TO BE A FLY ON THE WALL WHEN ONE OF DONALD TRUMP'S KIDS TELLS OFF DADDY
After reading this editorial, please express your own thoughts.
At the bottom, please click on the word "Comments" below the copyright and type
your remarks in the box. When finished, please click on the word "Publish."
Please also share a link to this column with others in your e-mail directory and
on social media.
This column - in part or in its entirety - may be freely shared among individuals, and it may be reprinted, republished, or quoted in any medium, including broadcast, cable, satellite, print, Internet, and other forms of media, but only when crediting Gary B. Duglin and The Controversy.
"You're a no-good, lying son-of-a-bitch. You have destroyed our family. Your actions are shameful and inexcusable. You have ruined our company's future. And you have poisoned our family's legacy. You make me sick."
That's NOT a quote by anyone in the Donald Trump family. Let me repeat that so Republicans and other Trump cheerleaders don't accuse me of "fake news." The aforementioned "quoted" paragraph is not a quote at all. At least it's not one that I'm aware of. But I would certainly not be shocked - or even mildly surprised - if the words in the above passage were ever spoken by one of Trump's children. That's not to say that Trump's three oldest kids - Donald Jr., Ivanka, and Eric - are squeaky clean because I doubt that any of them are. In fact, anybody with a sense of right and wrong is positive that one of Trump's heirs surely is not pure as the driven snow.
After all, Trump Jr. and his brother-in-law - Ivanka Trump's husband, Jared Kushner - are likely to be indicted on a variety of federal charges for allegedly colluding to conspire with Russia by meeting with Vladimir Putin's cronies to get "dirt" on Democratic presidential nominee Hillary Clinton at that infamous Trump Tower gathering on June 9th, 2016.
According to the Federal Elections Commission, "Campaigns may not solicit or accept contributions from foreign nationals. Federal law prohibits contributions, donations, expenditures and disbursements solicited, directed, received or made directly or indirectly by or from foreign nationals in connection with any election - federal, state or local." To clarify further, as per U.S. Code, Title 52, Subtitle III, Chapter 301, Subchapter 30121, "It is unlawful for a foreign national, directly or indirectly, to make a contribution or donation of money or other thing of value, or to make an express or implied promise to make a contribution or donation, in connection with a federal, state, or local election." Obtaining - or even the intent to obtain - damaging information about former Secretary of State Clinton from a "foreign national" is considered a "thing of value" and is, therefore, illegal. Persons who engage in such activity may be subject to criminal prosecution.
When Donald Trump Jr. admitted that the intent of the Trump Tower meeting was to receive information that could be incriminating to Mrs. Clinton, he broke the law. The evidence is as clear as a Windexed window. Despite Trump Jr.'s efforts, there was no detrimental material that Russia could provide because Secretary Clinton did nothing illegal. Nevertheless, Trump Jr. participated in an alleged criminal conspiracy to illegally involve the Russian government in federal election interference. In arranging the meeting, British publicist and Trump family friend Rob Goldstone - who reportedly also attended the meeting - exchanged the following June 3rd, 2016 email transactions with Trump Jr. Goldstone: "This is obviously very high level and sensitive information but is part of Russia and its government's support for Mr. Trump." Trump Jr.: "If it's what you say I love it especially later in the summer."
Besides Donald Trump Jr., Jared Kushner and Rob Goldstone, those present at that Trump Tower meeting included Trump Campaign chairman Paul Manafort... Russian lawyer Natalia Veselnitskaya - who The New York Times says is regarded in Moscow as a "trusted insider" for The Kremlin...plus Rinat Akhmetshin, a former Soviet Union counterintelligence officer, who is thought, reportedly, to allegedly have ties to Russian intelligence, which he denies. The New York Times says Akhmetshin has "a history of working for close allies" of Vladimir Putin. At least two other people also attended the meeting, including an interpreter.
Anyone who believes that Donald Trump was unaware of the Trump Tower meeting is in denial. There is no way that a narcissist such as Trump, who demands total control and power, would not be fully in the loop about anything to do with his company or his campaign. I have expressed similar thoughts in many columns throughout the last two years, and recently Michael Cohen and others have confirmed that Trump is not only always informed, but he is the guiding light behind everything connected to Trump...whether good...or bad. Therefore, Trump too has allegedly committed a felony...and I believe many more than just one, including obstruction of justice. It will be up to Special Counsel Robert Mueller and/or Congress to definitively prove that Trump is guilty and, therefore, should be forced to resign the presidency or that he should be impeached, convicted and removed from office.
In addition, Trump and Trump Jr. allegedly violated the federal campaign finance law by allegedly signing reimbursement checks to Michael Cohen to pay him back for the illegal hush money he paid to porn star Stormy Daniels, which Cohen has evidence that Trump and Trump Jr. did. "Other checks to reimburse me for the hush money payments were signed by Don Jr.," Cohen testified under oath before the House Oversight Committee on February 27th, 2019. As Donald Trump's former attorney and so called "fixer," Cohen also testified before Congress and in federal court that Trump "directed" him to pay Daniels - whose real name is Stephanie Clifford - $130,000, prior to the 2016 presidential election, in order to silence her about an alleged sexual affair between Daniels and Trump. Trump has never acknowledged that the sexual encounter existed in 2006, shortly after Donald and Melania Trump's son, Barron was born.
But Cohen has at least one check signed by Trump - in the amount of $35,000 - which Cohen says was part of his reimbursement for the money he laid out to pay Daniels. That check was issued to Cohen on August 1st, 2017 when Trump was already president of the United States. Yet Republicans still want to put Trump on to a pedestal and bow down to him. However, the day is coming...and soon...for the Mueller Report and for Republicans to reevaluate. Once there is clear-cut evidence of criminality by Trump, Republicans on Capitol Hill - and hopefully nationwide - will have to realize that Donald Trump needs to go.
If Trump ordered Cohen to commit felonies - which Cohen categorically states - then I've got to believe that the Trump patriarch would instruct Trump Jr. - or any one of his adult offspring - to also commit crimes on his behalf, or to simply protect their father and/or their business entities.
The New York State attorney general has commenced investigations in to The Trump Organization, which - by virtue of their executive positions - would presumably include not only Donald Trump, but Donald Trump Jr., Ivanka Trump, and Eric Trump. Trump's two youngest children are not and have never been employed by The Trump Organization. Trump's younger daughter, Tiffany Trump, age 25, attends Georgetown Law School in Washington, DC. Trump's youngest child, his son, Barron Trump, is barely even a teenager, as he won't celebrate his 13th birthday until March 20th.
Letitia James - "The Empire State's" newly elected A.G. has been threatening since her political campaign to aggressively investigate Donald Trump if she won the election. In August 2018, while commenting about Special Counsel Mueller's probe in to Russia's interference in to America's 2016 election, James expressed the following cautionary statement.
"The president of the United States has to worry about three things...Mueller, Cohen, and Tish James." In her election night victory speech on November 6th, 2018, James continued with her warning that referenced Trump. "I will be shining a bright light in to every dark corner of his real estate dealings, and every dealing, demanding truthfulness at every turn." In December 2018, James had even more to speak out about when she was interviewed by NBC News. "We will use every area of the law to investigate (Donald) Trump and his business transactions and that of his family."
As part of his sworn testimony before the House Oversight Committee, Michael Cohen - on live national television - provided Congress with Trump's financial statements from 2011, 2012 and 2013. Cohen claims it was his "experience" that "Trump inflated his total assets when it served his purposes, such as trying to be listed amongst the wealthiest people in Forbes, and deflated his assets to reduce his real estate taxes." "Spilling the beans" and throwing Trump "under the bus," so to speak, as Cohen did, prompted Attorney General James to move forward with her investigation by issuing subpoenas on Monday, March 11th, 2019 to Deutsche Bank and Investors Bank for records pertaining to the financing of four Trump Organization projects and an unsuccessful effort by Trump in 2014 to purchase the National Football League's Buffalo Bills.
