SPOILER: Het Kabinet-Trump

Het kabinet:
Secretary of State - Mike Pompeo
Secretary of Treasury - Steven Mnuchin
Secretary of Defense - Patrick M. Shanahan (Acting)
Attorney General - William Barr
Secretary of the Interior - David Bernhardt (Acting)
Secretary of Agriculture - Sonny Perdue
Secretary of Commerce - Wilbur Ross
Secretary of Labor - Alexander Acosta
Secretary of Health and Human Services - Alex Azar
Secretary of Housing & Urban Development - Ben Carson
Secretary of Transportation - Elaine Chao
Secretary of Energy - Rick Perry
Secretary of Education - Betsy DeVos
Secretary of Veterans Affairs - Robert Wilkie
Secretary of Homeland Security - Kirstjen Nielsen

Cabinet-level officials:
White House Chief of Staff - Mick Mulvaney (Acting)
Trade Representative - Robert Lighthizer
Director of National Intelligence - Dan Coats
Ambassador to the UN - Jonathan Cohen (Acting)
Director of the Office of Management & Budget - Mick Mulvaney
Director of the Central Intelligence Agency - Gina Haspel
Administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency - Andrew R. Wheeler (Acting)
Administrator of the Small Business Administration - Linda McMahon

Andere kopstukken:
Ivanka Trump (Advisor to the President), Jared Kushner (Senior Adviser Strategic Planning), Stephen Miller (Senior Adviser Policy), John Bolton (National Security Adviser), Kellyanne Conway (Counselor), Donald McGahn (White House Counsel), Sarah Huckabee Sanders (Press Secretary), Christopher Wray (Director of the Federal Bureau of Investigation), Robert Mueller (Special Counsel), Rod Rosenstein (United States Deputy Attorney General).

Verdwenen of voormalige kopstukken:
Kabinet: Tom Price (HHS), David Shulkin (VA), Rex Tillerson (State)
DOJ/FBI: Sally Yates, James Comey, Preet Bharara, Andrew McCabe
Communicatie WH: Mike Dubke, Sean Spicer, Anthony Scaramucci, Hope Hicks
Adviseurs enzo: Michael Flynn, Herbert McMaster, Reince Priebus, Rob Porter, Gary Cohn, Steve Bannon, John McEntee, General Jim 'Mad Dog' Mattis, Jeff Sessions. John F. Kelly, Ryan Zinke, Nikki Haley, Scott Pruitt

SPOILER: Overzicht van lopende onderzoeken

Timeline of Russian interference in the 2016 United States elections
Timeline of investigations into Trump and Russia (2017)
Timeline of investigations into Trump and Russia (2018)
Timeline of investigations into Trump and Russia (2019)

twitter:

realDonaldTrump twitterde op zondag 28-07-2019 om 13:39:56 Speaking of failing badly, has anyone seen what is happening to Nancy Pelosi’s district in San Francisco. It is not even recognizeable lately. Something must be done before it is too late. The Dems should stop wasting time on the Witch Hunt Hoax and start focusing on our Country! reageer retweet

quote:

Op zondag 28 juli 2019 14:03 schreef Ulx het volgende:
Hij is weer stevig in een meltdown.

twitter:

realDonaldTrump twitterde op zondag 28-07-2019 om 13:39:56 Speaking of failing badly, has anyone seen what is happening to Nancy Pelosi’s district in San Francisco. It is not even recognizeable lately. Something must be done before it is too late. The Dems should stop wasting time on the Witch Hunt Hoax and start focusing on our Country! reageer retweet

quote:

Op zondag 28 juli 2019 14:59 schreef Chivaz het volgende:

[..]

Was san francisco niet de stad waar je over de daklozen heen moet stappen en de naalden overal op de grond liggen?
Is het ook niet de stad waar mensen gewoon hun behoefte doen op straat?
Bizar eigenlijk dat Pelosi zo min mogelijk wilt doen aan illegale immigratie terwijl de daklozen de straten vies en onveilig maken.

quote:

Op zondag 28 juli 2019 15:04 schreef Ludachrist het volgende:
Ik ben in San Francisco wel honderd keer per dag op een volle heroïnespuit gaan staan. Overal junkies, MS-13 was mensen op straat aan het onthoofden, 2 op de 1 mensen die je zag lopen was dakloos. Wat een hellegat, wat een ellende.

quote:

Op zondag 28 juli 2019 15:02 schreef Tijger_m het volgende:

[..]

Nee. Maar alle steden in de VS hebben grote hoeveelheden daklozen, dat is inherent aan hun systeem.

En je liegt weer eens over Pelosi, hou daar nou eens mee op?

quote:

Op zondag 28 juli 2019 14:59 schreef Chivaz het volgende:

[..]

Was san francisco niet de stad waar je over de daklozen heen moet stappen en de naalden overal op de grond liggen?
Is het ook niet de stad waar mensen gewoon hun behoefte doen op straat?
Bizar eigenlijk dat Pelosi zo min mogelijk wilt doen aan illegale immigratie terwijl de daklozen de straten vies en onveilig maken.

quote:

Op zondag 28 juli 2019 15:20 schreef Zwoerd het volgende:

[..]

Is er iets waaruit blijkt dat Republikeinen daklozen willen helpen?

quote:

Op zondag 28 juli 2019 15:20 schreef Zwoerd het volgende:

[..]

Is er iets waaruit blijkt dat Republikeinen daklozen willen helpen?

quote:

Op zondag 28 juli 2019 15:15 schreef Chivaz het volgende:

quote:

Op zondag 28 juli 2019 15:22 schreef Chivaz het volgende:

[..]

Dat doet er niet toe, de steden waar kritiek op is zijn in democratische handen.

twitter:

kylegriffin1 twitterde op zondag 28-07-2019 om 14:00:00 In light of Trump's Baltimore tweets, this is an interesting 2017 flashback: "The President's posh resort in Palm Beach, Florida, was slapped with 13 health violations at its last kitchen inspection in January, including 3 categorized as 'high priority'." https://t.co/IkwbwDSeIM reageer retweet

quote:

Op zondag 28 juli 2019 15:25 schreef Xa1pt het volgende:

[..]

Wat wil Trump aan de opioid-crisis doen?

quote:

Op zondag 28 juli 2019 15:25 schreef Xa1pt het volgende:

[..]

Nou nee, dat is niet ok. Het probleem zit hem alleen in de POTUS die dat probleem niet als ook zijn verantwoordelijkheid ziet maar dat afschuift op het bordje van iemand die hem niet bevalt.

En de useful idiots gaan daar nog in mee ook. "Maar hij heeft toch gelijk, de mensen doen daar hun behoefte op straat!!!!"

Er zijn verschillende oorzaken die hier een rol in spelen, met onder andere de opiatencrisis. Maar wat Trump doet is een president onwaardig.

quote:

Op zondag 28 juli 2019 15:28 schreef Ulx het volgende:
En zijn de Democraten ook schuldig aan deze zwijnenstal?

twitter:

kylegriffin1 twitterde op zondag 28-07-2019 om 14:00:00 In light of Trump's Baltimore tweets, this is an interesting 2017 flashback: "The President's posh resort in Palm Beach, Florida, was slapped with 13 health violations at its last kitchen inspection in January, including 3 categorized as 'high priority'." https://t.co/IkwbwDSeIM reageer retweet

Florida is toch een rode staat? Hoe kan dit dan?

quote:

Op zondag 28 juli 2019 15:47 schreef Chivaz het volgende:

[..]

Whataboutism is een slappe tactiek om de aandacht te verleggen.
“But het e-mails” was het toch wanneer rechts van dit soort tactieken gebruik maakten?

quote:

Op zondag 28 juli 2019 15:44 schreef Chivaz het volgende:

[..]

Dus de president is nu ook al verantwoordelijk voor lokale aangelegenheden?
Er is ruimte genoeg voor de staten om dit soort problemen op te lossen of op z’n minst een poging te wagen.

quote:

Op zondag 28 juli 2019 15:54 schreef Ulx het volgende:

[..]

Ik vraag gewoon of de republikeinse leiding van de rode staat Florida verantwoordelijk is voor het ongedierte dat bij Mar-a-Lagp door de Mise-en-Place banjert.

Of is de eigenaar van die tent verantwoordelijk voor deze smeerpijperij?

twitter:

kylegriffin1 twitterde op zondag 28-07-2019 om 16:05:04 Jerry Nadler on Trump's attacks on Elijah Cummings: "The president is as he usually is or often is, disgusting and racist. He makes these charges with no base at all. And they are designed to distract attention from the very serious allegations about his conduct."Via ABC https://t.co/EufTe9Q8vp reageer retweet

quote:

62.37% White
3.56% Black
19.31% Asian
12.36% Hispanic
0.30% Native American

Demographically, it includes neighborhoods in Manhattan and Brooklyn that are heavily Jewish.

quote:

Op zondag 28 juli 2019 15:58 schreef Chivaz het volgende:

[..]

Nogmaals wat doet dat ertoe? Sinds wanneer is de staat verantwoordelijk voor misstanden bij een bedrijf?

quote:

Op zondag 28 juli 2019 15:15 schreef Chivaz het volgende:
Altijd leuk in dit topic, waar de democraten tot op het einde verdedigd worden.
Van anti semitisme tot aan racisme (tegen de juiste kleur) tot aan socialisme en nu is het blijkbaar oké dat de straten vol liggen met naalden en dat mensen daar hun behoeften doen.
Orange man bad, dat is het enige wat telt of zijn kritiek nu legitiem is of niet.

twitter:

kylegriffin1 twitterde op zondag 28-07-2019 om 16:40:59 Q: "Do you personally support impeaching President Trump?" Nadler: "My personal view is that [Trump] richly deserves impeachment. He has done many impeachable offenses."Via CNN https://t.co/SJoOd96r6W reageer retweet

quote:

Op zondag 28 juli 2019 10:03 schreef KoosVogels het volgende:
Het blijft een bizarre gewaarwording. Stel je voor dat Rutte riep dat Groningen, Limburg of welke streek dan ook een 'rat infested' ellende was.

Dat doe je toch niet als leider van een land?

quote:

Op zondag 28 juli 2019 16:47 schreef DuizendGezichten het volgende:

[..]

Hé stropoppenkoopman!

Ga jij ergens anders je walgelijke waren aanbieden, alsjeblieft.

quote:

Op zondag 28 juli 2019 17:22 schreef Vis1980 het volgende:

[..]

Let maar op, een Baudet of Wilders zou zoiets over Amsterdam zeggen.

quote:

Op zondag 28 juli 2019 17:35 schreef Chivaz het volgende:

[..]

Nee

twitter:

thehill twitterde op zondag 28-07-2019 om 15:53:03 WATCH: Mulvaney defends Trump attacks, says he’d be fired if “I had poverty in my district like they have in Baltimore” https://t.co/vFtOdMVLQ6 https://t.co/URoC2fh82k reageer retweet

quote:

Op zondag 28 juli 2019 18:38 schreef ExtraWaskracht het volgende:
Ze gaan dus lekker door met die achterlijkheid. Alsof een congreslid überhaupt grote invloed zou hebben wat er in zijn district gebeurt.

twitter:

SharkWeek twitterde op zondag 28-07-2019 om 06:03:34 IT'S OFFICIALLY #SHARKWEEK! 🦈 reageer retweet

quote:

Op zondag 28 juli 2019 15:22 schreef Chivaz het volgende:

[..]

Dat doet er niet toe, de steden waar kritiek op is zijn in democratische handen.

twitter:

mattyglesias twitterde op zondag 28-07-2019 om 01:32:56 Per @AlecMacGillis’ reporting, Jared Kushner is actually a major Baltimore-area slumlord who’s breaking all kinds of rules so perhaps Trump should direct his concerns about rats and such to him. https://t.co/qKu6Ak87eW reageer retweet

quote:

Op zondag 28 juli 2019 20:41 schreef AnneX het volgende:
BREAKING NEWS
The director of national intelligence, Dasn Coats, is expected to step down. He has been at odds with President Trump throughout his tenure.
Sunday, July 28, 2019 2:33 PM EST
People familiar with the decision said President Trump was likely to tap Representative John Ratcliffe, a Texas Republican and staunch defender of Mr. Trump, as his replacement.

Men. Ratcliffe was demonstratief misselijkmakend en disrespectvol jegens Müller voor de bühne ofwel WH . Only the best.

twitter:

NatashaBertrand twitterde op zondag 28-07-2019 om 19:44:51 🚨 I’m told Nunes was offered the job but turned it down & would want an intel job, like CIA Director, post 2020 if Trump is re elected. Per Axios Ratcliffe is now the front runner, though there’s been some concern that he’s too inexperienced to be confirmed. https://t.co/xxkEP4tygN reageer retweet

twitter:

realDonaldTrump twitterde op dinsdag 28-04-2015 om 13:55:42 President Obama, you have a big job to do. Go to Baltimore and bring both sides together. With proper leadership, it can be done! Do it. reageer retweet

twitter:

realDonaldTrump twitterde op dinsdag 28-04-2015 om 06:38:12 Our great African American President hasn't exactly had a positive impact on the thugs who are so happily and openly destroying Baltimore! reageer retweet

twitter:

kylegriffin1 twitterde op zondag 28-07-2019 om 22:25:31 New. Democratic Rep. Derek Kilmer: "The rule of law needs to mean something. The integrity of our democracy needs to mean something. With that clear focus, I support the House of Representatives beginning an impeachment inquiry."https://t.co/IQNsYbyK7V reageer retweet

twitter:

kylegriffin1 twitterde op zondag 28-07-2019 om 22:45:15 New. Democratic Rep. Suzan DelBene: "It gives me no pleasure to announce that I am calling for the House of Representatives to begin an impeachment inquiry into the President of the United States." https://t.co/xiIeBLNbC9 reageer retweet

twitter:

rgoodlaw twitterde op zondag 28-07-2019 om 20:42:41 1. Remarkable Fox poll👇47% Americans favor impeachment or impeachment and removal45% oppose impeachmentPlus what Sidney Blumenthal calls "Pelosi effect":"Many of the Democrats would shift their view if Pelosi and the party unified in favor of an impeachment inquiry."... https://t.co/k46fW7KINd reageer retweet

quote:

Op woensdag 24 juli 2019 19:01 schreef Mike het volgende:

[..]

Ook John Rathcliffe uit Texas. Die kende ik nog niet voor vandaag, maar eigenlijk had ik dat liever ook zo willen houden.

twitter:

realDonaldTrump twitterde op zondag 28-07-2019 om 22:45:49 I am pleased to announce that highly respected Congressman John Ratcliffe of Texas will be nominated by me to be the Director of National Intelligence. A former U.S. Attorney, John will lead and inspire greatness for the Country he loves. Dan Coats, the current Director, will.... reageer retweet

twitter:

realDonaldTrump twitterde op zondag 28-07-2019 om 22:45:50 ....be leaving office on August 15th. I would like to thank Dan for his great service to our Country. The Acting Director will be named shortly. reageer retweet

quote:

Op zondag 28 juli 2019 23:10 schreef Kijkertje het volgende:
Het wachten is op goedkeuring van Pelosi.

Draadje:

twitter:

rgoodlaw twitterde op zondag 28-07-2019 om 20:42:41 1. Remarkable Fox poll👇47% Americans favor impeachment or impeachment and removal45% oppose impeachmentPlus what Sidney Blumenthal calls "Pelosi effect":"Many of the Democrats would shift their view if Pelosi and the party unified in favor of an impeachment inquiry."... https://t.co/k46fW7KINd reageer retweet

[ afbeelding ]

quote:

Op zondag 28 juli 2019 23:38 schreef ExtraWaskracht het volgende:

[..]

