. Whether that will be sustained in the courts remains to be seen but it would have to be determined by the Supreme court and that process would take quite a while.

There is no separation of powers argument. Mueller is in the same branch of government as the President.

Anonymous wrote:Good. I wish he followed through with it. Mueller is trying to bring down a duly elected president because the left will lie, cheat, and steal to win. The whole FBI should be gutted.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My guess:
Mueller's extremely damning report comes out in September of 2018---putting Congress in the position of having to defend a decision NOT to impeach on the campaign trail.
Either the House flips D, in which case impeachment proceeds, or the House stays R and impeachment stalls.
Either way, there are not enough Senate votes to convict---unless the Senate Republicans remember that the Senate is a co-equal branch of government and grow a spine (or see a now blue House and get concerned about their own hides).
If the report is damning enough (serious money-laundering and thorough evidence of collusion with Russia to influence the 2016 elections) and Congress still stalls on impeachment, then there is a possibility of a direct criminal indictment.
There is no legal precedent saying a president can't be indicted---just a memo suggesting that is the case written by a self-serving Nixonian justice department. Politically, indictment of a sitting president is the least palatable option because of the precedent it would set. However, given Trump's intransigence and overwhelming narcissism, it might come down to that. In that event, SCOTUS would probably hold that a president CAN be indicted.
At that point, we are deep into 2019.

Omg these liberal fantasies are hilarious. Please keep them coming.

Spot on! I am a liberal and some of these scenarios are so ludicrous that it makes one wonder if these posters have any concept of reality or whether all the blather they post is just based on their hatred of Trump.

I don't care for Trump but one needs to be grounded in some sense of what is likely to happen.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Trump won't testify in person - maybe answer questions in writing.

If Mueller issues a subpoena he will likely invoke the 5th Amendment arguing that it is a witch hunt, etc and that his lawyer has advised him not to do so.

I'm starting to think you might be right about this. Trump has so far claimed he's happy to not only be interviewed, but even testify under oath! But we all know he's a liar, and he routinely flip-flops on everything he says, so his public claims mean nothing. Trump will make up a bunch of excuses and refuse to talk.

Anonymous wrote:Liberals will go nuts when that happens. Republicans and his supporters will be fine with it because the only downside is political damage and Trump has already laid the groundwork for why Mueller is biased, the FBI is corrupt, etc so the fallout among those whose opinions count, will not matter.

Liberal opinion and rants don't matter one iota to Trump and most Republicans. What matters is whether the conservative agenda is being implemented and that is happening in spades .... it is all that matters to Republicans.

Not only "liberals," but also all moderates and many Republicans will go nuts. Gutless wonders like Paul Ryan and Mitch McConnell will express "deep concern" without taking any position either way. What's going to be frustrating though is that even those Republicans who know Trump's doing a terrible thing will refuse to hold him accountable.

But ... there is a silver lining. It's pretty obvious at this point that Trump and others around him have committed crimes. Whether or not Trump himself testifies, there's a good chance Special Counsel Mueller will have enough evidence to bring more indictments, maybe even against Trump himself. So while Trump may be willing to accept the political heat and just general appearance of guilt and weakness that comes from pleading the 5th, that doesn't shield him from getting charged with crimes.

Mueller won’t seek an indictment of a sitting president. That battle would only result in legal proceedings and delay. He will lay out his evidence to the House for Articles of Impeachment.

Finally, an intelligent comment.

It is questionable if one can indict a sitting president - remember Nixon was declared an "unindicted co-conspirator". The proper recourse is impeachment and Trump will not be impeached by a Republican controlled House unless it is something really blatant and egregious. Even if he is impeached there are not 67 votes in the senate to remove him from office.
co
The other likelihood, is that Trump - really his attorneys - may seek to quash any subpoena demanding his testimony claiming constitutional constraints ostensibly making a separation of powers argument. Whether that will be sustained in the courts remains to be seen but it would have to be determined by the Supreme court and that process would take quite a while.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My guess:
Mueller's extremely damning report comes out in September of 2018---putting Congress in the position of having to defend a decision NOT to impeach on the campaign trail.
Either the House flips D, in which case impeachment proceeds, or the House stays R and impeachment stalls.
Either way, there are not enough Senate votes to convict---unless the Senate Republicans remember that the Senate is a co-equal branch of government and grow a spine (or see a now blue House and get concerned about their own hides).
If the report is damning enough (serious money-laundering and thorough evidence of collusion with Russia to influence the 2016 elections) and Congress still stalls on impeachment, then there is a possibility of a direct criminal indictment.
There is no legal precedent saying a president can't be indicted---just a memo suggesting that is the case written by a self-serving Nixonian justice department. Politically, indictment of a sitting president is the least palatable option because of the precedent it would set. However, given Trump's intransigence and overwhelming narcissism, it might come down to that. In that event, SCOTUS would probably hold that a president CAN be indicted.
At that point, we are deep into 2019.

Omg these liberal fantasies are hilarious. Please keep them coming.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Trump won't testify in person - maybe answer questions in writing.

If Mueller issues a subpoena he will likely invoke the 5th Amendment arguing that it is a witch hunt, etc and that his lawyer has advised him not to do so.

Liberals will go nuts when that happens. Republicans and his supporters will be fine with it because the only downside is political damage and Trump has already laid the groundwork for why Mueller is biased, the FBI is corrupt, etc so the fallout among those whose opinions count, will not matter.

Liberal opinion and rants don't matter one iota to Trump and most Republicans. What matters is whether the conservative agenda is being implemented and that is happening in spades .... it is all that matters to Republicans.