In previously published columns and in commentaries posted on Facebook, I have predicted that it's inevitable - that at some point - criminal charges will be filed against Donald Trump by both the State of New York and by the Southern District of New York for allegations made that accuse him of many different crimes. Although such a foregone conclusion may take awhile to come to a head, I think the American people - and others around the world - will eventually be witness to the first president of the United States who could find himself going before a judge to plead for his freedom. But all that will probably come after the Mueller Report, and more than likely after Trump is - one way or another - no longer in The White House.
All that being said, the fictitious quote that began this column might someday become a reality. And if it does...metaphorically speaking I'd really like to be a fly on the wall in the room...when and if those words are ever uttered.
And that's The Controversy for today.
I'm Gary B. Duglin.
"We'll talk again."
The Controversy is a publication of GBD Productions. Founder and Editor-In-Chief of The Controversy is Gary B. Duglin.
Please express your personal opinions by following the instructions printed at the top of this column. And thank you for reading The Controversy.
Photo credits: Gary Cameron/Reuters (Eric Trump, Donald Trump, Jr., Ivanka Trump and Donald Trump), Justin Sullivan/Getty Images (Former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton), NBC News Screenshot (Rob Goldstone), The Associated Press (Donald Trump, Jr., Jared Kushner and Paul Manafort), The Associated Press (Donald Trump #1), CNN Screenshot (Michael Cohen #1), Getty Images (Stephanie "Stormy Daniels" Clifford), PBS (Donald Trump's Check to Michael Cohen), Andy Kropa/Invision/The Associated Press (Tiffany Trump), Cheriss May/Nur Photo/Getty Images (Barron Trump), Source/The Northstar Group (New York State Attorney General Letitia James), Tom Williamson/CQ Roll Call and The Slate Group (Special Counsel Robert Mueller), Chip Somodevilla/Getty Images (Michael Cohen #2) and Getty Images (Donald Trump #2)
Copyright 2019 Gary B. Duglin and TheControversy.net. All Rights Reserved.
The New York State attorney general has commenced investigations in to The Trump Organization, which - by virtue of their executive positions - would presumably include not only Donald Trump, but Donald Trump Jr., Ivanka Trump, and Eric Trump. Trump's two youngest children are not and have never been employed by The Trump Organization. Trump's younger daughter, Tiffany Trump, age 25, attends Georgetown Law School in Washington, DC. Trump's youngest child, his son, Barron Trump, is barely even a teenager, as he won't celebrate his 13th birthday until March 20th.
As part of his sworn testimony before the House Oversight Committee, Michael Cohen - on live national television - provided Congress with Trump's financial statements from 2011, 2012 and 2013. Cohen claims it was his "experience" that "Trump inflated his total assets when it served his purposes, such as trying to be listed amongst the wealthiest people in Forbes, and deflated his assets to reduce his real estate taxes." "Spilling the beans" and throwing Trump "under the bus," so to speak, as Cohen did, prompted Attorney General James to move forward with her investigation by issuing subpoenas on Monday, March 11th, 2019 to Deutsche Bank and Investors Bank for records pertaining to the financing of four Trump Organization projects and an unsuccessful effort by Trump in 2014 to purchase the National Football League's Buffalo Bills.
You must truly hate the President. Let me start with that I don’t believe the President’s son or son-in-law will be indicted, because I don’t believe they committed any crime. They did not “solicit or accept contributions from foreign nationals” the law specifically states that you must “solicit or accept” they did neither. They were approached by the Russians, took a meeting and nothing came from it. The only group that paid a foreign national for dirt on her opponent was the Clinton campaign and the DNC, they bought and paid for the fabricated Trump dossier. They paid millions and then they used the Obama DOJ to get an illegal FISA warrants to spy on the Trump campaign. We now find out this is the same DOJ that at the same time ordered the FBI not to ask for indictments against Clinton after the investigation showed she broke the law. Talk about breaking the law, Hillary Clinton is the Queen of it and then had the DOJ, The AG and probably the former President cover it all up for her. I love the idea that you quote the Federal Elections Commission to try and prove a point (misguided as it is) yet when the Federal Elections Commission says that paying “hush money” is not a campaign finance violation if the President paid it with his own money and had the second reason to try and protect his marriage and his young son, then it is not a crime. You don’t care about the law or the facts because you hate the President. As for Letitia James she is a Trump hater she doesn’t care how or why she “gets Trump” just that she does, he beat Hillary and is a Republican and that’s enough for her. I have always believed that the American way of justice was that law enforcement investigated crimes, not investigated in search of crimes, acts like James’s sound more like the KGB or secret police. What’s next planting evidence or blackmailing more people to lie. The democrats form of justice; we do no wrong and screw the rest of you. Win at all cost and if you lose find a way to get rid of the winner. As for the Mueller report we will have to wait and see, we will see if he is an honest man or a patsy for the left. We will see if we even get to see the report. Remember the law says it is up to the AG to determine what if any to make public or even give to the Congress. I will end as I started: you must truly hate the President.
ReplyDeleteThe response to the above reader will be in three parts.
DeletePART ONE OF THREE
Wayne, I don't know how many times I have to write the following words. I...do...NOT...hate...Donald...Trump. I have stated those words dozens of times over the last three-and-a-half years since he became a candidate for president. I loathe what he stands for...I despise his actions, his behavior and his treatment towards other people...and I abhor what he is doing to the United States of America...but I do not "HATE"...him. But then...as I've also noted in the past, I hate nobody. I am incapable of hate. Now you and others have said - and probably will say again - that if I have such animosity towards everything that Trump represents, then that means I hate him. That is not true and I disagree with anyone who feels that way. Donald Trump is morally, ethically and mentally ill, unstable, and unfit...and, therefore, he should not be president of the United States.
You are someone who is in such denial, Wayne. It's mindboggling that you don't believe that Donald Trump Jr. and Jared Kushner will be indicted because you "don't believe they committed any crime." As usual, Wayne, you do NOT want to accept THE FACTS!!! Trump Jr. and Kushner did indeed "solicit" and "accept. By Trump Jr. merely accepting the meeting at Trump Tower constitutes acceptance. When Trump Jr. received the emails from Rob Goldstone, Trump Jr. should have said..."No thank you. What you're doing doesn't sound right." Federal law is very clear...and I've quoted it in my column. But the bottom line is...if you're part of a political campaign...DON'T MEET WITH FOREIGN NATIONALS. DO NOT MEET WITH RUSSIANS!!!
As usual, Wayne, it is YOU who is the hater. You hate Hillary Clinton. You hate all Clintons and all Democrats. So here are some more facts regarding the Steele Dossier.
Christopher Steele - who is a former MI6 operative - had started a private firm and he compiled the dossier on Trump during the campaign. But Steele was under contract to the United States research company, Fusion GPS. Steele had sources in Russia who could provide him with the research that Fusion wanted. Fusion was being paid to get information on Trump by the Washington Free Beacon, which is a Republican media firm. Let me repeat that. The Washington Free Beacon is a REPUBLICAN media firm. When Trump was nominated by the GOP, the Democratic Party and the Clinton Campaign picked up the check, so to speak, for the Fusion research. Steele's sources informed him that Vladimir Putin's government was in cahoots with Donald Trump in an effort to help him be victorious over Mrs. Clinton, including the hacked emails. These are just some of the allegations being investigated by Special Counsel Robert Mueller. And that is why two-thirds of Americans believe Trump conspired to collude with Russia.
GBD
END OF PART ONE OF THREE
PART TWO OF THREE
DeleteWayne, the following paragraph is directly from NBC News...which I know you will say is "fake news," but it's not.
"It has already been established by the House Intelligence Committee that the Russia investigation began after the FBI learned that another campaign aide, George Papadopoulos, had been approached by a Russian agent. The agent told Papadopoulos the Russians had incriminating information about Hillary Clinton, including emails, according to court documents. Papadopoulos then mentioned to an Australian diplomat that the Russians had 'dirt' on Clinton, the Australians contacted the U.S. government, and the FBI began to take a look. The Steele dossier formed a portion of the evidence used to meet the surveillance warrant's legal burden of establishing 'probable cause' that Page was an agent of Russia. But people who have read the supporting documents for the FISA warrants, including Rep. Adam Schiff, the ranking Democrat on the House Intelligence Committee (at the time...now the committee's chairman), say they contain secret evidence establishing ties between Page and Russians — evidence that goes beyond what was included in the dossier. Frank Figliuzzi, the former FBI counterintelligence chief who is now an NBC News analyst, says that likely includes reporting from human sources and intercepted communications. The FBI also disclosed to the court that authorized the warrant that Steele was paid by people seeking to discredit Trump, but said it viewed Steele as credible."