Als dat klopt dan is dat wel een shift van wat er daarvoor over gepolled werd. Nog niet zo lang geleden was dacht ik een meerderheid tegen impeachment.

quote:

Alma Adams, N.C.
Nanette Barragán, Calif.
Joyce Beatty, Ohio
Don Beyer, Va.
Earl Blumenauer, Ore.
Lisa Blunt Rochester, Del.
Suzanne Bonamici, Ore.
Brendan Boyle, Penn.
Julia Brownley, D-Calif.
G.K. Butterfield, N.C.
Tony Cardenas, Calif.
Andre Carson, Ind.
Sean Casten, Ill.
Joaquin Castro, Texas
David Cicilline, R.I. (Member of the House Judiciary Committee)
Katherine Clark, Mass. (Vice Chair of the House Democratic Caucus)
Yvette Clarke, N.Y.
William Lacy Clay, Mo.
Steve Cohen, Tenn. (Member of the House Judiciary Committee)
Danny K. Davis, Ill.
Madeleine Dean, Penn. (Member of the House Judiciary Committee)
Peter DeFazio, Oregon
Diana DeGette, Colo.
Suzan Del Bene, Wa.
Val Demings, Fla. (Member of the House Judiciary Committee)
Mark DeSaulnier, Calif.
Lloyd Doggett, Texas
Mike Doyle, Penn.
Veronica Escobar, Texas (Member of the House Judiciary Committee)
Adriano Espaillat, N.Y.
Dwight Evans, Penn.
Marcia Fudge, Ohio
Ruben Gallego, Ariz.
John Garamendi, Calif.
Jesús García, Ill.
Jimmy Gomey, Calif.
Al Green, Texas
Raul Grijalva, Ariz. (Chairman of the Natural Resources Committee)
Denny Heck, Wa.
Brian Higgins, N.Y.
Jim Himes, Conn.
Jared Huffman, Calif.
Pramila Jayapal, Wash. (Member of the House Judiciary Committee)
Robin Kelly, Ill.
Joe Kennedy III, Mass.
Dan Kildee, Mich. (chief deputy whip of House Democratic caucus)
Derek Kilmer, Wa.
Ann Kirkpatrick, Ariz.
Annie Kuster, N.H.
Rick Larsen, Washington
Brenda Lawrence, Mich.
Barbara Lee, Calif.
Andy Levin, Mich.
Mike Levin, Calif.
Ted Lieu, Calif. (Member of the House Judiciary Committee)
Alan Lowenthal, Calif.
Tom Malinowski, N.J.
Carolyn Maloney, N.Y.
Doris Matsui, Calif.
Betty McCollum, Minn.
Jim McGovern, Mass. (Chairman of the House Rules Committee)
Gwen Moore, Wis.
Seth Moulton, Mass.
Debbie Mucarsel-Powell, Fla. (Member of the House Judiciary Committee)
Grace Napolitano, Calif.
Joe Neguse, Colo. (Member of the House Judiciary Committee)
Donald Norcross, N.J.
Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, N.Y.
Ilhan Omar, Minn.
Christopher Pappas, N.H.
Bill Pascrell, N.J.
Scott Peters, Calif.
Chellie Pingree, Me.
Mark Pocan, Wis.
Katie Porter, Calif.
Ayanna Pressley, Mass.
Mike Quigley, Ill.
Jamie Raskin, Md. (Member of the House Judiciary Committee)
Kathleen Rice, N.Y.
Cedric Richmond, La. (Member of the House Judiciary Committee)
Harley Rouda, Calif.
Lucille Roybal-Allard, Calif.
Bobby Rush, Ill.
Tim Ryan, Ohio
Mary Gay Scanlon, Penn. (Vice chair of the House Judiciary Committee)
Jan Schakowsky, Ill.
Kim Schrier, Was.
Brad Sherman, Calif.
Adam Smith, Washington (Chairman of the Armed Services Committee)
Jackie Speier, Calif.
Greg Stanton, Arizona (Member of the House Judiciary Committee)
Eric Swalwell, Calif. (Member of the House Judiciary Committee, member of House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence)
Bennie Thompson, Miss. (Chairman of the House Homeland Security Committee)
Rashida Tlaib, Mich.
Paul Tonko, N.Y.
Norma Torres, Calif.
Lori Trahan, D-Mass.
Juan Vargas, Calif.
Filemon Vela, Texas
Nydia Velazquez, N.Y. (Chairwoman of the House Small Business Committee)
Maxine Waters, Calif. (Chairwoman of the House Financial Services Committee)
Bonnie Watson-Coleman, N.J.

Pete Welch, Vermont

John Yarmuth, Ky. (Chairman of the House Budget Committee)

Others:
Justin Amash, I-Mich

quote:

Op maandag 29 juli 2019 07:15 schreef Ulx het volgende:
Dit is de lijst met impeachmentvoorstanders.
[..]

quote:

Op maandag 29 juli 2019 06:23 schreef Ulx het volgende:
Het kan ook zijn dat veel mensen Trump zat zijn om andere redenen. Amerikaanse kinderen drie weken zonder eten in kooien stoppen zal niet echt helpen.

quote:

Op maandag 29 juli 2019 10:05 schreef MangoTree het volgende:

[..]

Alle BS zal ook echt niet helpen maar weer veel sterkte met hopen.

quote:

MITCH MCCONNELL RECEIVED DONATIONS FROM VOTING MACHINE LOBBYISTS BEFORE BLOCKING ELECTION SECURITY BILLS

Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell squashed two bills intended to ensure voting security on Thursday, just one day after former special counsel Robert Mueller warned that Russians were attempting to sabotage the 2020 presidential elections "as we sit here."

McConnell said he wouldn't allow a vote on the bills because they were "so partisan," but, as previously reported, earlier this year McConnellreceived a slew of donations from four of the top voting machine lobbyists in the country.

twitter:

realDonaldTrump twitterde op maandag 29-07-2019 om 03:47:51 “If the Democrats would have closed the Loopholes two years ago when President Trump asked them to do so, none of this stuff would have happened.” @ThomasHomanICE reageer retweet

quote:

Op maandag 29 juli 2019 10:49 schreef Ulx het volgende:
"Who alone can fix it?"

Not Trump obviously...

twitter:

realDonaldTrump twitterde op maandag 29-07-2019 om 03:47:51 “If the Democrats would have closed the Loopholes two years ago when President Trump asked them to do so, none of this stuff would have happened.” @:ThomasHomanICE reageer retweet

Je zal nog fan zijn van die blaaskaak. Sta je mooi voor lul.

twitter:

ChrisMurphyCT twitterde op zondag 28-07-2019 om 15:26:15 I’m unfollowing the President of the United States today on Twitter, because his feed is the most hate-filled, racist, and demeaning of the 200+ I follow, and it regularly ruins my day to read it. So I’m just going to stop. I can’t believe I just typed that. reageer retweet

quote:

Op maandag 29 juli 2019 11:18 schreef Ulx het volgende:
Senator Murphy (D-Connecticut) is gestopt met het volgen van de POTUS op twitter.

twitter:

ChrisMurphyCT twitterde op zondag 28-07-2019 om 15:26:15 I’m unfollowing the President of the United States today on Twitter, because his feed is the most hate-filled, racist, and demeaning of the 200+ I follow, and it regularly ruins my day to read it. So I’m just going to stop. I can’t believe I just typed that. reageer retweet

quote:

Op maandag 29 juli 2019 12:23 schreef vipergts het volgende:

[..]

Nu pas

quote:

Op maandag 29 juli 2019 12:33 schreef kladderadatsch het volgende:

[..]

Snap toch niet waarom tegenstanders van Trump z'n account zouden volgen. Ik heb geeneens een account maar kan zo ook prima lezen wat mensen allemaal schrijven op twitter.

Maar misschien wordt het vandaag wel een hashtag, #unfollowtrump oid.

quote:

Op maandag 29 juli 2019 12:38 schreef Ulx het volgende:

[..]

Als je Senator bent en je taak is het controleren van de uitvoerende macht lijkt het me geen raar idee de POTUS te volgen. Het zijn tenslotte officiële mededelingen van het WH.

quote:

Op maandag 29 juli 2019 10:51 schreef Mike het volgende:

[..]

Hij verwijst ook nog eens naar de tijd toen de Republikeinen zowel het Huis als de Senaat in handen hadden.

twitter:

GeorgePapa19 twitterde op zaterdag 30-03-2019 om 02:06:29 America: you have been great to me! Thanks for the support! Hope you have enjoyed my new book so far. My book is a roadmap to redirect the investigation now towards the investigators. FISA declassification coming. Pick up a copy here! https://t.co/yLe2q1TBon reageer retweet

twitter:

realDonaldTrump twitterde op maandag 29-07-2019 om 12:04:03 Good luck with the book George, should do well! https://t.co/Rdti0VyFLd reageer retweet

twitter:

JoyceWhiteVance twitterde op maandag 29-07-2019 om 13:38:56 Wait, I thought he barely knew him? https://t.co/LWC89mRdqy reageer retweet

quote:

Op maandag 29 juli 2019 13:43 schreef Ulx het volgende:
Wat dacht je van deze?

twitter:

GeorgePapa19 twitterde op zaterdag 30-03-2019 om 02:06:29 America: you have been great to me! Thanks for the support! Hope you have enjoyed my new book so far. My book is a roadmap to redirect the investigation now towards the investigators. FISA declassification coming. Pick up a copy here! https://t.co/yLe2q1TBon reageer retweet

twitter:

realDonaldTrump twitterde op maandag 29-07-2019 om 12:04:03 Good luck with the book George, should do well! https://t.co/Rdti0VyFLd reageer retweet

twitter:

JoyceWhiteVance twitterde op maandag 29-07-2019 om 13:38:56 Wait, I thought he barely knew him? https://t.co/LWC89mRdqy reageer retweet

Ahum.

quote:

Op maandag 29 juli 2019 10:51 schreef Mike het volgende:

[..]

Hij verwijst ook nog eens naar de tijd toen de Republikeinen zowel het Huis als de Senaat in handen hadden.

quote:

Op maandag 29 juli 2019 13:47 schreef kladderadatsch het volgende:

[..]

Hij reageert alleen op wat hem goed uitkomt. Op Joyce Vance gaat echt geen reactie komen.

quote:

Op maandag 29 juli 2019 14:08 schreef Ulx het volgende:

[..]

So? Het is twitter. Geen e-mail.

quote:

Op maandag 29 juli 2019 14:10 schreef kladderadatsch het volgende:

[..]

Kortom je hoeft hem niet te volgen om op hem te reageren. Dat was mijn punt.

quote:

Op maandag 29 juli 2019 14:14 schreef Ulx het volgende:

[..]

Ik volg het account van het paard van Sinterklaas niet, en ik zou niet weten hoe ik op de tweets van dat beest kan reageren.

quote:

Op maandag 29 juli 2019 14:17 schreef kladderadatsch het volgende:

[..]

Ik heb geen twitter account, maar volgens mij is het gewoon prima mogelijk om een tweet te copy-pasten en er dan op je eigen account op te reageren. Correct me if I'm wrong.

Al die volgers is iets waar Trump alleen maar goeie sier mee maakt.

quote:

Op maandag 29 juli 2019 12:45 schreef Ulx het volgende:
Het kost wel iets meer tijd.

twitter:

matthewamiller twitterde op maandag 29-07-2019 om 15:30:52 Seen a lot of Ratcliffe quotes about being a former terrorism prosecutor, but looking at various prosecution databases and DOJ's website, don't see any cases brought in the Eastern District of Texas while he was either US Atty or head of its anti-terror unit. reageer retweet

twitter:

matthewamiller twitterde op maandag 29-07-2019 om 15:32:48 He seems to have played some role in the Holy Land case brought in a neighboring district, but not sure there's a single case he led that put a terrorist in jail. I'm sure Senate Intel will look into it more deeply, but his actual national security resume appears awfully thin. reageer retweet

twitter:

matthewamiller twitterde op maandag 29-07-2019 om 15:49:40 Not sure what Ratcliffe is talking about on his website here, since I don't see any prosecutions when he was US atty: "As a U.S. Attorney and federal terrorism prosecutor, Ratcliffe put terrorists in prison..." https://t.co/YpgwhPZlUz reageer retweet

twitter:

realDonaldTrump twitterde op maandag 29-07-2019 om 13:26:08 Al Sharpton would always ask me to go to his events. He would say, "it's a personal favor to me." Seldom, but sometimes, I would go. It was fine. He came to my office in T.T. during the presidential campaign to apologize for the way he was talking about me. Just a conman at work! reageer retweet

twitter:

jeffmason1 twitterde op maandag 29-07-2019 om 16:17:20 “I was down there also, but I’m not considering myself a first responder,” ⁦@realDonaldTrump⁩ tells people who rushed to help at the Twin Towers on #911. https://t.co/HI2N7ffJOL reageer retweet

twitter:

kylegriffin1 twitterde op maandag 29-07-2019 om 18:45:04 Rev. Al Sharpton: "He attacks everybody. I know Donald Trump. He's not mature enough to take criticism. He can't help it. He's like a child ... But he has a particular venom for blacks and people of color."Via The Hill https://t.co/3Dl8NF6Ava reageer retweet

twitter:

kylegriffin1 twitterde op maandag 29-07-2019 om 17:00:05 New. Democratic Rep. Dina Titus: "I feel compelled to call for an impeachment inquiry against President Trump." https://t.co/ZYgOVUmI3i reageer retweet

twitter:

Politidope twitterde op maandag 29-07-2019 om 15:41:15 Trump's "strong" disapproval numbers are inching towards 50%, nearly doubling the percentage who "strongly approve", per a new @MorningConsult poll. https://t.co/4BDIOS8S1x reageer retweet

twitter:

tedlieu twitterde op maandag 29-07-2019 om 17:03:54 What happens when @realDonaldTrump doubles down on hate? It frightens independents and moderate Republicans, and galvanizes the Democratic base. Also, @POTUS is antagonizing many Americans by suing to eliminate coverage for people with pre-existing conditions.#MondayThoughts https://t.co/R1I4xsgWEj reageer retweet

quote:

Op maandag 29 juli 2019 18:11 schreef Ulx het volgende:
Deze gaat ook vast stemmen opleveren.

twitter:

jeffmason1 twitterde op maandag 29-07-2019 om 16:17:20 “I was down there also, but I’m not considering myself a first responder,” ⁦@:realDonaldTrump⁩ tells people who rushed to help at the Twin Towers on #911. https://t.co/HI2N7ffJOL reageer retweet

"Niet zo zaniken, mannen. Ik was ook op Ground Zero en zeur ik om een uitkering?"

quote:

Op maandag 29 juli 2019 22:09 schreef Knipoogje het volgende:

[..]

Let maar op, hij gaat een keer proefballonnetjes opgooien waarin hij iets gaat uitkramen als "I was there. Maybe, it's a crazy thing I know, you can call me a first responder too. Many people say I was very helpful then"

quote:

Op maandag 29 juli 2019 22:15 schreef Tweek het volgende:

[..]

https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/trump-searching-911-survivors/

quote:

Op maandag 29 juli 2019 22:26 schreef KoosVogels het volgende:
Wat is die Trump toch ook een wandelende berg stront. Claimen dat je een bijdrage hebt geleverd aan het puinruimen na 9/11 terwijl hij met z'n dikke reet op de radio liep te braggen dat zijn gebouw voortaan de grootste in Manhatten was.

quote:

Op maandag 29 juli 2019 22:27 schreef Tijger_m het volgende:

[..]

En liegen dat je geld hebt gegeven voor de slachtoffers.

quote:

1 On 9/11 itself Trump was on the phone with a TV station hours after the buildings collapsed to bragging about how his building was now the tallest.

2 Trump promised to donate $10,000 to the 9/11 victims. (A paltry amount for a New Yorker who claimed to be a billionaire and one of the richest men in the country) But he never donated the money....though he took public credit for donating it.

3 Trump lied and claimed he had hundreds of his men working in the 9/11 rescue effort when he didn't have any.

4 Trump lied and claimed that he helped in the 9/11 clean-up personally.

5 Trump lied repeatedly about 9/11 claiming to have seen thousands of Muslims cheering in New Jersey when the Towers fell....something that never happened.

6 Trump lied and said he watched people jump from the windows on 9/11

7 Trump lied and said he lost hundreds of friends in the 9/11 attack. But he can't name a single one. You lost someone in that attack, you remember their names.

8 Trump did make money off 9/11 though he lied repeatedly about the reason why he was given that money. The billionaire, one of the richest men in America, applied for and got a small business grant of $150,000. (15 times more than he was willing to pledge [but not pay] to the victims' fund.)

Trump lied and said the money was reimbursement for helping out after the attacks, it wasn't.

9 Finally, in 2016, 15 years after 9/11 happened and in the middle of his presidential campaign, Trump finally does something for 9/11 (that isn't being a lying, greedy, piece of shit). He has his Trump Foundation donate $100,000 to the 9/11 Museum Memorial --- days before the New York primary.

But understand, that wasn't Trump's own money. He hadn't given a dime to his Foundation in years. So Trump donated $100,000 of other people's money to the 9/11 Museum to help his campaign.

quote:

Op maandag 29 juli 2019 22:47 schreef ExtraWaskracht het volgende:

[..]

Wel een aardige bloemlezing hier.