If the GOP wants to go down that rathole, it won't win any election of merit for 30 years. The public intellect and opinion are deep against what you are claiming.

You are out of your mind! You have no idea how little credibility the media has with Republicans generally and with all of the attacks on Mueller and the FBI most Republicans believe this whole thing is a witch hunt and completely without any basis. I don't know if Trump will testify but if you know anything about Republicans they will not care one bit if Trump invokes the 5th because he will say it is a perjury trap and they will believe him.

I would be amazed if his attorneys allow him to testify; as I said the only potential downside is political and given the current climate, it will not matter.

Anonymous wrote:My guess:
Mueller's extremely damning report comes out in September of 2018---putting Congress in the position of having to defend a decision NOT to impeach on the campaign trail.
Either the House flips D, in which case impeachment proceeds, or the House stays R and impeachment stalls.
Either way, there are not enough Senate votes to convict---unless the Senate Republicans remember that the Senate is a co-equal branch of government and grow a spine (or see a now blue House and get concerned about their own hides).
If the report is damning enough (serious money-laundering and thorough evidence of collusion with Russia to influence the 2016 elections) and Congress still stalls on impeachment, then there is a possibility of a direct criminal indictment.
There is no legal precedent saying a president can't be indicted---just a memo suggesting that is the case written by a self-serving Nixonian justice department. Politically, indictment of a sitting president is the least palatable option because of the precedent it would set. However, given Trump's intransigence and overwhelming narcissism, it might come down to that. In that event, SCOTUS would probably hold that a president CAN be indicted.
At that point, we are deep into 2019.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Trump won't testify in person - maybe answer questions in writing.

If Mueller issues a subpoena he will likely invoke the 5th Amendment arguing that it is a witch hunt, etc and that his lawyer has advised him not to do so.

I'm starting to think you might be right about this. Trump has so far claimed he's happy to not only be interviewed, but even testify under oath! But we all know he's a liar, and he routinely flip-flops on everything he says, so his public claims mean nothing. Trump will make up a bunch of excuses and refuse to talk.

Anonymous wrote:Liberals will go nuts when that happens. Republicans and his supporters will be fine with it because the only downside is political damage and Trump has already laid the groundwork for why Mueller is biased, the FBI is corrupt, etc so the fallout among those whose opinions count, will not matter.

Liberal opinion and rants don't matter one iota to Trump and most Republicans. What matters is whether the conservative agenda is being implemented and that is happening in spades .... it is all that matters to Republicans.

Not only "liberals," but also all moderates and many Republicans will go nuts. Gutless wonders like Paul Ryan and Mitch McConnell will express "deep concern" without taking any position either way. What's going to be frustrating though is that even those Republicans who know Trump's doing a terrible thing will refuse to hold him accountable.

But ... there is a silver lining. It's pretty obvious at this point that Trump and others around him have committed crimes. Whether or not Trump himself testifies, there's a good chance Special Counsel Mueller will have enough evidence to bring more indictments, maybe even against Trump himself. So while Trump may be willing to accept the political heat and just general appearance of guilt and weakness that comes from pleading the 5th, that doesn't shield him from getting charged with crimes.

Mueller won’t seek an indictment of a sitting president. That battle would only result in legal proceedings and delay. He will lay out his evidence to the House for Articles of Impeachment.

Mueller will lay out his evidence to the public, as well as the House. The House won't impeach (R or D) without the public behind them.

Which will make the 2018 midterms about the Trump's impeachment - you want him impeached, vote for a Democrat.

I don't want him impeached. I want him to negotiate a quiet retirement with no charges. Charge others, fine. Have Trump step down peacefully, that's what I want.

I don't want him impeached either. I want him in jail for his multiple crimes.

LOL. Please state SPECIFICALLY what his "multiple crimes" are and the clear evidence - not liberal innuendo - that supports them.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Trump won't testify in person - maybe answer questions in writing.

If Mueller issues a subpoena he will likely invoke the 5th Amendment arguing that it is a witch hunt, etc and that his lawyer has advised him not to do so.

I'm starting to think you might be right about this. Trump has so far claimed he's happy to not only be interviewed, but even testify under oath! But we all know he's a liar, and he routinely flip-flops on everything he says, so his public claims mean nothing. Trump will make up a bunch of excuses and refuse to talk.

Anonymous wrote:Liberals will go nuts when that happens. Republicans and his supporters will be fine with it because the only downside is political damage and Trump has already laid the groundwork for why Mueller is biased, the FBI is corrupt, etc so the fallout among those whose opinions count, will not matter.

Liberal opinion and rants don't matter one iota to Trump and most Republicans. What matters is whether the conservative agenda is being implemented and that is happening in spades .... it is all that matters to Republicans.

Not only "liberals," but also all moderates and many Republicans will go nuts. Gutless wonders like Paul Ryan and Mitch McConnell will express "deep concern" without taking any position either way. What's going to be frustrating though is that even those Republicans who know Trump's doing a terrible thing will refuse to hold him accountable.

But ... there is a silver lining. It's pretty obvious at this point that Trump and others around him have committed crimes. Whether or not Trump himself testifies, there's a good chance Special Counsel Mueller will have enough evidence to bring more indictments, maybe even against Trump himself. So while Trump may be willing to accept the political heat and just general appearance of guilt and weakness that comes from pleading the 5th, that doesn't shield him from getting charged with crimes.

Mueller won’t seek an indictment of a sitting president. That battle would only result in legal proceedings and delay. He will lay out his evidence to the House for Articles of Impeachment.