Hillary Clinton never "broke the law." The former Secretary of State testified before Congress for 11 hours and not only Democrats, but Republicans, agreed that there was no reason to pursue any means of prosecution against Mrs. Clinton. Former FBI Director James Comey - who is in great part responsible for Hillary Clinton losing the presidential election - found (along with numerous FBI agents) that although, according to Comey, Secretary Clinton was "careless," she was not a criminal as she did nothing "illegal" and nothing that could be "prosecuted." But, of course, you will say - as you have in the past - that Comey was under orders by Attorney General Loretta Lynch because of her friendship with President and Secretary Clinton. Not only do you hate the Clintons, but you obviously hate President Obama too. Mr. Obama never "cover(ed) up" anything for Mrs. Clinton.
GBD
END OF PART TWO OF THREE
PART THREE OF THREE
DeleteRegarding the hush money, Wayne...I've written about this in other columns, but did not include it in the one above because Trump has violated the Campaign Finance Law in any event, however, under federal law, a person cannot donate more than $2,700 to a campaign. A payment of $130,000 is a hell of a lot more than $2,700 and Michael Cohen has testified (and a federal judge and prosecutors from the Southern District of New York believed him) that the money was paid to Stormy Daniels for the purpose of influencing a federal election. That...IS...against the law. Cohen testified under oath that he was "directed" by Trump to pay Stormy Daniels (and we hear Trump on a recording regarding Karen McDougal's payment). Furthermore, Cohen admitted that the payments were intended to protect Trump at the ballot box, therefore, the payments are considered "in-kind contributions" to the Trump campaign. As for your comment about the hush money not being a crime "if (Trump) paid it with his own money" and that he was trying to "protect his marriage and his young son" is so ludicrous that I'm literally on the floor laughing. You're taking the word of a former FEC commissioner - a Republican - who was nominated by President George W. Bush but couldn't get confirmed by the Senate so he was appointed by recess appointment. Hans Von Spakovsky is a partisan hack. The bottom line is that Donald Trump "knowingly and willfully" broke the law. So I do "care about the law" and "the facts." It is obvious that either you DON'T...or you just don't know what is true.
There you go again, calling another Democrat a "hater." Letitia James is going to take down Trump, his family and their organization because they have broken law after law after law. It is disgraceful that you would equate a state attorney general with the KGB. It is despicable that you would even suggest that Democrats would "plant evidence" or "blackmail" people to lie. This is why Hillary Clinton said "you could put half of Trump's supporters into what I call the basket of deplorables."
Robert Mueller is one of the most revered law enforcement officers in American history. He will not lie and he is not "a patsy for the left."
Wayne, your closing remarks are reprehensible, repugnant and contemptible...and YOU...are a hater.
GBD
END OF PART THREE OF THREE
Maybe when you stop spewing hate people will stop saying that you are a hater. Gary I am not in “denial” what you claim to be “FACTS!!!” are only opinions. Just because you accept a meeting does not mean you have accepted anything of value, NO LAW says you can’t meet with someone, this is still America no matter what the Democrats say, we still have the freedom of association and the right to talk to whomever we want. There is no evidence that anything of value changed hands at that meeting, those are the real FACTS. As for the dossier, who paid for it to a foreign national, who lied on the FEC report calling it legal fees and had to amend the report, who? The Clinton camp and the DNC! They used the dossier as the main evidence to get the FISA warrant, it has been stated from DOJ/FBI that without it they would not have received the warrant, they knew it was unverified, they knew that Christopher Steele was cut loose from the FBI for lying, Andrew McCabe testified before the House Intelligence Committee in December 2017 that “no surveillance warrant would have been sought” from the FISA court “without the Steele dossier information.” As for Clinton breaking the law, why did the DOJ order the FBI not to “CHARGE” Clinton: During closed-door testimony, last summer, former FBI lawyer Lisa Page said the Obama administration’s Justice Department advised the FBI not to pursue the gross negligence statute for Hillary Clinton in the mishandling of classified information. Former U.S. Attorney and House Republican John Radcliffe led the line of questioning about the statute known as 18 U.S. C 793. Radcliffe: “You're making it sound like it was the departed who told you: You're not going to charge gross negligence because we’re the prosecutors.” Page interrupted: “That is correct.” We now have reports from the agents that did the investigation that say they recommended indicting Mrs. Clinton. Why did the AG tell the FBI that then needed to prove “intent” when the statute specifically does not require intent only “gross negligence,” read the law!!! She broke it and the AG and Comey knew it. 18 U.S.C. (f) Whoever, being entrusted with or having lawful possession or control of any document, writing, code book, signal book, sketch, photograph, photographic negative, blueprint, plan, map, model, instrument, appliance, note, or information, relating to the national defense, (1) through gross negligence permits the same to be removed from its proper place of custody or delivered to anyone in violation of his trust, or to be lost, stolen, abstracted, or destroyed, or (2) having knowledge that the same has been illegally removed from its proper place of custody or delivered to anyone in violation of its trust, or lost, or stolen, abstracted, or destroyed, and fails to make prompt report of such loss, theft, abstraction, or destruction to his superior officer—Shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than ten years, or both. Once again Gary you misstate the facts an individual can contribute any amount of his own money to his own campaign, Donald Trump was not limited to $2700 dollars, now if you want to claim it was an illegal campaign donation from convicted, admitted crook and lair Cohen and then he billed his client for legal fees that’s Mr. Cohen’s problem. What it was that Cohen took care of a “personal” problem for his client, paid it for him and then billed his client back, all perfectly legal! You can spew your hate at Hans Von Spakovsky a true American for his opinion on FEC law all because he has a (R) after his name, that’s the hate I talk about from democrats, you hate anyone who doesn’t believe the way you do, in what you want to do the America, tear-up the Constitution, turn us into Venezuela and flush us down the toilet. The comment you quoted from Hillary was disgraceful and Un-American as is the person who said it! She is a hater, you are a hater and most of the small minded left wing nuts are haters. God help America, we need His protection from the Dems out there!
ReplyDeleteThe response to the above reader will be in three parts.
DeletePART ONE OF THREE
Wayne, there is not one scintilla of "hate" in my column. I do not use the word or reference any definition of it in my editorial. But YOU...on the other hand...use the word towards or about me...and other Democrats...4 times in one short paragraph in your first response and then 8 times in your longer paragraph in your second response. In my entire column of 14 paragraphs, I never mentioned anything that relates to hate.
You are so very wrong, Wayne. What I state (not claim) to be "FACTS"...are INDEED...FACTS...NOT OPINIONS. Federal law is very clear. If you're a candidate running for political office (or anybody who is part of that campaign), you better not be keeping company with foreign nationals who are looking to give you "dirt" on the candidate's opponent. The intent was clear, Wayne. Donald Trump Jr. was willing to meet with the Russians to get damaging information about Hillary Clinton. "If it's what you say I love it especially later in the summer." Those were Trump Jr.'s words in his email to Rob Goldstone. "Evidence of anything of value" is meaningless. The INTENT was there. If a man goes in to a bank with a gun, goes to a teller, points the gun at the teller, but then has a change of heart and says, "Nevermind, I changed my mind," that man is going to be arrested and he's going to go to jail...even though he stole nothing. His INTENT was to rob the bank. And THOSE are the real FACTS.
Your remarks about Christopher Steele's "Trump Dossier" are completely wrong. My response to your earlier comment is accurate.
Your remarks about Hillary Clinton are more venomous hatred that you relish in spewing at the Clintons, at President Obama, and at anybody who is a Democrat, so I won't even dignify your comments without any other response. It's not worth my time because you are going to shell out more of your hatred towards Secretary Clinton, and all Democrats, including me. And yes, I used the word hatred, but only as a means of response to you.