Samenvattend:
[..]

quote:

2 Trump promised to donate $10,000 to the 9/11 victims. (A paltry amount for a New Yorker who claimed to be a billionaire and one of the richest men in the country) But he never donated the money....though he took public credit for donating it.

quote:

Op maandag 29 juli 2019 22:09 schreef Knipoogje het volgende:

[..]

Let maar op, hij gaat een keer proefballonnetjes opgooien waarin hij iets gaat uitkramen als "I was there. Maybe, it's a crazy thing I know, you can call me a first responder too. Many people say I was very helpful then"

twitter:

jacquesdem twitterde op maandag 29-07-2019 om 21:45:44 @gtconway3d Sliced bread. I invented that. Many people don't know this. But before me it was just bread#losttrumphistory reageer retweet

twitter:

Hambino15 twitterde op maandag 29-07-2019 om 21:50:42 "I wont call myself an astronaut, but I was there when we landed on the moon"#LostTrumpHistory https://t.co/q4LBTKB4vf reageer retweet

quote:

Op maandag 29 juli 2019 22:56 schreef KoosVogels het volgende:

[..]

De schaamteloze schofterigheid van die man is ook gewoon zo cartoonesk dat het bijna grappig wordt.

twitter:

ABCInvestigates twitterde op maandag 29-07-2019 om 23:04:45 Breaking: House Dems blast Trump insider in new report, allege profit motive in push for Saudi nuclear plan - ABC News - https://t.co/c2IoKGZXpf via @ABC reageer retweet

quote:

A longtime Trump insider has been pushing a proposal to build dozens of nuclear power plants in Saudi Arabia while seeking to avoid restrictions on the transfer of U.S. nuclear technology and has at times stood to profit from the effort, according to an investigative report by the House Oversight Committee.

“Today’s report reveals new and extensive evidence that corroborates Committee whistle-blowers and exposes how corporate and foreign interests are using their unique access to advocate for the transfer of U.S. nuclear technology to Saudi Arabia,” said Rep. Elijah Cummings, the Maryland Democrat who chairs the committee.

The 50-page report, which relied on 60,000 documents and statements from whistle-blowers inside the administration, was made public Monday. It focuses on the actions of Thomas Barrack, a wealthy Los Angeles businessman who oversaw President Donald Trump’s inaugural committee, as well as earlier efforts by retired Lt. Gen. Michael Flynn to push a Saudi nuclear energy plan. Investigators said they found evidence that “private parties with close ties to the President wield[ed] outsized influence over U.S. policy towards Saudi Arabia.”

“These new documents raise serious questions about whether the White House is willing to place the potential profits of the President’s friends above the national security of the American people and the universal objective of preventing the spread of nuclear weapons,” according to the report.

The investigative report was completed late last week but is being released on the heels of a barrage of critical tweets by President Trump targeting the Maryland Democrat and his Baltimore district. There is no indication Trump knew the report was imminent.


The White House did not cooperate with the investigation, providing none of the documents requested. Congressional investigators said documents they did recover showed that some Trump administration officials used personal email accounts to communicate with executives from private companies pushing the plan. In several instances, it was “unclear” if those officials “took steps to preserve this email as required by the Presidential Records Act,” the report said.
(...)

twitter:

obedmanuel twitterde op maandag 29-07-2019 om 22:54:41 EXCLUSIVE: California congressman @tedlieu has asked a Border Patrol chief who delivered contradictory testimony on the detention of Francisco Erwin Galicia to the House Judiciary last week to clarify his statement. My latest for @dallasnews:https://t.co/PyKaLPlZV8 reageer retweet

quote:

Op dinsdag 30 juli 2019 06:02 schreef Mryc het volgende:
Vanochtend ook twee artikelen op de voorpagina van nu.nl:

VS kan definitief raketten leveren aan Saoedi-Arabië door veto
https://www.nu.nl/buitenl(...)rabie-door-veto.html

Republikeinse leider Senaat VS geeft Obama schuld Russische inmenging
https://www.nu.nl/buitenl(...)ische-inmenging.html

twitter:

ABCPolitics twitterde op maandag 29-07-2019 om 23:05:53 NEW: Trump aide submitted drafts of 2016 "America First" energy speech to senior United Arab Emirates officials for edits, according to emails and text messages uncovered by a House Oversight Committee investigation https://t.co/qYEGckdcBo reageer retweet

quote:

Op dinsdag 30 juli 2019 08:35 schreef Vis1980 het volgende:

[..]

Dus het is een hoax en Obama is de schuldige. Rare jongens die Romeinen.

twitter:

BillKristol twitterde op maandag 29-07-2019 om 21:55:01 Undeterred by McConnell crying McCarthyism, @ForTheRuleOfLaw is airing this new ad in DC and KY criticizing @senatemajldr for blocking Senate consideration of election security legislation. https://t.co/vIaiJPvzcU reageer retweet

twitter:

SenSchumer twitterde op dinsdag 30-07-2019 om 01:24:56 My heart is filled with sadness & anger after reports of deadly shootings at festivals on opposite coastlines, one in my hometown of Brooklyn and one across the country in CaliforniaBut still, @SenateMajLdr McConnell refuses to even allow a debate on commonsense gun safety laws https://t.co/lAEEjMHxX1 reageer retweet

twitter:

BillPascrell twitterde op maandag 29-07-2019 om 23:38:48 It appears the attacker in Gilroy is a right-wing domestic extremist. My heart aches for the victims and their families.The House passed two bills for enhanced background checks months ago. The Senate should end its blockade and ratify both now.https://t.co/OaP6Nlglcr reageer retweet

quote:

Op dinsdag 30 juli 2019 10:39 schreef Ulx het volgende:
Ik heb nog niks van Trump gezien, maar het kan dat ik zijn thoughts & prayers heb gemist.

twitter:

SenSchumer twitterde op dinsdag 30-07-2019 om 01:24:56 My heart is filled with sadness & anger after reports of deadly shootings at festivals on opposite coastlines, one in my hometown of Brooklyn and one across the country in CaliforniaBut still, @:SenateMajLdr McConnell refuses to even allow a debate on commonsense gun safety laws https://t.co/lAEEjMHxX1 reageer retweet

twitter:

BillPascrell twitterde op maandag 29-07-2019 om 23:38:48 It appears the attacker in Gilroy is a right-wing domestic extremist. My heart aches for the victims and their families.The House passed two bills for enhanced background checks months ago. The Senate should end its blockade and ratify both now.https://t.co/OaP6Nlglcr reageer retweet

quote:

Op dinsdag 30 juli 2019 11:24 schreef IkStampOpTacos het volgende:

[..]

Was de schutter een moslim geweest, zaten we nu op topic #32 hierover.

quote:

Op dinsdag 30 juli 2019 11:44 schreef Ludachrist het volgende:

[..]

Geen paniek, je kan nu een topic openen om te klagen hoe de Democraten een nationale tragedie gebruiken om over de rug van de slachtoffers hun ziekelijke plannen door te drukken, of dat je nooit hoort dat iemand een moslim-extremist is maar zodra het een rechts-extremist is buitelt iedereen over elkaar heen om dat te benadrukken.

quote:

Sprint and T-Mobile, the No. 3 and No. 4 mobile phone companies in the United States, got the green light from the Trump administration on Friday to merge, a baffling decision that’s bad for ordinary Americans but suspiciously good for Donald Trump.
[...]
One has to suspect that Trump’s close ties to Sprint’s Japanese owner and T-Mobile’s sudden interest in patronizing Trump’s hotels may have played a role. What’s more, the decision to approve the merger casts a suspect light on the Trump DOJ’s earlier effort to stop AT&T from buying Time Warner, making that look more like political retaliation against CNN than sober antitrust analysis.

twitter:

AlxThomp twitterde op dinsdag 30-07-2019 om 00:57:29 Bernie email blast with subject line “Kamala Harris” https://t.co/HrwKzdl663 reageer retweet

twitter:

kylegriffin1 twitterde op dinsdag 30-07-2019 om 14:50:28 The new ad from the Tom Steyer-back Need to Impeach. It's called 'What Mueller Said.' Via @playbookplus: The group is spending in the mid-six figures to air the ad on CNN and MSNBC before and after the second presidential debate. https://t.co/xN5KgOvLqu reageer retweet

quote:

Op dinsdag 30 juli 2019 14:56 schreef Ulx het volgende:

twitter:

kylegriffin1 twitterde op dinsdag 30-07-2019 om 14:50:28 The new ad from the Tom Steyer-back Need to Impeach. It's called 'What Mueller Said.' Via @:playbookplus: The group is spending in the mid-six figures to air the ad on CNN and MSNBC before and after the second presidential debate. https://t.co/xN5KgOvLqu reageer retweet

Here we go! Volgens mij is dit de eerste spot die oproept tot impeachment. Vrijwel zeker de eerste met soundbites van de getuigenis van Mueller.

quote:

Op dinsdag 30 juli 2019 15:03 schreef Tweek het volgende:

[..]

Geloof dat Need to Impeach al tijden spotjes heeft die oproepen om te impeachen.

quote:

Op dinsdag 30 juli 2019 15:06 schreef kladderadatsch het volgende:

[..]

Ja, al een paar jaar.

quote:

Op dinsdag 30 juli 2019 15:07 schreef Ulx het volgende:

[..]

Met soundbites van Mueller?

quote:

Op dinsdag 30 juli 2019 15:09 schreef kladderadatsch het volgende:

[..]

"Here we go! Volgens mij is dit de eerste spot die oproept tot impeachment."

quote:

Op dinsdag 30 juli 2019 15:23 schreef Ulx het volgende:

[..]

"Vrijwel zeker de eerste met soundbites van de getuigenis van Mueller."

Dus? Komt ook al twee jaar op TV?

quote:

Op dinsdag 30 juli 2019 15:12 schreef OMG het volgende:
Die ads komen inderdaad al een tijdje voorbij.

quote:

Op dinsdag 30 juli 2019 14:39 schreef Ulx het volgende:
Bernie is weer ouderwets bezig voor Trump. Lekker compromisloos andere Dems afbranden.

twitter:

AlxThomp twitterde op dinsdag 30-07-2019 om 00:57:29 Bernie email blast with subject line “Kamala Harris” https://t.co/HrwKzdl663 reageer retweet

twitter:

kylegriffin1 twitterde op dinsdag 30-07-2019 om 16:00:23 .@SRuhle: "The president not giving any supporting evidence around the billions of dollars he claims was stolen in Baltimore and the thousands of African Americans who've reached out to him ... There is no evidence of that. We invite the W.H. to provide any of that." @MSNBC reageer retweet

quote:

Op dinsdag 30 juli 2019 16:00 schreef Kijkertje het volgende:
Trump zojuist over Baltimore: Dems stole BILLIONS and BILLIONS of dollars (x6 )

twitter:

kylegriffin1 twitterde op dinsdag 30-07-2019 om 16:00:23 .@:SRuhle: "The president not giving any supporting evidence around the billions of dollars he claims was stolen in Baltimore and the thousands of African Americans who've reached out to him ... There is no evidence of that. We invite the W.H. to provide any of that." @:MSNBC reageer retweet

twitter:

gtconway3d twitterde op dinsdag 30-07-2019 om 15:53:36 I think more and more people are starting to apply Occam’s razor to Trump. They are realizing that he’s not playing multidimensional chess, but that, instead, he’s cuckoo for Cocoa Puffs. reageer retweet

quote:

Op dinsdag 30 juli 2019 16:18 schreef kladderadatsch het volgende:

[..]

Heb jij ook de indruk dat hij z'n hand aan het overspelen is? Snap de strategie hierachter ook totaal niet, degenen die dit allemaal prachtig vinden stonden toch al achter hem, so what's the point?

Die rally's zijn nu echt een pig circus trouwens, het is nog erger als bij de vorige verkiezingen. Deplorables van het ergste soort, die eigenlijk alleen maar op komen dagen om Trump dit soort crypto-racistische shit uit te horen kramen, zodat ze lekker met hun rood aangelopen koppen een potje kunnen krijsen.

quote:

Op dinsdag 30 juli 2019 16:25 schreef Kijkertje het volgende:

[..]

Ik heb vooral de indruk dat hij de zwarte bevolking hiermee probeert te paaien.

quote:

Op dinsdag 30 juli 2019 16:25 schreef Kijkertje het volgende:

[..]

Ik heb vooral de indruk dat hij de zwarte bevolking hiermee probeert te paaien.

quote:

Although Ratcliffe's website says he "put terrorists in prison," there is no evidence he ever prosecuted a terrorism case.

Bron

quote:

Op dinsdag 30 juli 2019 14:56 schreef Ulx het volgende:

twitter:

kylegriffin1 twitterde op dinsdag 30-07-2019 om 14:50:28 The new ad from the Tom Steyer-back Need to Impeach. It's called 'What Mueller Said.' Via @:playbookplus: The group is spending in the mid-six figures to air the ad on CNN and MSNBC before and after the second presidential debate. https://t.co/xN5KgOvLqu reageer retweet

Here we go! Volgens mij is dit de eerste spot die oproept tot impeachment. Vrijwel zeker de eerste met soundbites van de getuigenis van Mueller.

quote:

Op dinsdag 30 juli 2019 18:01 schreef vipergts het volgende:

[..]

Heeft dat nut dan, als degene die ze moeten overhalen Fox kijken.

twitter:

kylegriffin1 twitterde op dinsdag 30-07-2019 om 18:05:25 A protester holding a sign the reads 'Deport Hate' interrupts Trump, shouting: "Mr. President, you can't send us back, Virginia is our home!"Via ABC https://t.co/P53tIzsmB9 reageer retweet

quote:

Op dinsdag 30 juli 2019 18:36 schreef Ulx het volgende:

[..]

Weigert Fox deze dan?

quote:

Op dinsdag 30 juli 2019 18:48 schreef vipergts het volgende:

[..]

Geen idee in je tweet staat cnn en msmbc lijken mij gewoon geen zenders voor Trumpstemmers

quote:

Op dinsdag 30 juli 2019 18:40 schreef Ulx het volgende:

twitter:

kylegriffin1 twitterde op dinsdag 30-07-2019 om 18:05:25 A protester holding a sign the reads 'Deport Hate' interrupts Trump, shouting: "Mr. President, you can't send us back, Virginia is our home!"Via ABC https://t.co/P53tIzsmB9 reageer retweet

Een demonstrant met een bord met daarop "Deporteer Haat" valt Trump in de rede. Roept 'Meneer de President, U kunt on niet terugsturen, Virginia in ons thuis!"

quote:

Op dinsdag 30 juli 2019 19:13 schreef ExtraWaskracht het volgende:

[..]

Om hem te impeachen heb je geen Trump stemmers nodig, maar genoeg democratische (primary) + independent stemmers uit de districten van democratische afgevaardigden. Althans, als dat het primaire doel is.

quote:

Op dinsdag 30 juli 2019 18:48 schreef vipergts het volgende:

[..]

Geen idee in je tweet staat cnn en msmbc lijken mij gewoon geen zenders voor Trumpstemmers

quote:

Op dinsdag 30 juli 2019 19:21 schreef VoMy het volgende:

[..]

En nu?

twitter:

PeterAtlantic twitterde op dinsdag 30-07-2019 om 20:29:53 Talking to reporters just now on the South Lawn, Pres. Trump said that the intelligence agencies -- the ones who brief and inform him of global threats -- have "run amok." reageer retweet

quote:

Op dinsdag 30 juli 2019 22:09 schreef crystal_meth het volgende:
Trump heeft de "U.S. special presidential envoy for hostage affairs" naar Zweden gestuurd voor het proces van A$AP...
https://apnews.com/7ae4a9(...)_campaign=SocialFlow

quote:

Op dinsdag 30 juli 2019 22:09 schreef crystal_meth het volgende:
Trump heeft de "U.S. special presidential envoy for hostage affairs" naar Zweden gestuurd voor het proces van A$AP...
https://apnews.com/7ae4a9(...)_campaign=SocialFlow

quote:

Op dinsdag 30 juli 2019 22:09 schreef crystal_meth het volgende:
Trump heeft de "U.S. special presidential envoy for hostage affairs" naar Zweden gestuurd voor het proces van A$AP...
https://apnews.com/7ae4a9(...)_campaign=SocialFlow

twitter:

MollyJongFast twitterde op dinsdag 30-07-2019 om 18:49:23 Students for trump has found the perfect brand ambassador. Good work team! https://t.co/qrJ5M9b6tD reageer retweet

quote:

Op dinsdag 30 juli 2019 22:09 schreef crystal_meth het volgende:
Trump heeft de "U.S. special presidential envoy for hostage affairs" naar Zweden gestuurd voor het proces van A$AP...
https://apnews.com/7ae4a9(...)_campaign=SocialFlow

quote:

Op dinsdag 30 juli 2019 23:30 schreef ExtraWaskracht het volgende:
Anyway ... vanavond en morgenavond het tweede Democratische debat. Hierna zal, naast dat Chivaz een filmpje gaat laten zien waaruit blijkt dat deze mensen enige compassie tonen in deze debatten met immigranten, er gezien de hogere eisen aan het volgende debat naar verwachting een redelijke verdunning gaan plaats vinden.

quote:

Op woensdag 31 juli 2019 02:59 schreef OMG het volgende:
Dat constante "thank you" om iemand al tijdens een eerste zin af te kappen is wel ontiegelijk irritant.

quote:

Op woensdag 31 juli 2019 03:01 schreef Tweek het volgende:

[..]