When former F.B.I. Director James Comey stated that no criminal charges would be filed against Mrs. Clinton for using a private email server and for allegedly sending classified emails, Comey was very specific with his words. "No reasonable prosecutor would bring such a case." Comey further stated that there was no "evidence" that Secretary Clinton "intentionally" transmitted or "intentionally" mishandled classified information. There was NO...INTENT. Attorney James P. Melendres, who is a former federal prosecutor and who was employed by the Justice Department in their National Security Division in Washington, DC, told The San Diego Union-Tribune..."In a classified information case, the most difficult element is always intent - the mental state." The newspaper went on to report that "the lack of any evidence of intent" is "a fundamental aspect to criminal law." Melendres is the lawyer who prosecuted former C.I.A. Director David Petraeus for mishandling classifed information. The retired four-star Army General Petraeus pleaded guilty for mishandling classified information because he gave "highly classified" information about his time as commander in Afghanistan to his mistress who was writing a biography about him. Melendres told The San Diego Union-Tribune..."That would be a textbook example of clear intent." Hillary Clinton testified before Congress, as well as in interviews with the F.B.I., that she did not "knowingly" send or receive classified information. The F.B.I. believed her. Democrats in Congress believed her. And even many Republicans in Congress believed her. After 11 hours of public testimony, there was no proof that Secretary Clinton did anything "illegal." There was NO INTENT.
GBD
END OF PART ONE OF THREE
PART TWO OF THREE
DeleteWayne...you, Donald Trump, and any other Republicans who simply want to "lock her up" will never be successful because Hillary Clinton did not do anything "intentionally" wrong. James Comey was wrong to have described Mrs. Clinton as "extremely careless," as he should not have said anything. But the FACTS are that she did nothing that could be "prosecuted" as being "criminal." Being "careless" was not sufficient enough to have criminal charges filed against Secretary Clinton. There was no "gross negligence." Mrs. Clinton did not act in any way that would be considered "a conscious, voluntary act or omission in reckless disregard." And that's the legal definition of "gross negligence." You, Trump, and other Trump cheerleaders will do anything to try to get Trump's true crimes out of the headlines, but newly released testimony by the Republicans regarding Lisa Page or anybody else is not going to do a damn thing because two-thirds of this country want Trump to pay for HIS crimes. And Special Counsel Robert Mueller - along with the Southern District of New York and the State of New York Attorney General - are going to prove with irrefutable evidence that another president of the United States is a "crook." Just wait and see.
Once again Wayne you don't read clearly what I write. In my remarks above, I stated..."becaue Trump has violated the Campaign Finance Law in any event, however, under federal law, a person cannot donate more than $2,700 to a campaign. A payment of $130,000 is a hell of a lot more than $2,700 and Michael Cohen has testified (and a federal judge and prosecutors from the Southern District of New York believed him) that the money was paid to Stormy Daniels for the purpose of influencing a federal election. THAT...IS...against the law." I did not state that Trump himself contributed the money. Cohen did. But...and here's the BIG...BUT...Trump "directed" Cohen to commit a crime...and then reimbursed him for the money that Cohen laid out to "intentionally" influence the election by keeping Stormy Daniels quiet about her sexual affair with Trump. So I did not "misstate the facts." ABSOLUTELY NOTHING that Trump and Cohen cooked up to keep porn star Daniels (and Playboy Playmate Karen McDougal) silent about their sexual flings with Trump was - as you want to believe - "all perfectly legal." It was ALL PERFECTLY ILLEGAL.
At the risk of sounding like President Ronald Reagan, there you go again, Wayne. I spewed no "hate" at Hans Von Spakovsky. But you do love to accuse me of "hate." All I gave were more facts. I wrote..."You're taking the word of a former FEC commissioner - a Republican - who was nominated by President George W. Bush but couldn't get confirmed by the Senate so he was appointed by recess appointment." That is all 100% true. I continued by writing..."Hans Von Spakovsky is a partisan hack." The facts are there as well. That's what he is...and he's proved it. But you continue to accuse me of "hate."
GBD
END OF PART TWO OF THREE
PART THREE OF THREE
DeleteWayne, you have such viciousness towards Democrats - including towards me. To wrongly accuse us of wanting to "tear up the Constitution" and to turn us (the United States) in to Venezuela" and to "flush us down the toilet" are just more despicable remarks from you. I quoted Hillary Clinton only after you labeled New York State Attorney General Letitia James as a "hater"...then equated her to the likes of the KGB...and suggested that she would "plant evidence" or "blackmail" people to lie. When you make statements as you did, Wayne, you simply prove Hillary Clinton's point that "you could put half of Trump's supporters in to what I call the basket of deplorables." You can't have it both ways, Wayne. And when you make wicked and vindictive remarks, as you did with your closing statement about Secretary Clinton...about me...and other Democrats..."She is a hater, you are a hater and most of the small minded left wing nuts are haters. God help America, we need His protection from the Dems out there!"... then how else should Democrats take such atrocious language from an ass-kissing Trump lover?
GBD
END OF PART THREE OF THREE
Gary your analogy is laughable, it was more like that someone he knew called and said he had information on Clinton (dirt) and he said I’ll meet and see what they say, maybe he thought if they have some good stuff I will find out if I can get it legally but since they gave him nothing, it went no further, so he committed no crime. My remarks about the Christopher Steele's "Trump Dossier" are 100% correct. I don’t hate Hillary Clinton I just believe the facts that she broke the law and was protected by the FBI and DOJ. When Comey made his statement “No reasonable prosecutor would bring such a case" was only after he was ordered not to charge her, that order came before they had completed their investigation. The Federal law 18 U.S.C. 793 does not require “intent” in fact a in the 60’s a DOD employee taking work home stopped at a diner and left his brief case at the table, by the time he returned it was gone, he was later charged and convicted, his defense team claimed he had no intent, the Judge ruled and was upheld that 18 U.S.C. 793 does not require intent only “gross negligence.” Why did the DOJ give that order? Why did the DOJ say they needed intent, when the law doesn’t require it? Why was Clinton’s interview not recorded in any form? Why was she not put under oath? Why did they make the deal not to look at the Clinton foundation’s emails on the server? Why did they give immunity to her aids? The questions go on and on and on, and the only reasonable answer is that she was being protected by someone for some reason. The only ones high enough to do that were the AG or the President. As for the hush money, the law is clear that if it was done for personal reason and would have been done if he was not running then it is 100% LEGAL! If you want to believe a convicted and confessed liar who just lied to Congress two weeks ago again, that’s your right. Gary name calling people like “partisan hack” shows your hatred. As for you and your party and the US Constitution, all your party is talking about is tearing it up, get rid of the 2nd Amendment, rewriting the 1st, disregarding the 10th, ignoring the Article 2 powers of the President along with turning us into a socialist country. Don’t start your lies that we are already one, because we are not. Just because we have a few social programs doesn’t make America a socialist country. As for me being “an ass-kissing Trump lover” you make me laugh, I’m in agreement with most of his policies and want to protect America, but I don’t like a lot of thing he says and how he says them. I’ll take all the personal things that I disagree with, because of all the good he is doing great Judges on the bench, the Supreme Court, trying to build the Wall (55 more miles and more) going up, etc., etc. Better than anything your party has done in years maybe decades.
ReplyDeleteThe response to the above reader will be in three parts.
DeletePART ONE OF THREE
My analogy makes perfect sense. The bottom line is, Wayne, that if you INTEND...or ATTEMPT...to commit a crime...YOU HAVE COMMITTED THE CRIME. That being said, when Donald Trump Jr. is being escorted out of Trump Tower in handcuffs you can cry along with him.
Well considering that my remarks - THE FACTS - about the dossier are 100% correct...then I guess you have to be incorrect. Hmmm. Yep. You're incorrect.
If you don't "hate" Hillary Clinton then why do you use such vicious and ruthless language? When you tell falsehoods regarding Secretary Clinton - such as the July 5th, 2016 quote by James Comey - that's stating hate by you. Comey was never "ordered" to not charge Mrs. Clinton with a crime. Oh I know that some of the Republican rag sheets such as the National Review spewed their venom that President Obama "ordered" Comey - when he was F.B.I. Director - to charge Secretary Clinton, but both Comey and Mr. Obama have stated that no such conversation ever happened. President Obama did tell Chris Wallace on the April 10th, 2016 edition of Fox News Sunday, that Hillary Clinton "would never intentionally put America in any kind of jeopardy" by using a private email server. But Mr. Obama also told Chris Wallace..."I guarantee that there is no political influence in any investigation conducted by the Justice Department, or the F.B.I. - not just in this case, but in any case. Full stop. Period." But Wayne, you're going to believe the conservative crackpots at Fox News (not Chris Wallace), and others who support Donald Trump, who make up lies about Secretary Clinton, about President Obama, and about any and all Democrats. Your ludicrous questions about Mrs. Clinton and her aides are laughable. But yet, you still say you don't "hate" Hillary Clinton. Now that's a joke.
There was NO "INTENT" by Mrs. Clinton...and there was no "gross negligence" on her part either. It amazes me that you...Donald Trump...and other Trump cheerleaders...nearly three years later...continue to bring up Hillary Clinton. Totally amazing!!! But back to "intent." There was "intent" and "gross negligence" too on the part of Donald Trump Jr. He clearly intended to committed a crime and he was grossly negligent. The legal definition of "gross negligence" is as follows. "Gross negligence is a conscious, voluntary act or omission in reckless disregard of a legal duty." Trump Jr. lied about the Trump Tower meeting. And Trump Sr. lied about it too. Remember, it was Donald Trump who wrote the initial false statement that the meeting at Trump Tower was all about "Russian adoption." A LIE!!! Therefore, there was "gross negligence" because there was a "conscious, voluntary act or omission in reckless disregard of a legal duty." You cannot spin it any other way, Wayne.
Wayne, I have read numerous legal explanations about campaign finance laws and have heard numerous legal scholars discuss it, and each and every one...many of whom are Republicans (or were Republicans) who worked for Presidents Reagan, Bush or Bush...say that the "hush money" payments to both Stormy Daniels and Karen McDougal...were illegal. You'll believe what you want, but I'm going to trust the likes of people with a combined hundreds of years of legal history.
Yeah, Hans Von Spakovsky is a partisan hack. He has spread the myth - false as it is - that Democratic voter fraud is common and that it helps Democrats win elections. LIE, LIE, LIE!!! Yeah...he's a hack.
GBD
END OF PART ONE OF THREE
PART TWO OF THREE
DeleteWayne, your lies are so imbedded in to your head that I think you think like Trump. In other words...if you tell lies long enough, you believe them yourself and believe they are no longer lies but the truth. Democrats have no desire of "tearing up" the U.S. Constitution. Your remarks are disgraceful and despicable. We don't want to "get rid of the 2nd Amendment." We merely want universal background checks so that people who should in no way be given the opportunity to obtain a gun (or guns), wouldn't get them. We want to ban certain weapons - such as assault weapons, bump stocks, etc. - and we want waiting periods to be sure that people who quickly buy a gun to kill someone, is stopped. As for the 10th Amendment, sometimes the federal government is best to decide a law. As for Article II of the Constitution, you were not specific. However, when a crook like Trump is allowed to grant a pardon to his criminal buddy, Paul Manafort - which I'm sure Trump will do (but only on the federal charges, so Manafort's going to prison no matter what when he's convicted on state charges), that should not be allowed, especially when any sane person knows that Trump made a deal with Manafort..."Keep your mouth shut about me and I will pardon you." That is witness tampering and obstruction of justice. These are just more reasons why Trump is going to be removed from office by Congress or forced to resign. And yes...as I have written in other columns and the one above...Donald Trump's freedom IS in jeopardy. At some point, whether while president or as a former president, Trump will be taken away by law enforcement officers - either federal or State of New York - in handcuffs. That is not hate, Wayne. I truly do not "hate" Donald Trump. Simple conjecture...for now, Wayne. But a prediction that I believe will become fact. Also regarding Article II, yes...the president is the commander-in-chief of the armed forces. But that should not mean that he can declare a bogus national emergency so he can steal 8 billion dollars from the Department of Defense, and then order the military to build a wall that Congress has voted to oppose. Trump - and people like you - need to realize that the president is the president. He is not emperor. He is not dictator.
Regarding your comment that Democrats want to turn the United States "in to a socialist country." We ARE a socialist country. And thank God for it. My comments are not "lies"...as you call them. There are more than just "a few social programs." As I posted on Facebook on February 24th, 2019..."Republicans don't seem to understand FACTS! The United States of America IS ALREADY A SOCIALIST NATION. Social Security is socialism. Medicare is socialism. Medicaid is socialism. Welfare, food stamps, disability...all are socialism. The Veterans Administration healthcare program is socialism. In fact, the entire U.S. military - the Army, Navy, Air Force, Marines and Coast Guard - represent socialism. Each and every police and fire department in our country represents socialism. And the list of other forms of American socialism is endless. So when Donald Trump - in his 2019 State of the Union Address - said..."America will never be a socialist country"...he has no damn clue what he is talking about. America IS a socialist country and EVERYBODY in our country benefits from it. Whether you say you love it or not...the fact of the matter is...in reality...YOU DO LOVE IT! YOU ALL LOVE SOCIALISM! And you'd be LOST WITHOUT IT!!!" I posted those comments on Facebook, Wayne...but I say them to you and any other readers of The Controversy who agree with you. The fact of the matter is...America IS a socialist country. And it's fortunate that we are.
GBD
END OF PART TWO OF THREE
PART THREE OF THREE
DeleteYes Wayne, you are "an ass-kissing Trump lover." If Hillary Clinton...or Bill Clinton...or Barack Obama...or Joe Biden...or any Democrat that I have supported or would support...would ever make the offensive, insulting, vile, vulgar, reprehensible, repugnant, vindictive comments that Donald Trump has made...I...WOULD...NEVER...EVER...EVER...SUPPORT THAT PERSON AGAIN. The fact that you supported Donald Trump after everything he said and did throughout the 2016 campaign...along with everything he has said and done over the last two-and-a-half years...that makes YOU "an ass-kissing Trump lover." There is no debating that fact. So stop denying it. Trump's comments during the campaign about John McCain should have ended Trump's chances at winning the Republican nomination, let alone the presidency. But fortunately, those Independents who helped to get Trump elected have now run away from him. He couldn't get elected dog catcher today. Just wait and see, Wayne, when Special Counsel Robert Mueller draws both his guns (metaphorically speaking) and kills Trump (metaphorically speaking) with his report, Trump, his family, and his company will become history. By the time Congress gets through with Trump, it will be Mitch McConnell and clan (just like Barry Goldwater and the Republican leadership in 1974) who will take that short journey down Pennsylvania Avenue. And like Goldwater and friends did with Richard Nixon...McConnell and friends will tell Trump that there are enough votes to impeach, convict and remove from office...and Trump will be FORCED to resign.
GBD
END OF PART THREE OF THREE
Sorry. Could not read all the back and forth between you two.
ReplyDeleteWhat's worrying me now, (and wondering what both of your thoughts are on this Wayne and Gary ) is this talk of a non peaceful transition of power if Trump loses the 2020 election. I heard what Michael Cohen said or warned us about. From what I have seen of Trump, if he loses he may not accept it. He could incite violence somehow. I wonder if he is declared the loser in 2020 if he will laims it's all illegal voting, then incites violence and refuses to leave the White House. Calls another national emergency. Am I being silly? I mean as soon as he's no longer president, it seems he'll be found guilty of something. He may even go to jail. So losing in 2020 may not be just losing an election, but it may be losing his feeedom. How do you think his presidency will end? Will he lose gracefully? Somehow, I am afraid the worst is yet to come for our country. What do you think will happen if hesh declared a loser in 2020?
The response to the above reader will be in three parts.