Ja, maar dat zou beter moeten worden met minder kandidaten.

Ben je het met mee eens dat Sanders, Warren en Buttigieg de enige zijn die vanavond er goed uit komen?

quote:

Op woensdag 31 juli 2019 03:33 schreef OMG het volgende:

[..]

Yep, en stiekem vond ik dat mevrouw de schrijft Williamson ook nog wel wat zinnige dingen zei voor zover ze aan het woord kwam.

Delaney en Ryan, man man man, wat een figuren.

quote:

Texas General Election Head To Head:

O’Rourke 49 (+12)
Trump 37

Warren 41 (+3)
Trump 38

Sanders 39 (+2)
trump 37

Harris 40 (+1)
Trump 39

Trump 37
Biden 37

Trump 39 (+6)
Buttigieg 33

The University of Texas at Tyler/Texas Opinion Survey
https://t.co/o2YXBWmj3j

quote:

Op woensdag 31 juli 2019 04:26 schreef Tweek het volgende:
Oh, Buttigieg is de engiste die tegen over Sanders scoort. Vooral omdat Sanders zijn praatje houdt. En de vraag over jong en oud ging.

Qua debat begin ik steeds meer fan van hem te worden. Hij gaat dit niet winnen. Maar hij kan over 4 of 8 jaar zeker wel winnen.

twitter:

YAppelbaum twitterde op dinsdag 30-07-2019 om 23:28:27 1. In 1971, Richard Nixon got a call from Ronald Reagan, complaining about African delegates at the UN. "To see those, those monkeys from those African countries—damn them, they’re still uncomfortable wearing shoes!” https://t.co/SZmPj8omUy reageer retweet

twitter:

YAppelbaum twitterde op dinsdag 30-07-2019 om 23:30:09 2. The racist remarks were excised from the recording’s initial release in 2000. The historian @TimNaftali requested that these tapes be rereviewed, and the Nixon Library has now released them. We publish them for the first time here: https://t.co/SZmPj8omUy reageer retweet

twitter:

YAppelbaum twitterde op dinsdag 30-07-2019 om 23:31:56 3. Nixon laughed, and then began repeating Reagan’s complaint to aides. “He saw these, these, uh, these cannibals on television last night, and he says, ‘Christ, they weren’t even wearing shoes, and here the United States is going to submit its fate to that.'" reageer retweet

twitter:

JakeSherman twitterde op woensdag 31-07-2019 om 03:15:14 NEWS ... Texas GOP Rep. Mike Conaway is retiring after 15 years in Congress. This is the fifth retirement in two weeks. reageer retweet

twitter:

JakeSherman twitterde op woensdag 31-07-2019 om 03:18:45 The GOP is losing some of its most well liked members. Roby. Mitchell. Conaway. Brooks. Olsen. Retirements are again a problem for the House GOP reageer retweet

quote:

Op woensdag 31 juli 2019 10:37 schreef Ulx het volgende:
Trump's geliefde heeft weer wat rakettesten gedaan.

https://www.cnn.com/2019/(...)y-30-intl/index.html

quote:

Op woensdag 31 juli 2019 09:53 schreef Ulx het volgende:
Voor degenen die willen weten wat er met "de GOP van Reagan" is gebeurd.....

Niet veel volgens mij....

twitter:

YAppelbaum twitterde op dinsdag 30-07-2019 om 23:28:27 1. In 1971, Richard Nixon got a call from Ronald Reagan, complaining about African delegates at the UN. "To see those, those monkeys from those African countries—damn them, they’re still uncomfortable wearing shoes!” https://t.co/SZmPj8omUy reageer retweet

twitter:

YAppelbaum twitterde op dinsdag 30-07-2019 om 23:30:09 2. The racist remarks were excised from the recording’s initial release in 2000. The historian @:TimNaftali requested that these tapes be rereviewed, and the Nixon Library has now released them. We publish them for the first time here: https://t.co/SZmPj8omUy reageer retweet

twitter:

YAppelbaum twitterde op dinsdag 30-07-2019 om 23:31:56 3. Nixon laughed, and then began repeating Reagan’s complaint to aides. “He saw these, these, uh, these cannibals on television last night, and he says, ‘Christ, they weren’t even wearing shoes, and here the United States is going to submit its fate to that.'" reageer retweet

twitter:

ddale8 twitterde op woensdag 31-07-2019 om 03:31:40 As with the first Democratic debate last time around, a highly factual debate so far. (I don't check opinion and prediction.) The leading candidates have been almost entirely accurate. reageer retweet

twitter:

ddale8 twitterde op woensdag 31-07-2019 om 03:44:57 One notable thing about checking the Democrats, as opposed to Trump, is that the statistics they cite are overwhelmingly either accurate or at least rooted in an actual source. With Trump, you have to be suspicious that almost everything is invented. https://t.co/hUOfs8emJh reageer retweet

twitter:

ForTheRuleOfLaw twitterde op dinsdag 30-07-2019 om 00:29:43 Congress needs to support and defend the Constitution and laws of the United States of America against all enemies, foreign and domestic.It's time to protect American elections from foreign attacks! https://t.co/HOLHZDKI28 reageer retweet

twitter:

mfa_russia twitterde op woensdag 31-07-2019 om 14:53:38 . @realDonaldTrump Dear Mr. President, beautiful #US company @Twitter blocked our no less beautiful account @RusEmbSyria. Please say something as beautiful as you said on the digital tax that #France imposed on 'great American technology companies'. reageer retweet

twitter:

dandeluce twitterde op woensdag 31-07-2019 om 06:00:48 After heated debate, Trump set to hold off on tightening limits on Iran's nuclear work. Hawks frustrated. My latest: https://t.co/NcRpRf7dFI reageer retweet

quote:

Op woensdag 31 juli 2019 16:20 schreef kladderadatsch het volgende:
Ow jee, kijk nou eens (ad staat in de tweet):

twitter:

ForTheRuleOfLaw twitterde op dinsdag 30-07-2019 om 00:29:43 Congress needs to support and defend the Constitution and laws of the United States of America against all enemies, foreign and domestic.It's time to protect American elections from foreign attacks! https://t.co/HOLHZDKI28 reageer retweet

Dat Dems met anti-Trump ads komen is nog tot daar en toe, maar dit zijn dus Republicans. Lijkt erop dat die strategie van Trump nog slechter uitpakt dan ik al dacht. Tick... Tock... Tick... Tock....

quote:

Op woensdag 31 juli 2019 10:12 schreef Hexagon het volgende:
De republikeinse partij is meer een soort storthoop geworden voor mensen met allerlei dubieuze politieke drijfveren. Ongeveer alles dat abject is verzamelt zich daar.

twitter:

kylegriffin1 twitterde op woensdag 31-07-2019 om 16:00:09 More than 50% of federal aid meant to help American farmers cope with the negative impacts of Trump's trade war with China went to the largest and wealthiest farms, Axios reports. https://t.co/RLs5Ka8gHi reageer retweet

quote:

Op woensdag 31 juli 2019 04:12 schreef Tweek het volgende:

Beto had niet eens in de gaten dat hij in een debat was.

quote:

Op woensdag 31 juli 2019 19:59 schreef Ulx het volgende:

[..]

Maar niemand kan onder Beto uit als hij zo blijft staan in de polls in Texas. 49-37 tegen Trump. Zet hem op je ticket als VP en je wint die staat. Of in ieder geval moeten de GOP en Trump daar dan echt alle zeilen bijzetten. En Trump die Texas niet gemakkelijk kan winnen toont zwakte.

Harris/O'Rourke heeft op dit moment mijn voorkeur.

quote:

Op woensdag 31 juli 2019 20:25 schreef Jabberwocky het volgende:

[..]

Ik zit meer in kamp Warren maar Warren zal O'Rourke niet snel selecteren als running mate denk ik. Harris/O'Rourke en je hebt 93 kiesmannen al binnen. Dat is geen slecht begin.

quote:

Op woensdag 31 juli 2019 20:27 schreef ExtraWaskracht het volgende:

[..]

Die snap ik niet zo. Californië is sowieso voor de democraten.

quote:

Op woensdag 31 juli 2019 20:08 schreef OMG het volgende:
Neh, Beto mag er van mij mee stoppen, net als 5-6 anderen van gisteravond.

quote:

Op woensdag 31 juli 2019 20:25 schreef Jabberwocky het volgende:

[..]

Ik zit meer in kamp Warren maar Warren zal O'Rourke niet snel selecteren als running mate denk ik. Harris/O'Rourke en je hebt 93 kiesmannen al binnen. Dat is geen slecht begin.

quote:

Op woensdag 31 juli 2019 20:30 schreef Jabberwocky het volgende:

[..]

Ook zo, maar ik zie andere frontrunners O'Rourke nog niet echt vragen om running mate te worden. Wellicht Buttigieg maar die geef ik al minder kansen om de nominatie te winnen dan Harris, Biden, Warren of Sanders.

quote:

Op woensdag 31 juli 2019 20:36 schreef ExtraWaskracht het volgende:

[..]

Vorige keer werd het Tim “who the fuck” Kaine. Zou dus echt willekeurig wie worden tezijnertijd. Doen alsof mensen in Texas ineens overstag gaan vanwege O’Rourke als VP lijkt me echt sterk overdreven. Er is voor zover ik weet nooit een sterk verband aangetoond hierin.

quote:

Op woensdag 31 juli 2019 20:47 schreef Ulx het volgende:

[..]

Kijk die bovenstaande poll.

Ik zie Trump niet 15 punten stijgen. Die gaat niet ineens populair worden in Texas. He fucked it up bigly.
Misschien wordt het verschil tussen de rest en Trump ook groter in die staat. Dat kan. Dan is Beto zijn voordeel kwijt. Maar als Beto de Texas primary heel duidelijk pakt...dan moet je hem wat beloven.

quote:

Op woensdag 31 juli 2019 20:51 schreef ExtraWaskracht het volgende:

[..]

Er is veel bewijs voor dat mensen een groot voordeel hebben in hun thuisstaat als ze bovenaan het ticket staan, maar als VP veel minder. Toon me een aantal polls die bv. Harris met O'Rourke als VP hebben vs Trump/Pence en dan kan het zijn dat ik er wat anders over ga denken in dit specifieke geval, maar vooralsnog zijn het m.i. appels en peren.

quote:

Op woensdag 31 juli 2019 21:20 schreef Ulx het volgende:

[..]

Trump zal vol aan de bak moeten. En dat is het punt.

quote:

On average the vice-presidential candidate gains only about 0.3 percent more in his home state than expected.

quote:

Zet Beto op het ticket (of laat hem campagne voor je voeren in ruil voor een mooie post) en Trump moet iets doen. Trump heeft dan een uitdaging in de Rustbelt èn één in een conservatief bastion. . Het is met deze cijfers geen appeltje-eitje meer voor de GOP. (Als ze het eerlijk spelen.)

quote:

En zie jij Trump ineens populair worden?

quote:

Op woensdag 31 juli 2019 22:25 schreef ExtraWaskracht het volgende:


Niet direct. Wat ik wel zie is dat de FED de rente gaat verlagen, mogelijk onder politieke druk vanuit Trump. Als dat een kortstondige hogere economische groei laat zien hoger dan 3% kan dat net het verschil maken, hoewel ook dat speculatief is.

quote:

Op woensdag 31 juli 2019 22:40 schreef Ulx het volgende:
Wat is dan een betere optie om Texas te flippen?

quote:

Op donderdag 1 augustus 2019 02:36 schreef L3gend het volgende:

Debat: het is wel heel geforceerd Biden vs Harris nu
Ze komen beide slechter uit

quote:

Op donderdag 1 augustus 2019 03:04 schreef Tweek het volgende:


Wel wordt er gedemonstreerd. Eerder bij Booker ook, geen idee wat er geroepen wordt alleen.

quote:

Op donderdag 1 augustus 2019 03:06 schreef OMG het volgende:

[..]

Fire Pantaleo. Was een agent betrokken bij Eric Garner;
https://www.wxyz.com/news(...)anting-fire-pantaleo

quote:

Op donderdag 1 augustus 2019 03:09 schreef L3gend het volgende:

- Ik denk dat de Democraten echt te ver links zijn geschoten op migratie wat ze in 2020 kan breken

quote:

Op donderdag 1 augustus 2019 04:13 schreef OMG het volgende:
De volgende keer neem ik bij iedere fact of the matter een shot whisky of zo, misschien dat het dan wat interessanter is.

quote:

Op donderdag 1 augustus 2019 04:10 schreef OMG het volgende:
Vind het vooral een beetje raar debat. Dat van gisteren was beter, nu gaat het alle kanten op en niemand springt er uit. Niks memorabels, behalve Biden's stopwoordjes.

Wordt tijd dat er een stel mee ophouden zodat we wat langere inhoudelijke debatten en antwoorden kunnen krijgen.

quote:

Op donderdag 1 augustus 2019 04:38 schreef L3gend het volgende:
Voor de volgende debat moeten kandidaten zowel 2% halen in vier verschillende peilingen en 130k donateurs hebben.

Biden, Sanders, Warren, Harris, Buttiging, Booker, O'Rouke hebben de criteria al gehaald. Klobuchar, Yang en Castro gaan de criteria ook zeer waarschijnlijk halen. Gabbard wordt het spanend, de rest lijkt me vrij kansloos

[ afbeelding ]

quote:

Op donderdag 1 augustus 2019 04:15 schreef Tweek het volgende:

[..]

Het is een Biden bash feestje voor iedereen, maar als front runner staat hij ook ver af van de rest. Hopelijk zijn er volgende keer maar 10 of minder over.

quote:

Op donderdag 1 augustus 2019 04:43 schreef L3gend het volgende:

[..]

De verwachtingen voor Biden waren ook zo laag na de eerste debat dat als hij bij dit debat een weerwoord of elke aanval heeft het al winst wordt gezien.

De status quo wordt gehandhaafd dus winst voor Biden.

quote:

Op donderdag 1 augustus 2019 04:23 schreef Tweek het volgende:
Mueller testimony wordt er bij gehaald.

Booker roept op tot impeachment, Ulx kan tevreden zijn.
Castro ook.

Bennet wil geen impeachment want dan Trump runnen op acquittal, Castro gaat er tegen in.

Bennet praat alsof hij op 0,5 speed afspeel snelheid staat.

Castro maakt het argument dat bij geen impeachment Trump het zelfde argument heeft.

Niet aanklagen is hetzelfde als vrijspreken. Worden helaas niet meer kandidaten bij betrokken en CNN gaat naar reclame.

twitter:

NBCPolitics twitterde op donderdag 01-08-2019 om 01:09:05 Inspector general says he can't investigate White House security clearances for the president's daughter, son-in-law and others until the president asks him to do so, according to a letter obtained by @NBCNews. https://t.co/0dnsijTOWZ reageer retweet

SPOILER

https://www.nytimes.com/2(...)ytpolitics&smtyp=cur

By Peter Baker
July 31, 2019

WASHINGTON — President Trump intervened Tuesday once again on behalf of a Navy SEAL who was charged but acquitted of war crimes in the death of a captured Islamic State fighter in Iraq, ordering the military to punish the prosecutors who tried the case in the first place.

Mr. Trump angrily lashed out at the Navy for awarding commendations to prosecutors in the murder trial of Edward Gallagher, a former special operations chief, and he publicly instructed Pentagon officials to strip them of the medals. His announcement was a remarkable rebuke by a president of his own Navy leadership.

“The Prosecutors who lost the case against SEAL Eddie Gallagher (who I released from solitary confinement so he could fight his case properly), were ridiculously given a Navy Achievement Medal,” Mr. Trump wrote on Twitter. “Not only did they lose the case, they had difficulty with respect to information that may have been obtained from opposing lawyers and for giving immunity in a totally incompetent fashion.”

quote:

Op donderdag 1 augustus 2019 08:48 schreef Ulx het volgende:
Dat zal hem populair maken bij de GI's.

quote:

Op donderdag 1 augustus 2019 10:32 schreef Tijger_m het volgende:

[..]

Ik denk het wel, ja. Niet bij de officieren, vermoedelijk.

quote:

Op donderdag 1 augustus 2019 04:15 schreef Tweek het volgende:

[..]

Het is een Biden bash feestje voor iedereen, maar als front runner staat hij ook ver af van de rest. Hopelijk zijn er volgende keer maar 10 of minder over.

twitter:

RusEmbUSA twitterde op donderdag 01-08-2019 om 00:27:51 US President Donald Trump, in phone talks with Vladimir Putin, offered assistance to Moscow in fighting wildfires in Siberia. The Russian president viewed Trump's offer as a sign that fully-fledged bilateral relations could be restored in the future🔹https://t.co/IUDFt5s6F3 🇷🇺🇺🇸 https://t.co/oe3YDbhEyg reageer retweet

twitter:

ABCPolitics twitterde op donderdag 01-08-2019 om 08:34:02 California Gov. Gavin Newsom signs bill requiring all presidential candidates, including President Donald Trump, to release their tax returns if they wish to appear on the state's primary election ballot. https://t.co/LovbXRxc9D https://t.co/2bjAY2d7YL reageer retweet

quote:

Op donderdag 1 augustus 2019 11:55 schreef Ulx het volgende:
Stel je maar kandidaat in Californië, Bill Weld. Dat gaat leuk worden.

twitter:

ABCPolitics twitterde op donderdag 01-08-2019 om 08:34:02 California Gov. Gavin Newsom signs bill requiring all presidential candidates, including President Donald Trump, to release their tax returns if they wish to appear on the state's primary election ballot. https://t.co/LovbXRxc9D https://t.co/2bjAY2d7YL reageer retweet

Pijnlijk ook voor Bernie Sanders.

quote:

Op donderdag 1 augustus 2019 12:29 schreef ExtraWaskracht het volgende:
Zelfs als het stand houdt, wat weerhoudt de republikeinen ervan om hun primary zo te organiseren als ze willen, maar dan zonder staatsfinanciering?

Echt een hele domme maatregel imo.

quote:

Op donderdag 1 augustus 2019 12:58 schreef Ulx het volgende:

[..]

Natuurlijk. Dat mag.

Je kunt denken:"If Trump goes low, we go high."

Je kunt ook denken:"If Trump goes low, we kick him in the teeth."

Ik denk dat bij een sociopatenclub als Trump's GOP aankomen met 'redelijke argumenten' geen zin meer heeft. En dat 'Impeachment motiveert zijn base alleen maar' een stomme aanname, en laf, is. Je moet dit soort figuren keihard aanpakken. Waarschuwingen krijgen ze al jaren. Ze doen er geen moer mee, integendeel zelfs. Fuck ze dan maar terug.

Geen enkele democraat of independent die ineens voor Trump gaat zijn omdat er voor hem consequenties aan zijn eigen gedrag zitten.

quote:

Op donderdag 1 augustus 2019 13:58 schreef Re het volgende:
presidenten die zich niet aan de wet houden moeten gewoon impeached worden, geen gemier over dat de senaat het toch niet zal accepteren, als je een constitutie om zeep wil helpen dan is het wel einde verhaal natuurlijk...

quote:

Op donderdag 1 augustus 2019 14:02 schreef Mike het volgende:

[..]

Precies, als je dit soort dingen niet aanpakt, dan wordt een president onschendbaar zolang-ie maar een meerderheid in het Huis en/of de Senaat heeft. Lijkt me een slechte zaak voor de democratie.

quote:

Op donderdag 1 augustus 2019 13:58 schreef Re het volgende:
presidenten die zich niet aan de wet houden moeten gewoon impeached worden, geen gemier over dat de senaat het toch niet zal accepteren, als je een constitutie om zeep wil helpen dan is het wel einde verhaal natuurlijk...

quote:

Op donderdag 1 augustus 2019 14:06 schreef Knipoogje het volgende:

[..]

Bij 1 partij dan he. Een democratische president was niet weggekomen met een 'ik release mijn tax returns niet, ik divest van mijn bedrijven door ze aan mijn zoons over te dragen en buitenlanders mogen mij altijd omkopen door een maandje een hotelkamer te boeken' .

Al vind ik het een symboolmaatregel in Californie, ben ik wel van mening dat men dit soort loopholes dicht moeten timmeren voor de toekomst. Ze hadden die regel bijvoorbeeld kunnen doen na de verkiezingen en als een democraat aan de macht was. Dan is het minder 'Trump pesten' en meer 'Geen president met wazige financiele belangen meer'

twitter:

kylegriffin1 twitterde op donderdag 01-08-2019 om 14:00:01 "How the hell is this not inciting violence?" A North Carolina gun store has erected a billboard with the Squad's faces, calling them "idiots." https://t.co/J6u4gIRHV9 reageer retweet

quote:

Op donderdag 1 augustus 2019 14:06 schreef Knipoogje het volgende:

[..]

Bij 1 partij dan he. Een democratische president was niet weggekomen met een 'ik release mijn tax returns niet, ik divest van mijn bedrijven door ze aan mijn zoons over te dragen en buitenlanders mogen mij altijd omkopen door een maandje een hotelkamer te boeken' .

Al vind ik het een symboolmaatregel in Californie, ben ik wel van mening dat men dit soort loopholes dicht moeten timmeren voor de toekomst. Ze hadden die regel bijvoorbeeld kunnen doen na de verkiezingen en als een democraat aan de macht was. Dan is het minder 'Trump pesten' en meer 'Geen president met wazige financiele belangen meer'

quote:

Op donderdag 1 augustus 2019 13:11 schreef Monolith het volgende:

[..]

Er wordt niets keihard aangepakt. Dat is de illusie waar je steeds voor lijk te vallen als er weer eens iemand wat stoere taal uitslaat. Een impeachment valt dood in de senaat. Dan kun je daar heel veel energie in gaan steken, maar uiteindelijk bereik je er niets mee.
De Democraten zetten vooral zichzelf mee buitenspel met dit soort acties. Californië kan prima weerstand bieden tegen Trump en de GOP zoals ze bijvoorbeeld doen met betrekking tot emissiereductie van auto's. Dat zet zoden aan de dijk. Niet één of andere kinderachtige, effectloze symboolmaatregel waar de GOP bovendien weer een electoraal slaatje uit kan slaan.
Het gaat natuurlijk ook niet om 'Democraten of Independents die opeens voor Trump gaan zijn'. Het gaat om het feit dat je hiermee eigenlijk je eigen argumenten omtrent voter surpression, gerrymandering en meer van dat soort zaken om het democratische proces te hinderen invalideert.
Dat kan bijvoorbeeld de achterban van Trump of de GOP motiveren om toch op te komen te dagen bij de verkiezingen, je verliest de 'moral high ground', wat weer kiezers kan demoraliseren en ga zo maar door. Het is misschien lastig te bevatten als je de werkelijkheid waarneemt door een anti-Trumpfilter, maar veel kiezers zijn lang niet zo extreem gepolariseerd als online 'discussies' doen vermoeden. Bovendien wordt er niet enkel voor het presidentsschap gestemd de komende jaren.

quote:

Op donderdag 1 augustus 2019 14:47 schreef Kijkertje het volgende:

[..]

Maar waar is die 'moral highground' als je een corrupte president niet impeacht? Dat het niet zal leiden het afzetten van Trump omdat de Reps dat in de Senaat kunnen tegenhouden is dan voor hun rekening.

Als je niet impeacht loop je de kans dat het in de toekomst uitgelegd zal worden als argument dat er niet genoeg bewijs zou zijn geweest.

quote:

Op donderdag 1 augustus 2019 14:49 schreef Monolith het volgende:

[..]

Je kunt prima uitleggen dat dit iets is dat je aan de kiezer wilt overlaten.

quote:

Op donderdag 1 augustus 2019 14:53 schreef Kijkertje het volgende:

[..]

Het lijkt me meer een taak voor de Congresleden om aan de kiezer uit te leggen waarom impeachment noodzakelijk is aangezien zij beter op de hoogte zijn van de feiten.

quote:

Op donderdag 1 augustus 2019 14:55 schreef Monolith het volgende:

[..]

Volgens mij hebben veel kiezers niet zoveel op met wat ze toch vooral zien als plichtmatige ceremonies in Washington die nergens toe leiden. Dan is het eerder aan de campagnevoerders om aan te geven waarom ze vinden dat die man geen tweede termijn verdient.

quote:

Op donderdag 1 augustus 2019 14:58 schreef Kijkertje het volgende:

[..]

Maar als het Huis Trump impeacht is dat toch niet 'niks' historisch gezien?

quote:

Op donderdag 1 augustus 2019 15:04 schreef kladderadatsch het volgende:

[..]

En dan? Alle aandacht zal 24/7 daarnaartoe gaan, ondertussen gaan types als McConnel achter de schermen gewoon door met de rechtsstaat in hun voordeel te reconstrueren.

Dan komen er verkiezingen en blijken er ineens allerlei achterlijke regels ingevoerd te kunnen worden zonder dat er juridisch gezien iets tegenin te brengen is.

quote:

Op donderdag 1 augustus 2019 15:04 schreef kladderadatsch het volgende:

[..]

En dan? Alle aandacht zal 24/7 daarnaartoe gaan

quote:

Op donderdag 1 augustus 2019 14:47 schreef Kijkertje het volgende:


Als je niet impeacht loop je de kans dat het in de toekomst uitgelegd zal worden als argument dat er niet genoeg bewijs zou zijn geweest.

quote:

Op donderdag 1 augustus 2019 15:34 schreef Ulx het volgende:

[..]

Bovendien: Ben je nou echt bang dat Trump ineens "TOTAL and COMPLETE EXONERATION!" gaat tweeten nadat McConnell hem vrijspreekt?

Dan heb ik nieuws voor je...

quote:

Op donderdag 1 augustus 2019 15:47 schreef Kijkertje het volgende:

[..]

En bovendien: ik persoonlijk zou het (als ik kiezer zou zijn) juist een zwaktebod vinden van de Democraten als ze niet gaan impeachen, misschien wel een reden om niet te gaan stemmen

quote:

Op donderdag 1 augustus 2019 15:57 schreef AnneX het volgende:

[..]

Wat ik net begrijp van AOC in een uurlang radio interview...als de House impeached, krijg je een impeached president, alleen moet dan de Senaat het proces afmaken.

Tekst.https://www.gq.com/story/ocasio-cortez-democrats-hot-97

Quote:..”When asked about whether she and Pelosi discussed impeachment Ocasio-Cortez said that the topic didn't come up directly, but she pointed out that Pelosi's hands are tied even with more than 100 members of Congress now supporting opening an impeachment inquiry, and that a good number of Democrats still don't support it. "The magic number is 218," she said, which is the minimum for a simple majority in the House. "Her job is a vote counter," she said of Pelosi, and she isn't likely to move on anything without being sure she has the votes to get it passed.
...”

Stand van zaken:
New: https://www.politico.com/(...)-impeachment-1440799

quote:

"If you are watching this at home," he said, "and you are a Republican member of Congress, consider the fact that when the sun sets on your career and they are writing your story of all the good and bad things you did in your life, the thing you will be remembered for is whether in this moment with this president you found the courage to stand up to him, or continued to put party over country."

quote:

Op donderdag 1 augustus 2019 16:05 schreef Kijkertje het volgende:

[..]

Ik ga ervan uit dat als Pelosi het groene licht geeft voor impeachment de Democraten in het Huis zo verstandig zijn om massaal achter haar te gaan staan (het 'Pelosi-effect'). Het zou heel erg dom zijn om dat niet te doen.

Edit: de Senaat gaat het niet afmaken maar dat is voor rekening van de Republikeinen en imo geen reden om er niet aan te beginnen. Laat ze maar in de geschiedenis te boek staan als degenen die een corrupte President de hand boven het hoofd hielden.

quote:

Op donderdag 1 augustus 2019 16:42 schreef Ulx het volgende:

[..]

Impeachnent is een einddoel voor het Huis. Simpel stemmen zodra de 218 over zijn schiet nu niet op.

Wat je wil zijn getuigen als McGahn die onder ede live op TV gaan. Wat je wil zijn de mails en de transcripts. Wat je wil is dat het SC (knarsentandend misschien) de Executive op de plek zet. Dat is wat je wil. Wat je wil is dat alle drek boven komt. Je wil de man op minstens drie zaken pakken. Dan duikt de approvalrating nog verder omlaag.

En als dat gedaan is en Trump rond de 20-25% approval hangt DAN pas ga je stemmen. En dan, en ik denk dat dat pas tijdens de campagne is, mag de GOP laten zien hoe verschrikkelijk trots ze zijn op Trumps daden.

quote:

Op donderdag 1 augustus 2019 17:27 schreef Ulx het volgende:
Er is geen officieel gedefinieerde procedure om een impeachmentonderzoek te beginnen. Niet in de Constitutie. Niet in de wet. Niet in de regels van het Huis. Het nag worden gestart in een comité.

Dat Nadler naar de rechter is gestapt en als argument gaf dat hij onderzoekt of er een impeachment moet gebeuren is dus in principe voldoende.

En als de GOP tot aan het SC gaat stonewallen en het SC zegt dat het Huis een motie had moeten aannemen dat doet Pelosi dat gewoon alsnog. Desnoods een dag later.
En het SC gaat dan niet op de eerdere terugkomen.

quote:

Op donderdag 1 augustus 2019 17:31 schreef Kijkertje het volgende:

[..]

Maar waarom moet hij dat nog onderzoeken, het Mueller rapport is toch duidelijk? Dat komt op mij over of ze het toch niet echt zeker weten of er reden voor impeachment is?

twitter:

rgoodlaw twitterde op donderdag 01-08-2019 om 17:26:59 Will this be Sen. Richard Burr (R-NC)'s legacy?Selling out American national security by helping confirm #Ratcliffe?TIME, NYT reported Burr warned Trump against nominating Ratcliffe.Burr to CNN (7/29): "I will work aggressively to make sure that John Ratcliffe is confirmed" https://t.co/0gwtMFjXhH reageer retweet

quote:

Op donderdag 1 augustus 2019 17:46 schreef Ulx het volgende:

[..]

Omdat impeachment een politiek proces is. Het GOP blok in de Senaat gaat pas scheuren vertonen zodra het risico Trump te beschermen te groot wordt.
Als de populariteit van Trump wegens, incompetentie, kutbeleid, corruptie èn wekenlange hoorzittingen en openbaar gemaakte documenten verder afbrokkelt dan verwacht ik barsten in het front.

Mueller had maar een beperkt mandaat.

twitter:

PostKranish twitterde op donderdag 01-08-2019 om 17:03:25 Biden asked viewers to Google `1000 prisoners freed, Kamala Harris.' She said his claim is not true. Here's my story on what actually happened, with Harris taking `full responsibility.' https://t.co/8lmmgAKEkD reageer retweet

quote:

Op donderdag 1 augustus 2019 18:06 schreef Kijkertje het volgende:
Waarom zitten de Democratische kandidaten in elkaars verleden te wroeten op zoek naar 'dirt' en richten ze zich niet op Trump? Zo is het wel erg makkelijk voor hem als zij het werk vast voor hem doen.

quote:

Op donderdag 1 augustus 2019 18:06 schreef Kijkertje het volgende:
Waarom zitten de Democratische kandidaten in elkaars verleden te wroeten op zoek naar 'dirt' en richten ze zich niet op Trump? Zo is het wel erg makkelijk voor hem als zij het werk vast voor hem doen.

twitter:

PostKranish twitterde op donderdag 01-08-2019 om 17:03:25 Biden asked viewers to Google `1000 prisoners freed, Kamala Harris.' She said his claim is not true. Here's my story on what actually happened, with Harris taking `full responsibility.' https://t.co/8lmmgAKEkD reageer retweet

Crime lab scandal rocked Kamala Harris’s term as San Francisco district attorney

quote:

Op donderdag 1 augustus 2019 18:05 schreef AnneX het volgende:

[..]

Zijn de scheuren ook zichtbaar nu 5 R’s zich niet herkiesbaar stellen?

quote:

En hoe kan #MoscowMitch als senator in al die jaren van +/- 1 naar 26 miljoen rijkdom “groeien”?

quote:

Op donderdag 1 augustus 2019 18:41 schreef Jabberwocky het volgende:

[..]

Op dit moment strijden ze nog niet tegen Trump maar moeten ze eerst maar nominee zien te worden.