DeletePART ONE OF THREE
Jack, I have no fears about a "peaceful transition of power if Trump loses the 2020 election." And why? Because - as I have written for more than 2 years - I don't think Donald Trump will be on the ballot in 2020. I am confident that Special Counsel Robert Mueller will have found the definitive evidence that Donald Trump has committed crimes - including, but not limited to - obstruction of justice, witness tampering, campaign finance violations, and probably conspiracy to collude with Russia. At that point - once Mueller releases his report - House of Representatives Republicans on Capitol Hill will join Democrats in proceeding with impeachment hearings with the Senate discussing their path to follow, which would mean a trial, conviction and removal from office. However, as with Richard Nixon, Trump's presidency will end long before any votes in Congress. As I wrote in my column of February 26th, 2019..."Once Congress comes to the same conclusion - which I believe is inevitable - impeachment proceedings will begin. And at some point - as it did with Richard Nixon and Watergate in August 1974 - Republican support on Capitol Hill will evaporate, and GOP leaders in both the House and Senate will make the short journey down Pennsylvania Avenue to advise Trump with crystal clear certainty that the votes are there in Congress to impeach, to convict, and to remove him from office. On that day - which is coming soon - Donald Trump will announce his resignation, and Mike Pence - at 12 o'clock noon the next day - will be sworn in as the 46th president of the United States. But President Nixon was involved in a cover-up, not in the actual planning of the initial crime. If there is direct evidence to prove that Trump is guilty of the crimes being alleged, I doubt there will be a pardon for him by Pence, as President Gerald Ford gave to Nixon. And although Pence won't express any remark similar to Mr. Ford's, Donald Trump will be gone...and Americans throughout the country will be able to echo President Ford's words...'our long national nightmare is over.'"
GBD
END OF PART ONE OF THREE
PART TWO OF THREE
DeleteJack, the entire passage that is in quotes above in Part One of my response to you, I wrote last month, but I've been making similar comments for two years. If you haven't my February 26th editorial - Deja Vu: From Richard Nixon To Donald Trump. The Day Is Coming. - then please do. Also please read my February 22nd column, "The Only National Emergency Is That (Donald Trump) Is An Idiot"...my commentary from March 1st, Day One Of The Donald Trump Impeachment Hearings. It Wasn't Called That. But That's What It Was....and my March 7th column, Donald Trump Is Not The Boss. I Am. And So Are You. You can access these editorials in the archives on the top right side of this site.
GBD
END OF PART TWO OF THREE
PART THREE OF THREE
DeleteHowever, Jack...just in case - for some reason - Mueller does not prove that which I believe he will, and he cannot give Congress enough evidence to impeach and remove from office, then Trump's name would be on the ballot in 2020. I would hope, at that juncture, that all Democrats will support our nominee (who I hope will be Joe Biden), and that enough Independents will vote for the Democrat too. That way Trump would lose. And then, I trust, there will still be a peaceful transition of power. Congress, the Secret Service, and the American people, will demand it. I do not believe that anyone would allow a "then former president" to - as you say - "incite violence" or "refuse to leave The White House." Our country and our Constitution is not set up that way and your "silly" scenanio could never happen. Once the new president takes the oath of office, he (or she) would order the F.B.I., and, if necessary, the military, to arrest Trump. But it's "silly" to even discuss this because your idea is so far-fetched that I can't imagine any possible way that anyone would permit it...not even in an Aaron Sorkin screenplay or a film directed by Oliver Stone. But yes, Jack - as I wrote in my column above and I have written in other editorials - I truly do believe that at some point in the future Donald Trump will lose his freedom, and so will some members of his family.
GBD
END OF PART THREE OF THREE
Gary, you just don’t get it. I supported President Trump (then Candidate Trump) after he secured the nomination. I supported his policies during the campaign not his personality. I could never vote for Hillary, I could not support her personality or her policies which I believe were and are dangerous to America. So what choice did Americans have, vote for someone they don’t like personally but agree with his policies or not vote? We could not vote for Hillary and not voting is basically a vote for Hillary so the choice was clear vote for Trump and his policies. That’s not being an ass-kisser or a Trump lover. Gary, I didn’t say anything about information from FOX News, you showed you hatred again, what I said was from Lisa Page’s testimony to the US House that the FBI was told they were not to “Charge” Clinton for “gross negligence” even though some of the FBI agents that did the investigation say they recommended indicting her. Remember Comey’s first draft of his July statement said that Mrs Clinton had been “grossly negligent,” the full statement from Comey’s May 2, 2016 draft read: “There is evidence to support a conclusion that Secretary Clinton, and others, used the email server in a manner that was grossly negligent with respect to the handling of classified information,” reports claim Peter Strzok help Comey edit his statement and replaced “gross negligent” with “'extremely careless': Former FBI lawyer Lisa Page testified last year to House that officials in the bureau, including then-FBI Director James Comey, discussed Espionage Act charges against Hillary Clinton, citing “gross negligence," but the Justice Department shut them down. These are facts in the House record, not FOX News.
ReplyDeleteAs for the Mueller Report, I don’t think it will prove the President committed any crimes but we will have to wait and see. According to a new USA TODAY/Suffolk University poll 50% of Americans say Trump is victim of a 'witch hunt'. Only twenty-eight percent say they have a lot of trust in former FBI director Mueller's investigation to be fair and accurate. The tides are changing, 2020 is looking better and better!
The response to the above reader will be in three parts.
DeletePART ONE OF THREE
Wayne, I suppose you and I have different values and different ideas (outside of the politics) of what the president of the United States should represent. Character means much more than the politics. So I stick to my earlier comment to you. If Hillary Clinton...or Bill Clinton...or Barack Obama...or Joe Biden...or any Democrat that I have supported or would support...would ever make the offensive, insulting, vile, vulgar, reprehensible, repugnant, vindictive comments that Donald Trump has made...I...WOULD...NEVER...EVER...EVER...SUPPORT THAT PERSON AGAIN. The fact that you supported Donald Trump after everything he said and did throughout the 2016 campaign...along with everything he has said and done over the last two-and-a-half years...that makes YOU an ass-kissing Trump lover.
Hillary Clinton would never have treated Americans the way Donald Trump has treated our fellow citizens...or - for that matter - ANY...HUMAN...BEING. Hillary Clinton would have never locked babies in cages. Hillary Clinton would have immediately denounced and condemned white supremacists/white nationalists, Nazis, and the Ku Klux Klan. Hillary Clinton would have never disparaged the late Senator John McCain. Hillary Clinton would have never insulted a Gold Star mother and father...or a federal judge...or a disabled reporter. Hillary Clinton would have never offended Mexicans, all Latinos, Muslims, Jews, and WOMEN. But I'm getting ahead of myself because my next editorial - later this week - focuses on much of what I am discussing in this response to you, so I will move on to your other remarks. I will add this one point first though. It's mind-boggling to think that your "choice was clear" by voting for Donald Trump. Wait until what you read what I have written for this week's column.
GBD
END OF PART ONE OF THREE
PART TWO OF THREE
DeleteWayne, there you go again using the "h" word. No, not Hillary...but "hatred." My remarks regarding Fox News are fact...not hate. As for the "draft" of former F.B.I. Director James Comey's statement regarding Secretary Clinton, a "draft" is just that. It's NOT the statement. Do you realize how many "drafts" are written and re-written, over and over again, before a television show or motion picture production team goes before the cameras? Do you realize how many "drafts" are written and re-written, over and over again, before a journalist's piece is published? There are editors who go over the copy with a fine-tooth comb to decide what language is exactly the wording they want their readers to read. Do you realize how many "drafts" are written and re-written, over and over again, before a corporation issues a memorandum to its employees? So Comey's draft was meaningless. All that counted was the statement he presented. And in that statement, Comey was very definite. "Although there is evidence of potential violations of the statues regarding the handling of classified information, our judgment is that no reasonable prosecutor would bring such a case." Comey later reiterated before the House Oversight Committee. "What we can't establish is that she (Secretary Clinton) acted with the necessary criminal intent." Now I know you won't believe anything from CNN...but I trust anchor and Chief Washington Correspondent Jake Tapper who wrote the following. "A source familiar with the decision-making process at the FBI at the time tells CNN that 'the Bureau and Jim were trying to see what a statement of declamation might look like -- and they were playing with the language throughout. The one thing that's a constant is that they thought what they had seen so far, subject to change, was that charges would not be appropriate but that the conduct was worthy of criticism. It was a matter of how to explain both.'" Note the words used. "They were playing with the language." Comey and the F.B.I. decided that there was NO gross neglience on the part of Secretary Clinton. That's all that is IMPORTANT. That's all that COUNTS. That's all that is FACT. There is no evidence whatsoever to prove what you want to believe that "the Justice Department shut them down." President Obama never interfered with Comey, or then-Attorney General Loretta Lynch, or anybody from the Department of Justice regarding Secretary Clinton, and as I stated earlier, Mr. Obama and former Director Comey have each stated that no such conversation ever happened. But as I also responded to you earlier, President Obama did tell Chris Wallace on the April 10th, 2016 edition of Fox News Sunday, that Hillary Clinton "would never intentionally put America in any kind of jeopardy" by using a private email server. And Mr. Obama also told Chris Wallace..."I guarantee that there is no political influence in any investigation conducted by the Justice Department, or the F.B.I. - not just in this case, but in any case. Full stop. Period." But Wayne...you'll believe the lies...not the truth...not the FACTS.