Bovendien, als een van de kandidaten veel skeletons in the closet heeft zitten, kun je dat beter maar nu weten dan wanneer het al te laat is. Als je de Republikeinen veel vuur aan de schenen legt moet je dat bij jezelf ook doen zodat de MAGAers in ieder geval niet kunnen zeggen dat je hypocriet bent (ze zullen het vast alsnog wel proberen maar in ieder geval heeft het dan minder kracht).

twitter:

realDonaldTrump twitterde op donderdag 01-08-2019 om 19:26:09 Our representatives have just returned from China where they had constructive talks having to do with a future Trade Deal. We thought we had a deal with China three months ago, but sadly, China decided to re-negotiate the deal prior to signing. More recently, China agreed to... reageer retweet

twitter:

realDonaldTrump twitterde op donderdag 01-08-2019 om 19:26:10 ...buy agricultural product from the U.S. in large quantities, but did not do so. Additionally, my friend President Xi said that he would stop the sale of Fentanyl to the United States – this never happened, and many Americans continue to die! Trade talks are continuing, and... reageer retweet

twitter:

realDonaldTrump twitterde op donderdag 01-08-2019 om 19:26:10 ...during the talks the U.S. will start, on September 1st, putting a small additional Tariff of 10% on the remaining 300 Billion Dollars of goods and products coming from China into our Country. This does not include the 250 Billion Dollars already Tariffed at 25%... reageer retweet

quote:

Op donderdag 1 augustus 2019 18:38 schreef Mike het volgende:

[..]

Zo werkt het toch altijd? Natuurlijk heb je een gezamenlijke Republikeinse tegenstander, maar eerst moet er onderling nog uitgemaakt worden wie de kandidaat wordt. Hetzelfde gebeurde vorige keer ook in beide kampen. Ik weet ook niet of het heel erg is: alle dirt die nu al gevonden wordt, kan niet meer gevonden worden in de tweestrijd met Trump.

quote:

Op donderdag 1 augustus 2019 20:31 schreef Kijkertje het volgende:

[..]

Hmm als kandidaten het van dit soort taktieken moeten hebben denk ik altijd dat ze het blijkbaar niet kunnen winnen op hun eigen beleidspunten.

twitter:

jimsciutto twitterde op donderdag 01-08-2019 om 18:42:45 New: Former Trump campaign manager Corey Lewandowski says he is considering a Senate bid in New Hampshire, saying “I'm looking at the race very seriously.” - CNN reporting. reageer retweet

twitter:

SenatorLeahy twitterde op donderdag 01-08-2019 om 19:22:13 Chairman Graham just broke FOUR committee rules in order to advance Pres. Trump’s bill to lock up immigrant children INDEFINITELY. Rules every Republican voted for 6 months ago. Rules I always respected as chairman. They might as well rip them up. So I did it for them. https://t.co/SCjnFLSOtE reageer retweet

quote:

Op donderdag 1 augustus 2019 21:51 schreef Ulx het volgende:

twitter:

SenatorLeahy twitterde op donderdag 01-08-2019 om 19:22:13 Chairman Graham just broke FOUR committee rules in order to advance Pres. Trump’s bill to lock up immigrant children INDEFINITELY. Rules every Republican voted for 6 months ago. Rules I always respected as chairman. They might as well rip them up. So I did it for them. https://t.co/SCjnFLSOtE reageer retweet

Fimpje in de tweet.

quote:

Op donderdag 1 augustus 2019 22:11 schreef kladderadatsch het volgende:
Trump rally in Cincinnati vanavond, heeft 'ie weer alle gelegenheid om wekenlang het nieuws te domineren door iets controversieels te roepen. Zal hij die gelegenheid aangrijpen, ja of nee? Place your bets.

quote:

Op donderdag 1 augustus 2019 22:17 schreef AnneX het volgende:

Wat doet een president eigenlijk? Is er een taakomschrijving: Rally’en en golfen en stoken.

quote:

Op donderdag 1 augustus 2019 22:11 schreef kladderadatsch het volgende:
Trump rally in Cincinnati vanavond, heeft 'ie weer alle gelegenheid om wekenlang het nieuws te domineren door iets controversieels te roepen. Zal hij die gelegenheid aangrijpen, ja of nee? Place your bets.

twitter:

kylegriffin1 twitterde op donderdag 01-08-2019 om 22:40:14 Trump won't commit to stopping supporters from chanting 'send her back' tonight at his rally in Ohio: "I don't know that you can stop people ... We'll see what we can do. I'd prefer that they don't. But if they do it, we'll have to make a decision then."Via ABC https://t.co/bEeynwZzro reageer retweet

quote:

Op donderdag 1 augustus 2019 20:31 schreef Kijkertje het volgende:

[..]

Hmm als kandidaten het van dit soort taktieken moeten hebben denk ik altijd dat ze het blijkbaar niet kunnen winnen op hun eigen beleidspunten.

quote:

Op donderdag 1 augustus 2019 23:21 schreef Kijkertje het volgende:
Niet alleen is het grootste deel van de subsidies (compensatie tarieven-oorlog) naar de grootste bedrijven gegaan, 9 van de 10 gingen ook naar counties die op Trump gestemd hebben.

9 in 10 counties that voted for Trump have received subsidies to fight the trade war

quote:

Op donderdag 1 augustus 2019 23:21 schreef Kijkertje het volgende:
Niet alleen is het grootste deel van de subsidies (compensatie tarieven-oorlog) naar de grootste bedrijven gegaan,

quote:

Op donderdag 1 augustus 2019 23:38 schreef ExtraWaskracht het volgende:

[..]

Niet zo raar toch? Laagbevolkte gebieden, waar je dus ook eerder boerenbedrijven zou verwachten, stemden veel meer op hem.

quote:

Op vrijdag 2 augustus 2019 00:06 schreef Kijkertje het volgende:

[..]

Ja dat is logisch maar ik begrijp uit het verhaal dat daar rekening mee is gehouden? Dat de counties waar boerenbedrijven zijn en die toch Clinton stemden in verhouding ook minder subsidie ontvingen?

quote:

Op donderdag 1 augustus 2019 23:44 schreef De_Hertog het volgende:

[..]

Ik was hem vorige keer vergeten, maar ik vind deze wel een beetje kort door de bocht. Als die grote bedrijven de meeste verliezen hebben is het vrij logisch dat ze ook de meeste subsidie krijgen.

In het algemeen is die hele ‘trade war’ natuurlijk erg dom, daar niet van

quote:

Op vrijdag 2 augustus 2019 00:12 schreef ExtraWaskracht het volgende:

[..]

Kan me moeilijk voorstellen dat dat by design is. Aan de andere kant, misschien zijn de republikeinen wel zo cynisch dat ze hun eigen stemvolk willen ontzien en de democraten zo cynisch dat ze Trump in hun districten geen succesje gunnen?

quote:

The testimony of Robert Mueller should have marked the end of a national nightmare. Instead, a new legend was born. The change came in the space of a single news cycle. Beginning before and ending after the congressional testimony of Special Counsel Robert Mueller, the depth of America’s faith-based mania was laid bare. The Russiagate press managed to turn reality all the way around.

In the moment, while the event was being broadcast live, the assessment of the ex-FBI director’s performance as a congressional witness was nearly unanimous. Mueller was a confused, vulnerable human being, not an indefatigable force.

“Very, very painful,” said longtime Democratic strategist David Axelrod.

“I don’t know what the #Dems were expecting from #RobertMueller, but this probably isn’t it,” tweeted Howard Fineman.

“Mueller is struggling,” former prosecutor and Mueller subordinate Glenn Kirchner commented during the event. “It strikes me as a health issue.”

This was a monstrous indictment of media. The Special Counsel’s inability to follow questions or remember key details (he was “not familiar” with oppo firm Fusion-GPS!) exploded two years of hype.

Mueller was sold in hundreds of articles and TV features as earth’s most competent human, a real-life superhero. His close-lipped manner and razor intellect supposedly presented a living antidote to our blabbermouth numbskull president, Donald Trump. He was as a character straight out of Team America, an ex-Marine FBI chief by way of St. Paul’s, Princeton, and a grad program at the University of Awesome. “Batman is back to save America,” his former FBI second Timothy Murphy said in a typical story from two years ago, describing Mueller as “the hero America needs.”

This myth died on television.

SPOILER

It happened by mistake, the kind that’s always a risk when you’re dealing with live broadcasts, as even censorious societies like the Soviet Union have found. Congressional Democrats like House Judiciary chief Jerrold Nadler and Adam Schiff of the Intelligence committee thought a TV show would bring the Mueller report “to life.”

How these two goofs didn’t know, or bother to find out, that Mueller was not up for the task of following difficult questions is hard to understand. Nadler and Schiff are both lawyers. A first-year law student wouldn’t put a witness on stand blind like that for a minute, let alone seven nationally-televised hours.

But they pressed on, convinced the Special Counsel could breathe new life into a case they believed had waned only because Mueller’s long report was a “dry, prosecutorial work product” that the public couldn’t or wouldn’t digest.

This in itself was crazy. Hopeful blue-staters across the country for months have indulged in readings of Mueller’s report like it was the word of God – with celebrity jackasses like Annette Bening, John Lithgow and Kevin Kline donning Rick Perry-style smart glasses to conduct televised deliverance of the gospel.

The report has been hyped plenty. It’s sold hundreds of thousands of copies and has now been on the New York Times bestseller list for thirteen weeks. In #Resistance America it’s as ubiquitous as Gideon’s Bible. What Nadler and Schiff seem to have wanted was something beyond familiarity with the work, like video of Mueller calling Trump a crook that could be used in commercials.

Instead, they revealed something no one expected. Now we understood why the Special Counsel avoided live exchanges across two years of being one of the most famous people on earth.

When Mueller’s morning session in Nadler’s committee ended, NBC’s studio seemed like a funeral parlor.

“If, uh, Democrats were looking for a pristine ten to fifteen second sound bite that made the point they wanted to make, uh, it probably didn’t happen,” said Lester Holt.

Chuck Todd, who along with colleague Rachel Maddow has been one of the most energetic Russigate torchbearers, offered that on the bringing-Mueller-to-life front, the testimony was “a complete failure.” He added it “didn’t do anything to help” impeachment arguments.

Within 48 hours, national consensus was completely reversed. It was breathtaking.

“Mueller didn’t fail. The country did,” wrote Jennifer Rubin of The Washington Post. Her key passage, which would become a point stressed by many, complained about the over-focus on “optics”:

The “failure” is not of a prosecutor who found the facts but might be ill equipped to make the political case, but instead, of a country that won’t read his report and a media obsessed with scoring contests rather than focusing on the damning facts at issue.

In a heartbeat this idea spread everywhere. “Robert Mueller and the tyranny of ‘optics’” blared The Atlantic. “Forget the theater criticism – Mueller’s conclusions are the real news,” wrote colleague David Graham. “Jeffries dismisses optics: We wanted testimony from Mueller, not Robert de Niro,” chimed in The Hill.

It became a de rigeur media and social media observation to say the hearing wasn’t a disaster, that Mueller in fact moved the ball forward, his mighty reputation intact. He’d been in a difficult position, you see, and fighting evil, not movie acting, is his thing. The Daily Beast said so with this headline and lede:

Robert Mueller, Trump Hunter

Really, there were Democrats angry with Special Counsel Robert Mueller for being Robert Mueller Wednesday morning before the House Judiciary Committee? Are we so unaccustomed to a modest public servant speaking honestly in a measured voice that it enrages us…?

Writer Margaret Carlson insisted Mueller had been asked to deliver the impossible, tasked with “saving the big game with Hail Mary passes in the fourth quarter.” However, she said, he “was never going to throw the long ball” (metaphor production has soared in the Mueller period). The problem wasn’t with Mueller, but with us, for failing to “manage expectations.”

As such, Mueller was not merely Abraham Lincoln, Vampire Hunter, but also “Moses on the Mount, delivering the Ten Commandments but not dramatizing them.” Moreover, in a predictable development, pundits insisted the rumors of Mueller’s disappointing testimony were vicious lies perpetrated by Republicans in league with (or “on their knees” for) Trump.

Mueller was back to being both a sacred figure and superhero (in America, the prophet is always also an ass-kicking leading man). This took two days. Three days after his testimony, Kathleen Parker was arguing in the Washington Post that Mueller’s “forbearance” on the stand made him deserving of the Medal of Honor. The following passage was actually published by someone self-identifying as a journalist:

The close-up of Mueller’s face was a portrait of rare depth, the sort one is more likely to find on a Leonardo da Vinci canvas with all its shadows, hollows and his soulful, nearly weeping eyes. I found myself thinking of paintings of the Agony in the Garden, showing Jesus’ upturned face as he prayed.

Mueller on the stand was a potted plant. Reporters saw Moses and Jesus. If you need evidence we’re in a religious mania, look no further. This was a pure exercise in restoring an idol for worship.

It was also a metaphor for the Russiagate narrative. Mueller’s legend was built without any of his hagiographers demanding to speak to the man. Virtually the whole of it was constructed on the word of confederates or anonymous sources. In the manner of priests everywhere since the beginning of time, these sources interpreted for us the secret beliefs, conclusions, and desires of the unavailable man above.

“It is instructive to hear friends and former colleagues talk about Robert Swan Mueller III,” wrote Time when giving the Mueller third place in its Person of the Year issue. Mueller was a figure of such great gravity, we were told, he does not deign to speech:

Mueller, they say, is the kind of man who flicks the lights off and on at his home to inform guests that it’s time to leave a social gathering…

Citizens were urged to find truth, justice, and integrity not in Mueller’s words, but in his hair. “Mueller’s hair is one little shining piece of sanity in a sea of madness,” a portrait artist told the AP. “So precise and sober and straightforward and without deceit…”

The same article interviewed a woman named Alicia Barrett whose son bought a Labrador puppy for Christmas:

“The strong, silent type,” Barnett observed. And then she named him Mueller, an homage to the stoic special prosecutor appointed to investigate Russian interference in the 2016 election…

Mueller’s silence turned out to be more genuinely Labrador-like than Barnett and everyone else was led to believe. A media legend of immense dimensions was built without anyone first making sure there was a there there. Sound familiar?

Fellow journalists who think they’re aiding an anti-Trump resistance by keeping the empty piñata of Russiagate raised to the rafters couldn’t be more wrong. This story is Trump’s best friend. As opposed to the Mueller probe, which was an immediate legal threat to the president and his family, Trump on some level must be dying for impeachment.

Heading into an election year, nothing would suit him more than the protracted media spectacle of Democrats trying to break down the walls of the White House with a noodle.

Instead of spending next year campaigning against a policy wonk like Elizabeth Warren or a populist like Bernie Sanders (it’s safe to say Trump would look forward to a run against verbal mistake-factory Joe Biden), he’ll be running against a parade of fourth-raters in and around the party who spent Trump’s presidency rejecting real-world concerns of voters and throwing political capital into a dead-end conspiracy theory.

Less than 1% of voters now consider “the Russia situation” the most serious issue facing the country. This isn’t a new development. Polls consistently showed this to be the case across the last few years, including earlier this winter, before Mueller’s probe ended without further indictments.

In other words, even when voters in both parties knew charges could be filed at any moment, this issue rated below the economy, immigration, civil rights, health care, and other concerns. In mid-March, just before Mueller’s probe wrapped up, CNN found a whopping zero percent of Americans identified “Russian investigation” as their primary concern heading into 2020. The network wrote (emphasis mine):

The CNN poll… asked respondents to describe one issue that would be the most important to them when deciding whom to support in next year’s presidential election. The Russia investigation didn’t register in the results.

The above was the fifteenth paragraph in CNN’s story. Talk about burying the lede! Instead of Poll: Americans Don’t Give a Shit About Russiagate, the headline read, “Americans want Mueller’s report release and approve of his work. But their minds are made up about Trump.”

The only people who really care about this story are DC politicians, Twitter, people who don’t have bills to worry about (like Hollywood actors), and the news media, which continues to put this story front and center. Ratings are one reason, but people like Jake Tapper and Chris Cuomo have probably also seen Red Sparrow too many times.*

The conspiracy tale has validated every Trump criticism about both crooked media and the deep state. The whole narrative is the brainchild of Clinton hacks, a handful of overzealous intelligence nuts, and a subset of the Democratic Party’s weakest elected minds, in particular murine ex-prosecutor Schiff, a man who should be selling Buicks back in his hometown Burbank.

Take a good look at Schiff, at our paranoid outpatient of an ex-CIA chief John Brennan, and at excuse-making Clinton campaign chief Robby Mook (a.k.a. the captain of the Democratic Titanic), and ask if you really want to be re-writing history for those people.

They’re making the press accomplices in the most imbecilic effort at political opposition in recent American history. Hence the desperate public comments and the string of wacked-out stunts, like putting Mueller under oath. Impeachment will be the next adventure in doubling down blind.

A significant portion of the original conspiracy theory vanished via a series of under-circulated news reports just in the months since the end of the Mueller probe. Remember the Southern District of New York campaign finance probe that arose in connection with Trump lawyer Michael Cohen, the one described as a “major danger” to Trump? Remember all that talk about how “Trump can’t run the Mueller playbook on the New York feds?” Experts told us that the Cohen probe posed a “significant threat” of new indictments for Trump and his family.

When that investigation closed with no new charges the same week Mueller testified, the commentariat barely noticed. Same with the Democrats v. Earth lawsuit/publicity stunt, in which the Democratic National Committee sued Trump, the Russian government, and Wikileaks under a RICO claim.

Plaintiffs charged the Trump campaign conspired to steal and release DNC emails. But a federal judge tossed the suit on the grounds that the Trump campaign “did not participate in the theft.” Moreover, the Clinton-appointed judge said published documents were “of public concern” and therefore protected like any other journalistic work product. The judge also ruled that allegations about all the non-Russian defendants (including Wikileaks) were “insufficient to hold them liable” for any illegality involved in obtaining DNC emails.

The end of this years-long gambit only drew a few brief stories in response. The same happened when Mueller in testimony dismissed a zany story about “human activity” detected between a secret server between Trump and Alfa-Bank. Over a dozen news stories covered this tale in length on the way up the news cycle, but dispositive information on the way down drew a shrug.

Russiagate should be dead. Instead, it’s gaining new life, with impeachment looking like the New Testament phase of the religion.

Until Russiagate, Robert Mueller was mainly known to the DC press corps as one of many imperious stiffs who made up George W. Bush’s War on Terror bureaucracy. At the outset of our glorious WMD hunt and in defense of the sweeping surveillance programs we likely still wouldn’t know about if not for Edward Snowden, Mueller effortlessly pushed official lies, conveying the impression of a man who wouldn’t wipe his ass with a congressional oversight committee.

Pious would have been a good word for him even pre-2017. Not many people could take two years of being portrayed as a Godhead on magazine covers and in comedy shows, but the role fit Mueller’s starchy Northeast celibate image like a glove.

The undisguised nature of the religiosity is amazing to look at now. GQ, describing Mueller as someone who embodied the “boy scout ideal” of “the absolute fairness of the lawful good,” wrote the following:

We may decide, in the end, that we do not want to know Robert Mueller; we may even take comfort in the fact that there may not be much of Robert Mueller to know.

This was the old “We’re not worthy!” routine from Wayne’s World. People did not want to find out Mueller was human in any way.

Newspapers and cable framed coverage of the investigation as a fable of coming deliverance. “Mueller knows” was one cliché. Reading “bread crumbs” or “puzzle pieces” dropped from above also became a regular fixation, as reporters sought to “read between the lines” of court filings.

By early this year, “waiting for Mueller” assumed enormous significance. The coming report was hyped as a judgment day. It was an article of faith with pundits and reporters that the verdict would contain all the expected evidence, as a fulfillment of prophecy.

The New York Times ran a multi-part audio series titled, “What to Expect When You’re Expecting (The Mueller Report).” The Atlantic meanwhile worried what the Trump opposition would do once Mueller finished his investigation. Would they be able to “grapple with a new world”?

Like the original Great Disappointment (Christ failing to come down to earth to dispense justice according to the Millerite prediction on October 22nd, 1844), the Mueller watch came to an abrupt cat-fart of an end.

Late on a March evening (coincidentally on the 22nd) the collusion narrative died, with news of the Mueller probe concluding without new indictments. This colossal bummer for Russiagate hopefuls forced poor Rachel Maddow to cut short her trout fishing vacation, and do a somber broadcast reassuring viewers that a concluded Mueller probe was “the start of something, not the end of something.”

There is a false narrative even about this sequence of events, as I have the misfortune to know personally. A common trope is that the death of the collusion narrative was a Trumpian falsehood, issued via hated Attorney General William Barr’s letter summarizing the Mueller report on March 24th.

As one of a handful of reporters who spoke about loony Russiagate coverage from the start, I began receiving emails or tweets on a daily or hourly basis from people accusing me of “believing Barr’s lies.” But like others who spoke out that day, I published my jeremiad about Russiagate being the next WMD on March 23rd, a day before Barr released his letter.

The end of the collusion/conspiracy narrative had nothing to do with Barr. It was officially over in the days before, as saddened media write-ups here, here, here, and here (“Russian collusion is a dead end,” conceded USA Today) attest.

The lack of charges was immediately spun by some as meaning nothing (Mueller found conspiracy but didn’t charge it because Manafort already had a prison sentence! Mueller found conspiracy but didn’t charge it because the evidence was classified! And so on). It all became a new story, about Barr lying about what those non-indictments meant.

On a more meta level, editorialists began plotting a rhetorical course that abandoned the search for conspiracy between Trump and Russia, and focused instead on obstruction of justice as the big reveal.

Legal analysts like Jeffrey Toobin were put back to work building the public case. We were reminded frequently that a charge of obstruction does not legally require an underlying offense. These arguments by themselves essentially admitted the previous two years of speculation about criminal Trump-Russia conspiracies involving blackmail, bribery, election fixing, espionage, even treason - all the theories about pee tapes and secret servers and five year cultivation plans and meetings with hackers in Prague and bribes from Rosneft — had been dead ends.

The precedent now would be impeachment of a sitting president for his response to a politically-charged investigation into crimes he didn’t commit, the same logic that rightly enraged Democrats in the Ken Starr days (articles of impeachment were filed against Bill Clinton, too, for obstruction, for coaching Monica Lewinsky and assistant Betty Currie). It wasn’t as good as a collusion case, but why not? Proponents pressed on, as if this had been their goal all along.

By the time Schiff and Nadler came up with their harebrained religious revival scheme, Russiagate had come full circle. Adherents were now back to making the same arguments editorialists were making in July and August of 2016: Donald Trump was simply too willing to be a partner to Putin. The crime was no longer any overt act of conspiracy, but in the mental state of being amenable to cooperation with the evil one.

This is how Vox reimagined “collusion” after the release of Mueller’s report:

What the report finds is not clear-cut evidence of a quid-pro-quo. Instead, what we see is a series of bungled and abortive attempts to create ties between the two sides…

Does that rise to the level of “collusion?” It’s a slippery term. But if “collusion” refers to a willingness to cooperate with Russian interference in the 2016 US election and actively taking steps to abet it, it seems to me that the Mueller report does in fact establish that it took place…

Schiff in his opening statement before Mueller’s testimony took this all a step further. He said Trump “knew a foreign power was intervening in our election and welcomed it,” a crime he described as “Disloyalty to our country.”

Noting that this offense “may not be criminal” (a fact Schiff hastened to blame on destruction of evidence and “the use of encrypted communications”), he went on to insist that, “disloyalty to country violates the very oath of citizenship,” and is therefore unconstitutional, and a “violation of law.” That this concept was originally dreamed up in the Red Scare era (McCarthy also accused members of Truman’s administration of disloyalty) seemed not to bother anyone.

Russiagate isn’t just about bad reporting. It was and is a dangerous political story about rallying the public behind authoritarian maneuvers in an effort to achieve a political outcome. Republicans who battered Mueller with questions weren’t wrong. Investigators in the Russia probe made extravagant use of informants abroad (in the less-regulated counterintelligence context), lied to the FISA court, leaked classified information for political purposes, opened the cookie jar of captured electronic communications on dubious pretexts, and generally blurred the lines between counterintelligence, criminal law enforcement, and private political research in ways that should and will frighten defense lawyers everywhere.

Proponents cheered the seizure of records from Trump’s lawyer Cohen, sending a message that attorney-client privilege is a voluntary worry if the defendant is obnoxious enough. The public likewise shrugged when prosecutors trashed Maria Butina as a prostitute, because Butina a) is Russian, and b) palled around with the NRA. This case has seen would-be liberals embracing guilt by association, guilt by nationality, guilt by accusation, entrapment, secret evidence, and other concepts that were considered an anathema to progressives as recently as the War on Terror period. In the name of preventing the “sowing of discord,” they’ve even embraced censorship.

Finally, in an effort to milk the Mueller report for maximum effect, Democrats – ostensibly the party of card-carrying ACLU members – are trying to uphold a vicious new legal concept, “not exonerated.” In a moment that provided a window into the authoritarian tendencies Mueller once expressed with more fluency, the Special Counsel declined under questioning by Ohio Republican Michael Turner to reject the idea that in our legal system, “there is not power or authority to exonerate.”

This was equivalent to no-commenting a question about whether people are innocent until proven guilty. In America, prosecutors don’t declare you exonerated, you are exonerated, until someone proves otherwise. Efforts to reverse this understanding are dangerous, Trump or no Trump. It’s appalling that Democrats are backing this idea.

All these excesses have been excused on the grounds that Trump must be stopped at all costs. But you don’t challenge someone for being racist and an enemy of immigrants, the poor, and the environment by turning the federal security apparatus into a Franz Kafka theme park. It’s fighting bad with worse.

twitter:

cliffordlevy twitterde op vrijdag 02-08-2019 om 00:48:02 Breaking: Trump’s family business was subpoenaed by state prosecutors in Manhattan over hush-money payments to Stormy Daniels and another woman.https://t.co/7vo0jx9lVQ reageer retweet

quote:

State prosecutors in Manhattan subpoenaed President Trump’s family business on Thursday, reviving an investigation into the company’s role in hush-money payments made during the 2016 presidential campaign, according to people briefed on the matter.

The subpoena, issued by the Manhattan district attorney’s office, demanded the Trump Organization provide documents related to money that had been used to buy the silence of Stormy Daniels, a pornographic film actress who said she had an affair with Mr. Trump.

The inquiry from the district attorney’s office, which is in early stages, is examining whether any senior executives at the company filed false business records about the hush money, which would be a state crime, the people said.

Marc L. Mukasey, an attorney for the Trump Organization, called the inquiry a “political hit job.”

“It’s just harassment of the president, his family and his business, using subpoenas as weapons. We will respond as appropriate,” Mr. Mukasey said.

[..]

twitter:

Yamiche twitterde op vrijdag 02-08-2019 om 02:06:31 Wow. Rep. Will Hurd is not running for re-election after being one of only four Republicans who voted in favor of a House bill to condemn as racist President Trump’s attacks against the four congresswomen of color. https://t.co/cwlv4WwgSx reageer retweet

twitter:

HurdOnTheHill twitterde op vrijdag 02-08-2019 om 02:00:47 I have made the decision to not seek reelection for the 23rd Congressional District of Texas in order to pursue opportunities outside the halls of Congress to solve problems at the nexus between technology and national security. https://t.co/GeZ4Hh264f reageer retweet

WATCH: Rep. Will Hurd’s full questioning of Robert Mueller | Mueller testimony

twitter:

kylegriffin1 twitterde op donderdag 01-08-2019 om 23:30:19 Q: Mueller said last week that Russia is interfering in U.S. elections right now. Did you raise that with Vladimir Putin?Trump: "You don't really believe this. Do you believe this?"Q: Did you raise it with Putin during your call yesterday?Trump: "We didn't talk about that." https://t.co/Hi82kYHRCP reageer retweet

quote:

Op vrijdag 2 augustus 2019 01:06 schreef Kijkertje het volgende:

twitter:

cliffordlevy twitterde op vrijdag 02-08-2019 om 00:48:02 Breaking: Trump’s family business was subpoenaed by state prosecutors in Manhattan over hush-money payments to Stormy Daniels and another woman.https://t.co/7vo0jx9lVQ reageer retweet

Manhattan D.A. Subpoenas Trump Organization Over Stormy Daniels Hush Money

Cyrus R. Vance Jr., the Manhattan district attorney, is reviving an investigation into payments made to two women during the 2016 campaign.
[..]

Op staatsniveau dus hier kan Barr zich niet mee bemoeien

quote:

Op vrijdag 2 augustus 2019 09:40 schreef AnneX het volgende:
Nou vooruit...toch bijna vol.
Een leuk draadje van all the famous swamped together in a trump appartementje.
https://mobile.twitter.co(...)/1156547749850034176

Het zoekt en vindt elkaar. Home is where the heart is 🇺🇸
Bovenste link is niks aan toe te voegen wat betreft comments.

https://mobile.twitter.com/Zeddary/status/1155486497451184128 en dan met name deze.

quote:

Op donderdag 1 augustus 2019 20:05 schreef crystal_meth het volgende:
Nieuwe tariffs op de resterende 300 miljard aan imports uit China vanaf 1 september:

twitter:

realDonaldTrump twitterde op donderdag 01-08-2019 om 19:26:09 Our representatives have just returned from China where they had constructive talks having to do with a future Trade Deal. We thought we had a deal with China three months ago, but sadly, China decided to re-negotiate the deal prior to signing. More recently, China agreed to... reageer retweet

twitter:

realDonaldTrump twitterde op donderdag 01-08-2019 om 19:26:10 ...buy agricultural product from the U.S. in large quantities, but did not do so. Additionally, my friend President Xi said that he would stop the sale of Fentanyl to the United States – this never happened, and many Americans continue to die! Trade talks are continuing, and... reageer retweet

twitter:

realDonaldTrump twitterde op donderdag 01-08-2019 om 19:26:10 ...during the talks the U.S. will start, on September 1st, putting a small additional Tariff of 10% on the remaining 300 Billion Dollars of goods and products coming from China into our Country. This does not include the 250 Billion Dollars already Tariffed at 25%... reageer retweet

De beurzen gingen meteen in het rood (Dow -0.7%).

quote:

Op vrijdag 2 augustus 2019 10:03 schreef Eyjafjallajoekull het volgende:

[..]

Aex -2,3% nu. Best een harde klap wat betekend dat men dit niet zag aankomen. Persoonlijk denk ik dat het nog heeeeel lang gaat duren. China gaat dit bijvoorbeeld rekken tot na 2020 maar tegelijk zal Trump juist voor de verkiezingen dit willen oplossen en dus de druk flink opvoeren.

quote:

Op vrijdag 2 augustus 2019 09:43 schreef Ringo het volgende:

[..]

[ afbeelding ]

quote:

Op vrijdag 2 augustus 2019 10:23 schreef KoosVogels het volgende:

[..]

Is dat de VS?

quote:

Op vrijdag 2 augustus 2019 10:37 schreef Ludachrist het volgende:
Gomorra.

quote:

Op vrijdag 2 augustus 2019 11:10 schreef Ulx het volgende:
Krugman legt uit waarom Trumponics een enorme mislukking is.

https://www.nytimes.com/2(...)ps://t.co/St8P0tf7LL

quote:

Op vrijdag 2 augustus 2019 10:47 schreef nostra het volgende:

[..]

Scampia; de serie is niet echt hè.

quote:

Op vrijdag 2 augustus 2019 01:03 schreef kladderadatsch het volgende:
Longread over de recente Mueller Hearing mania door Matt Taibbi:

The rise and fall of superhero Robert Mueller
[..]

SPOILER

It happened by mistake, the kind that’s always a risk when you’re dealing with live broadcasts, as even censorious societies like the Soviet Union have found. Congressional Democrats like House Judiciary chief Jerrold Nadler and Adam Schiff of the Intelligence committee thought a TV show would bring the Mueller report “to life.”

How these two goofs didn’t know, or bother to find out, that Mueller was not up for the task of following difficult questions is hard to understand. Nadler and Schiff are both lawyers. A first-year law student wouldn’t put a witness on stand blind like that for a minute, let alone seven nationally-televised hours.

But they pressed on, convinced the Special Counsel could breathe new life into a case they believed had waned only because Mueller’s long report was a “dry, prosecutorial work product” that the public couldn’t or wouldn’t digest.

This in itself was crazy. Hopeful blue-staters across the country for months have indulged in readings of Mueller’s report like it was the word of God – with celebrity jackasses like Annette Bening, John Lithgow and Kevin Kline donning Rick Perry-style smart glasses to conduct televised deliverance of the gospel.

The report has been hyped plenty. It’s sold hundreds of thousands of copies and has now been on the New York Times bestseller list for thirteen weeks. In #Resistance America it’s as ubiquitous as Gideon’s Bible. What Nadler and Schiff seem to have wanted was something beyond familiarity with the work, like video of Mueller calling Trump a crook that could be used in commercials.