GBD
END OF PART TWO OF THREE
PART THREE OF THREE
DeleteWayne, you obviously don't read all the evidence that is already available in plain sight to prove Donald Trump's guilt. But more is coming. This is why Rod Rosenstein is not stepping down as soon as everyone thought. Special Counsel Robert Mueller isn't finished yet. He's got more to investigate. And I think when Mueller is done, Trump will be done. And once he is forced to resign...(or is impeached, convicted and removed from office, if it come to that)...then Donald Trump will be criminally indicted on a host of charges unrelated to the Mueller probe. As I have said for some time now...Trump should be fearing his loss of freedom.
As for the USA Today/Suffolk University poll...they have already admitted that the question was worded improperly. Here was the question. "Trump has called the Special Counsel's investigation a 'witch hunt' and said he's been subjected to more investigations than previous presidents because of politics. Do you agree?" It is true that 50 percent of the people polled answered "yes" to the question. But the question was flawed because it asked two questions in one. The people could have responded "yes" that Trump's "been subjected to more investigations than previous presidents." There is no way to conclude that 50 percent feel "the Mueller investigation is a 'witch hunt.'" Nevertheless, the poll is an outlier. A recent CNN poll indicates that 87 percent of people - including a large majority of both Democrats and Republicans - want to see Robert Mueller complete his investigation and that the report be made public. Only 9 percent oppose a public report. Obviously if 87 percent of Americans want Mueller to finish his probe, then they can't feel that it's a "witch hunt." So don't go sounding like Trump, Wayne. You should be better than that.
As for 2020, I continue to state as I always have that Donald Trump's name will not be on the ballot. And if he wants it - and we'll know soon - on January 20th, 2021, the 46th president of the United States will be President Joe Biden.
GBD
END OF PART THREE OF THREE
Gary, you still don’t get it, if Joe Biden (or whomever the nominee is) is the Democrat nominee and makes offensive, insulting, vile, vulgar, reprehensible, repugnant, vindictive comments but you love his policies, your telling me you would vote for a far rightwing, anti-abortion, anti-gay marriage, wants full repeal of the ACA, wants to legalize conceal carry without any background checks for all gun purchases and wants to shut down all immigration from our southern border, that’s just for starter but he is a real nice guy, doesn’t play dirty and never has a bad word to say about anyone, you are going to vote for the far right-winger? If you say yes to that you are a lair. Personality does matter but number one on the list has to be policy and core beliefs. Just remember Hillary Clinton’s hands weren’t clean in 2016 she called 30 million people deplorable and irredeemable not to mention the other name calling she did. Gary you make the statement “you obviously don't read all the evidence that is already available in plain sight to prove Donald Trump's guilt,” there has been NO evidence released of any crime by the President. As for the CNN poll, they have been known for years to rig polls for the democrats why would we think this one is any different.
ReplyDeleteThe response to the above reader will be in three parts.
DeletePART ONE OF THREE
Wayne, this will be my final response to you on this subject because you're never going to realize that you are supporting a man who is mentally ill. That being said, the following is in no way a lie...so don't call me a "liar." I can promise you that if...if...Joe Biden - and he is my choice for 2020 - or any other Democrat in the 2020 campaign that were to become the Democratic nominee...were to make anything similar to the offensive, insulting, vile, vulgar, reprehensible, repugnant, vindictive comments that Donald Trump has made during the 2016 campaign and throughout the last two plus years of his presidency...I would no longer give that individual my vote. But I can assure you...that no Democrat...in fact, no other Republican...would ever...ever...act in the detestable, cruel and evil way that Trump has over the last three-and-a-half plus years. Now to answer your other remark. No...I would never vote for a "far right-wing, anti-abortion, anti-gay marriage" candidate who "wants full repeal of the ACA (Affordable Care Act)," who wants to give all people the legal right to carry a concealed weapon, who wants to legalize all gun purchases "without any background checks" and who "wants to shut down all immigration from our southern border." So if there were two candidates (which could never on God's green Earth ever happen), but just for argument sake, if there were two candidates - one Democrat, as described above, and one Republican, as described above - I would NOT under any circumstances vote for either. At that point, as unfortunate as it would be, since I in all good conscience could not vote for either...I would vote for a third party candidate, knowing full well that my vote would probably not count in the grand scheme of the election except to benefit one or the other mainstream nominees. I - and historically, Democrats in general - have to not only LIKE our candidate...we have to LOVE him or her. We have to believe in that person. We have to trust that person. We have to feel so comfortable with him or her as a person first...and then as a politician...that if we can't feel that way...we cannot vote for them. Unfortunately, that's what happened with Hillary Clinton. There were those of us who were madly in-love with her...as I was...and as I still am. And then there were those who were madly in-love with Bernie Sanders. The problem was - in 2016 - that Bernie didn't get the hell out soon enough. On March 1st, 2016, I wrote a column titled...SAY GOODBYE, BERNIE. But Sanders didn't. On May 17th, 2016, I wrote another column titled...GO HOME, BERNIE. IT’S TIME. But he still didn't. Sanders was selfish. He knew he could not win the nomination, but he kept on going until the end, just so he could get the votes in the remaining primaries and be able to move Secretary Clinton further to the left, which is what the Sanders supporters wanted. But when it was all said and done, Hillary Clinton was still the winner for the Democrats. But too many liberals who wanted Sanders, just couldn't pull the lever for Mrs. Clinton...so they stayed home on general election day in November...or they voted for a third party candidate. As for the Independents who were "on the fence"...some of them - not many, but some - even voted for Trump. So no matter what you think, Wayne...Democrats do rate their candidates by their character and by how they will ACT...as commander-in-chief...and that means not being an "insulter-in-chief"...an "offender-in-chief"...a "liar-in-chief"...or anything else "in-chief" that is not representative of what the president of the United States should be.
GBD
END OF PART ONE OF THREE
PART TWO OF THREE
DeleteWayne, as for your continued attack on Hillary Clinton for the "basket of deplorables" comment...you and other Republicans have always taken Mrs. Clinton's comment out of context. Below are the exact words spoken by Secretary Clinton at an LGBTQ fundraiser in New York City on September 9th, 2016.
"You know, to just be grossly generalistic, you could put half of Trump's supporters into what I call the basket of deplorables. Right? [Laughter/applause]. The racist, sexist, homophobic, xenophobic, Islamophobic — you name it. And unfortunately there are people like that. And he has lifted them up. He has given voice to their websites that used to only have 11,000 people, now have 11 million. He tweets and retweets offensive, hateful, mean-spirited rhetoric. Now some of those folks, they are irredeemable, but thankfully they are not America. But the other basket, the other basket, and I know because I see friends from all over America here. I see friends from Florida and Georgia and South Carolina and Texas, as well as you know New York and California. But that other basket of people who are people who feel that government has let them down, nobody cares about them, nobody worries about what happens to their lives and their futures, and they are just desperate for change. It doesn't really even matter where it comes from. They don't buy everything he says but he seems to hold out some hope that their lives will be different. They won't wake up and see their jobs disappear, lose a kid to heroine, feel like they're in a dead-end. Those are people we have to understand and empathize with as well."
The next day, Secretary Clinton responded to criticism by Donald Trump and Trump supporters.