Instead, they revealed something no one expected. Now we understood why the Special Counsel avoided live exchanges across two years of being one of the most famous people on earth.

When Mueller’s morning session in Nadler’s committee ended, NBC’s studio seemed like a funeral parlor.

“If, uh, Democrats were looking for a pristine ten to fifteen second sound bite that made the point they wanted to make, uh, it probably didn’t happen,” said Lester Holt.

Chuck Todd, who along with colleague Rachel Maddow has been one of the most energetic Russigate torchbearers, offered that on the bringing-Mueller-to-life front, the testimony was “a complete failure.” He added it “didn’t do anything to help” impeachment arguments.

Within 48 hours, national consensus was completely reversed. It was breathtaking.

“Mueller didn’t fail. The country did,” wrote Jennifer Rubin of The Washington Post. Her key passage, which would become a point stressed by many, complained about the over-focus on “optics”:

The “failure” is not of a prosecutor who found the facts but might be ill equipped to make the political case, but instead, of a country that won’t read his report and a media obsessed with scoring contests rather than focusing on the damning facts at issue.

In a heartbeat this idea spread everywhere. “Robert Mueller and the tyranny of ‘optics’” blared The Atlantic. “Forget the theater criticism – Mueller’s conclusions are the real news,” wrote colleague David Graham. “Jeffries dismisses optics: We wanted testimony from Mueller, not Robert de Niro,” chimed in The Hill.

It became a de rigeur media and social media observation to say the hearing wasn’t a disaster, that Mueller in fact moved the ball forward, his mighty reputation intact. He’d been in a difficult position, you see, and fighting evil, not movie acting, is his thing. The Daily Beast said so with this headline and lede:

Robert Mueller, Trump Hunter

Really, there were Democrats angry with Special Counsel Robert Mueller for being Robert Mueller Wednesday morning before the House Judiciary Committee? Are we so unaccustomed to a modest public servant speaking honestly in a measured voice that it enrages us…?

Writer Margaret Carlson insisted Mueller had been asked to deliver the impossible, tasked with “saving the big game with Hail Mary passes in the fourth quarter.” However, she said, he “was never going to throw the long ball” (metaphor production has soared in the Mueller period). The problem wasn’t with Mueller, but with us, for failing to “manage expectations.”

As such, Mueller was not merely Abraham Lincoln, Vampire Hunter, but also “Moses on the Mount, delivering the Ten Commandments but not dramatizing them.” Moreover, in a predictable development, pundits insisted the rumors of Mueller’s disappointing testimony were vicious lies perpetrated by Republicans in league with (or “on their knees” for) Trump.

Mueller was back to being both a sacred figure and superhero (in America, the prophet is always also an ass-kicking leading man). This took two days. Three days after his testimony, Kathleen Parker was arguing in the Washington Post that Mueller’s “forbearance” on the stand made him deserving of the Medal of Honor. The following passage was actually published by someone self-identifying as a journalist:

The close-up of Mueller’s face was a portrait of rare depth, the sort one is more likely to find on a Leonardo da Vinci canvas with all its shadows, hollows and his soulful, nearly weeping eyes. I found myself thinking of paintings of the Agony in the Garden, showing Jesus’ upturned face as he prayed.

Mueller on the stand was a potted plant. Reporters saw Moses and Jesus. If you need evidence we’re in a religious mania, look no further. This was a pure exercise in restoring an idol for worship.

It was also a metaphor for the Russiagate narrative. Mueller’s legend was built without any of his hagiographers demanding to speak to the man. Virtually the whole of it was constructed on the word of confederates or anonymous sources. In the manner of priests everywhere since the beginning of time, these sources interpreted for us the secret beliefs, conclusions, and desires of the unavailable man above.

“It is instructive to hear friends and former colleagues talk about Robert Swan Mueller III,” wrote Time when giving the Mueller third place in its Person of the Year issue. Mueller was a figure of such great gravity, we were told, he does not deign to speech:

Mueller, they say, is the kind of man who flicks the lights off and on at his home to inform guests that it’s time to leave a social gathering…

Citizens were urged to find truth, justice, and integrity not in Mueller’s words, but in his hair. “Mueller’s hair is one little shining piece of sanity in a sea of madness,” a portrait artist told the AP. “So precise and sober and straightforward and without deceit…”

The same article interviewed a woman named Alicia Barrett whose son bought a Labrador puppy for Christmas:

“The strong, silent type,” Barnett observed. And then she named him Mueller, an homage to the stoic special prosecutor appointed to investigate Russian interference in the 2016 election…

Mueller’s silence turned out to be more genuinely Labrador-like than Barnett and everyone else was led to believe. A media legend of immense dimensions was built without anyone first making sure there was a there there. Sound familiar?

Fellow journalists who think they’re aiding an anti-Trump resistance by keeping the empty piñata of Russiagate raised to the rafters couldn’t be more wrong. This story is Trump’s best friend. As opposed to the Mueller probe, which was an immediate legal threat to the president and his family, Trump on some level must be dying for impeachment.

Heading into an election year, nothing would suit him more than the protracted media spectacle of Democrats trying to break down the walls of the White House with a noodle.

Instead of spending next year campaigning against a policy wonk like Elizabeth Warren or a populist like Bernie Sanders (it’s safe to say Trump would look forward to a run against verbal mistake-factory Joe Biden), he’ll be running against a parade of fourth-raters in and around the party who spent Trump’s presidency rejecting real-world concerns of voters and throwing political capital into a dead-end conspiracy theory.

Less than 1% of voters now consider “the Russia situation” the most serious issue facing the country. This isn’t a new development. Polls consistently showed this to be the case across the last few years, including earlier this winter, before Mueller’s probe ended without further indictments.

In other words, even when voters in both parties knew charges could be filed at any moment, this issue rated below the economy, immigration, civil rights, health care, and other concerns. In mid-March, just before Mueller’s probe wrapped up, CNN found a whopping zero percent of Americans identified “Russian investigation” as their primary concern heading into 2020. The network wrote (emphasis mine):

The CNN poll… asked respondents to describe one issue that would be the most important to them when deciding whom to support in next year’s presidential election. The Russia investigation didn’t register in the results.

The above was the fifteenth paragraph in CNN’s story. Talk about burying the lede! Instead of Poll: Americans Don’t Give a Shit About Russiagate, the headline read, “Americans want Mueller’s report release and approve of his work. But their minds are made up about Trump.”

The only people who really care about this story are DC politicians, Twitter, people who don’t have bills to worry about (like Hollywood actors), and the news media, which continues to put this story front and center. Ratings are one reason, but people like Jake Tapper and Chris Cuomo have probably also seen Red Sparrow too many times.*

The conspiracy tale has validated every Trump criticism about both crooked media and the deep state. The whole narrative is the brainchild of Clinton hacks, a handful of overzealous intelligence nuts, and a subset of the Democratic Party’s weakest elected minds, in particular murine ex-prosecutor Schiff, a man who should be selling Buicks back in his hometown Burbank.

Take a good look at Schiff, at our paranoid outpatient of an ex-CIA chief John Brennan, and at excuse-making Clinton campaign chief Robby Mook (a.k.a. the captain of the Democratic Titanic), and ask if you really want to be re-writing history for those people.

They’re making the press accomplices in the most imbecilic effort at political opposition in recent American history. Hence the desperate public comments and the string of wacked-out stunts, like putting Mueller under oath. Impeachment will be the next adventure in doubling down blind.

A significant portion of the original conspiracy theory vanished via a series of under-circulated news reports just in the months since the end of the Mueller probe. Remember the Southern District of New York campaign finance probe that arose in connection with Trump lawyer Michael Cohen, the one described as a “major danger” to Trump? Remember all that talk about how “Trump can’t run the Mueller playbook on the New York feds?” Experts told us that the Cohen probe posed a “significant threat” of new indictments for Trump and his family.

When that investigation closed with no new charges the same week Mueller testified, the commentariat barely noticed. Same with the Democrats v. Earth lawsuit/publicity stunt, in which the Democratic National Committee sued Trump, the Russian government, and Wikileaks under a RICO claim.

Plaintiffs charged the Trump campaign conspired to steal and release DNC emails. But a federal judge tossed the suit on the grounds that the Trump campaign “did not participate in the theft.” Moreover, the Clinton-appointed judge said published documents were “of public concern” and therefore protected like any other journalistic work product. The judge also ruled that allegations about all the non-Russian defendants (including Wikileaks) were “insufficient to hold them liable” for any illegality involved in obtaining DNC emails.

The end of this years-long gambit only drew a few brief stories in response. The same happened when Mueller in testimony dismissed a zany story about “human activity” detected between a secret server between Trump and Alfa-Bank. Over a dozen news stories covered this tale in length on the way up the news cycle, but dispositive information on the way down drew a shrug.

Russiagate should be dead. Instead, it’s gaining new life, with impeachment looking like the New Testament phase of the religion.

Until Russiagate, Robert Mueller was mainly known to the DC press corps as one of many imperious stiffs who made up George W. Bush’s War on Terror bureaucracy. At the outset of our glorious WMD hunt and in defense of the sweeping surveillance programs we likely still wouldn’t know about if not for Edward Snowden, Mueller effortlessly pushed official lies, conveying the impression of a man who wouldn’t wipe his ass with a congressional oversight committee.

Pious would have been a good word for him even pre-2017. Not many people could take two years of being portrayed as a Godhead on magazine covers and in comedy shows, but the role fit Mueller’s starchy Northeast celibate image like a glove.

The undisguised nature of the religiosity is amazing to look at now. GQ, describing Mueller as someone who embodied the “boy scout ideal” of “the absolute fairness of the lawful good,” wrote the following:

We may decide, in the end, that we do not want to know Robert Mueller; we may even take comfort in the fact that there may not be much of Robert Mueller to know.

This was the old “We’re not worthy!” routine from Wayne’s World. People did not want to find out Mueller was human in any way.

Newspapers and cable framed coverage of the investigation as a fable of coming deliverance. “Mueller knows” was one cliché. Reading “bread crumbs” or “puzzle pieces” dropped from above also became a regular fixation, as reporters sought to “read between the lines” of court filings.

By early this year, “waiting for Mueller” assumed enormous significance. The coming report was hyped as a judgment day. It was an article of faith with pundits and reporters that the verdict would contain all the expected evidence, as a fulfillment of prophecy.

The New York Times ran a multi-part audio series titled, “What to Expect When You’re Expecting (The Mueller Report).” The Atlantic meanwhile worried what the Trump opposition would do once Mueller finished his investigation. Would they be able to “grapple with a new world”?

Like the original Great Disappointment (Christ failing to come down to earth to dispense justice according to the Millerite prediction on October 22nd, 1844), the Mueller watch came to an abrupt cat-fart of an end.

Late on a March evening (coincidentally on the 22nd) the collusion narrative died, with news of the Mueller probe concluding without new indictments. This colossal bummer for Russiagate hopefuls forced poor Rachel Maddow to cut short her trout fishing vacation, and do a somber broadcast reassuring viewers that a concluded Mueller probe was “the start of something, not the end of something.”

There is a false narrative even about this sequence of events, as I have the misfortune to know personally. A common trope is that the death of the collusion narrative was a Trumpian falsehood, issued via hated Attorney General William Barr’s letter summarizing the Mueller report on March 24th.

As one of a handful of reporters who spoke about loony Russiagate coverage from the start, I began receiving emails or tweets on a daily or hourly basis from people accusing me of “believing Barr’s lies.” But like others who spoke out that day, I published my jeremiad about Russiagate being the next WMD on March 23rd, a day before Barr released his letter.

The end of the collusion/conspiracy narrative had nothing to do with Barr. It was officially over in the days before, as saddened media write-ups here, here, here, and here (“Russian collusion is a dead end,” conceded USA Today) attest.

The lack of charges was immediately spun by some as meaning nothing (Mueller found conspiracy but didn’t charge it because Manafort already had a prison sentence! Mueller found conspiracy but didn’t charge it because the evidence was classified! And so on). It all became a new story, about Barr lying about what those non-indictments meant.

On a more meta level, editorialists began plotting a rhetorical course that abandoned the search for conspiracy between Trump and Russia, and focused instead on obstruction of justice as the big reveal.

Legal analysts like Jeffrey Toobin were put back to work building the public case. We were reminded frequently that a charge of obstruction does not legally require an underlying offense. These arguments by themselves essentially admitted the previous two years of speculation about criminal Trump-Russia conspiracies involving blackmail, bribery, election fixing, espionage, even treason - all the theories about pee tapes and secret servers and five year cultivation plans and meetings with hackers in Prague and bribes from Rosneft — had been dead ends.

The precedent now would be impeachment of a sitting president for his response to a politically-charged investigation into crimes he didn’t commit, the same logic that rightly enraged Democrats in the Ken Starr days (articles of impeachment were filed against Bill Clinton, too, for obstruction, for coaching Monica Lewinsky and assistant Betty Currie). It wasn’t as good as a collusion case, but why not? Proponents pressed on, as if this had been their goal all along.

By the time Schiff and Nadler came up with their harebrained religious revival scheme, Russiagate had come full circle. Adherents were now back to making the same arguments editorialists were making in July and August of 2016: Donald Trump was simply too willing to be a partner to Putin. The crime was no longer any overt act of conspiracy, but in the mental state of being amenable to cooperation with the evil one.

This is how Vox reimagined “collusion” after the release of Mueller’s report:

What the report finds is not clear-cut evidence of a quid-pro-quo. Instead, what we see is a series of bungled and abortive attempts to create ties between the two sides…

Does that rise to the level of “collusion?” It’s a slippery term. But if “collusion” refers to a willingness to cooperate with Russian interference in the 2016 US election and actively taking steps to abet it, it seems to me that the Mueller report does in fact establish that it took place…

Schiff in his opening statement before Mueller’s testimony took this all a step further. He said Trump “knew a foreign power was intervening in our election and welcomed it,” a crime he described as “Disloyalty to our country.”

Noting that this offense “may not be criminal” (a fact Schiff hastened to blame on destruction of evidence and “the use of encrypted communications”), he went on to insist that, “disloyalty to country violates the very oath of citizenship,” and is therefore unconstitutional, and a “violation of law.” That this concept was originally dreamed up in the Red Scare era (McCarthy also accused members of Truman’s administration of disloyalty) seemed not to bother anyone.

Russiagate isn’t just about bad reporting. It was and is a dangerous political story about rallying the public behind authoritarian maneuvers in an effort to achieve a political outcome. Republicans who battered Mueller with questions weren’t wrong. Investigators in the Russia probe made extravagant use of informants abroad (in the less-regulated counterintelligence context), lied to the FISA court, leaked classified information for political purposes, opened the cookie jar of captured electronic communications on dubious pretexts, and generally blurred the lines between counterintelligence, criminal law enforcement, and private political research in ways that should and will frighten defense lawyers everywhere.

Proponents cheered the seizure of records from Trump’s lawyer Cohen, sending a message that attorney-client privilege is a voluntary worry if the defendant is obnoxious enough. The public likewise shrugged when prosecutors trashed Maria Butina as a prostitute, because Butina a) is Russian, and b) palled around with the NRA. This case has seen would-be liberals embracing guilt by association, guilt by nationality, guilt by accusation, entrapment, secret evidence, and other concepts that were considered an anathema to progressives as recently as the War on Terror period. In the name of preventing the “sowing of discord,” they’ve even embraced censorship.

Finally, in an effort to milk the Mueller report for maximum effect, Democrats – ostensibly the party of card-carrying ACLU members – are trying to uphold a vicious new legal concept, “not exonerated.” In a moment that provided a window into the authoritarian tendencies Mueller once expressed with more fluency, the Special Counsel declined under questioning by Ohio Republican Michael Turner to reject the idea that in our legal system, “there is not power or authority to exonerate.”

This was equivalent to no-commenting a question about whether people are innocent until proven guilty. In America, prosecutors don’t declare you exonerated, you are exonerated, until someone proves otherwise. Efforts to reverse this understanding are dangerous, Trump or no Trump. It’s appalling that Democrats are backing this idea.

All these excesses have been excused on the grounds that Trump must be stopped at all costs. But you don’t challenge someone for being racist and an enemy of immigrants, the poor, and the environment by turning the federal security apparatus into a Franz Kafka theme park. It’s fighting bad with worse.

https://taibbi.substack.c(...)-of-superhero-robert

quote:

Op vrijdag 2 augustus 2019 13:21 schreef theunderdog het volgende:
Tulsi Gabbard was echt heerlijk ! wat maakte ze gehakt van haar opponent.