"Last night I was ‘grossly generalistic,’ and that's never a good idea. I regret saying ‘half’ -- that was wrong. But let's be clear, what's really ‘deplorable’ is that Donald Trump hired a major advocate for the so-called ‘alt-right’ movement to run his campaign and that David Duke and other white supremacists see him as a champion of their values. It's deplorable that Trump has built his campaign largely on prejudice and paranoia and given a national platform to hateful views and voices, including by retweeting fringe bigots with a few dozen followers and spreading their message to 11 million people. It's deplorable that he's attacked a federal judge for his ‘Mexican heritage,’ bullied a Gold Star family because of their Muslim faith, and promoted the lie that our first black president is not a true American. So I won't stop calling out bigotry and racist rhetoric in this campaign. I also meant what I said last night about empathy, and the very real challenges we face as a country where so many people have been left out and left behind. As I said, many of Trump's supporters are hard-working Americans who just don’t feel like the economy or our political system are working for them. I'm determined to bring our country together and make our economy work for everyone, not just those at the top. Because we really are ‘stronger together.’ "
The way I interpreted Secretary Clinton's comments was that most Trump supporters themselves were not "deplorable," but that they supported a man and his campaign that was (and still is) "deplorable" because they continue to cheer for him when he was in 2016 and still is now....a man who is - as Mrs. Clinton said - "racist, sexist, homophobic, xenophobic, Islamophobic - you name it."
GBD
END OF PART TWO OF THREE
PART THREE OF THREE
DeleteWayne, as for the polls, there's never been any evidence whatsoever that CNN "rigged polls." However, Trump's former lawyer Michael Cohen did not deny a report by The Wall Street Journal, and Cohen has stated, that on the direct orders of Donald Trump, he paid $50,000 to a tech firm to manipulate two news sites' polls. Cohen admitted that "what I did was at the direction of and for the sole benefit of Donald Trump."
Wayne, if you don't actually see with your eyes...the evidence that is in plain sight that proves Donald Trump's guilt...then you must be blind or living on another planet.
GBD
END OF PART THREE OF THREE
A P.S. to my Part One of Three. If Bernie Sanders had dropped out of the race in March - when I wrote my column - and he would have gotten behind Hillary Clinton 100 percent...I truly believe that former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton would today be President Hillary Clinton. Even with the Russians interference...even with James Comey's letter to Congress 11 days before the election...Hillary Clinton would be president today if Bernie Sanders had gotten out when he knew damn well he could not win the nomination. I can only hope...that if Joe Biden does decide to officially announce his 2020 campaign...that Sanders - and the other Democrats - will move aside early enough, so that Democrats and left-leaning and even moderate Independents nationwide can get behind ONE candidate. If the Democrats wind up with a clown car - as the Republicans did in 2016 - too far in to the 2020 campaign...then all it's going to do is give the Republican nominee (whomever that may be) more of an opportunity to win.
DeleteGBD
Wayne, I just read what George Conway said about Trump. I read the criteria for narrcissistic behavior. Omg it fits trump. Read it. I find it don't disturbing. What do you think? Is the man a mental case as it seems to some? Funny how he gies bragging how smart he is then threatens lawsuits if his grades are released by his high school or college. If he were smart, he would know that it's illegal for schools to divulge grades without permission.
ReplyDeleteI keep wondering if when the day will come when you finally realized he's a harmful and dangerous man.
No Jack...there will unfortunately never be a day when Wayne realizes that Donald Trump is "a harmful and dangerous man." I hope that you read my responses to you above and the responses I made to your comments to Wayne below. When you get a little time, please read all the comments below my column. Thanks. GBD
DeleteJack, let’s see what harm he has done: Got us out of a bad Iran deal, nope a good thing, destroyed ISIS’s land grab in the middle east, negotiated new trade deals with Canada and Mexico, all good things, opened up communications with North Korea, good thing, negotiating new trade deal with China, good thing, looking to protect our southern border, good thing, lower taxes, good thing – could have been better, dropped the Paris accords that were unfair to America yet we still are lowering our greenhouse output without have to pay for other countries, 2 great Justices on USSC , real good thing, told NATO countries they need to kick in more, good thing, I could list more but I think you get the point. So what harm has he done, unemployment is at its lowest, wages are up, job growth is good, GDP growth is higher than expected. So he calls people names and acts like a jerk sometimes, I don’t believe he broke any the laws, I don’t believe he is a racist or hates gays or is anti-Semitic. Does he have a problem that he has no filter, if it comes in his brain it comes out his mouth, yes probably so do a lot of people. Is he narcissistic, yes as are many people in power, 2 of our last 3 President were without a doubt, yes George W wasn’t not because he was GOP but it just wasn’t in his personality. As for the Presidents grades and threatening lawsuits you’re taking the word of Michael Cohen a man I wouldn’t trust to tell me the day of the week. He can’t tell the truth if he was standing on a stack of Bibles.
ReplyDeleteThe response to the above reader will be in three parts.
DeletePART ONE OF THREE
Wayne, I hope that Jack responds to you, and I most certainly welcome his comments. However, I would be remiss if I did not answer you too, so I'm going to take each point you made and give it the truth.
1 - Donald Trump getting out of the Iran deal is bad for America and bad for the world.
2 - ISIS is not destroyed in the Middle East, so you and Trump are sadly mistaken
3 - The USMCA trade deal - also known as the "New NAFTA" - (an agreement between the United States, Canada and Mexico) is signed but not yet ratified. And it may never be finalized. The deal is facing some resistance from Democrats in the House of Representatives who are concerned that the new labor rules will be hard to enforce. Plus, U.S. labor unions have not been convinced that the deal does enough to protect jobs for Americans. Furthermore, there are still concerns by Democrats that the changes from NAFTA to USMCA is bad for LGBTQ workers and pregnant working women. Congressman Richard Neal, Democrat - Massachusetts, says it's going to be a "very hard" path through Congress. Plus, Canada still has some reservations too.
4 - Kim Jong-un of North Korea is laughing behind Donald Trump's back. You Republicans were ready last year to give the Nobel Peace Prize to Trump. What a joke that was. North Korea is building more nuclear weapons and missiles, expanding its base, and building another facility.
5 - Trump doesn't care about protecting the U.S./Mexico border. He just wants to keep a campaign pledge to his base by building a wall. As I've written since June 16, 2015 when Trump announced his candidacy and first mentioned the idea of a wall on the southern border...THERE WILL NEVER BE A WALL. He can declare all the national emergencies he wants, but by the time the U.S. Supreme Court hears all the lawsuits, Trump will no longer be in office. He - you, and any other Republicans - are fools if all of you think Congress and the courts are going to allow Trump to steal 8 billion dollars from the Department of Defense to build a wall. Trump's "wall of hate" will never happen. It will never be built.
6 - No China trade deal. Negotiations are going nowhere.
7 - No lower taxes for the middle class, just for the super rich. Americans nationwide have been complaining throughout these first three months of 2019 because people who always received hefty tax refunds after filing their income tax returns are now having to pay large amounts in taxes. I personally know one person who used to receive in excess of $1,000 every year, but because of Trump's tax plan, he had to pay out about $6,000 in taxes this year. But the super wealthy made out like bandits.
8 - Doing away with the Paris Accords - totally, totally BAD. Period.
9 - Are you kidding me? Do you really think any Democrat is going to agree with you about Trump's two Supreme Court justices? No Wayne...not at all great.
10 - As for NATO, the other countries hate us. Trump has alienated our allies. The guy is sick in the head.
So Wayne...all your "good things"...are bad. Very bad.
GBD
END OF PART ONE OF THREE
PART TWO OF THREE
DeleteAs for the economy, Wayne...economists credit President Obama with the bulk of that success, including the low unemployment, etc. However, the tracking for the future was much better under President Obama...but with Donald Trump...not so much.
You can believe all you want that Trump hasn't broken any laws, but as I have already written, the evidence is right in front of everyone's eyes...right in plain sight. And if you don't believe - after all his crude and callous comments - that Trump is not a "racist," and that he doesn't "hate gays," and that he is not "anti-Semitic"...along with so much more that makes Trump a bigot (including his remarks about Mexicans, other Latinos, Muslims, African-Americans, etc.)...then you need to open your eyes and ears.
GBD
END OF PART TWO OF THREE
PART THREE OF THREE
DeleteWayne, the president of the United States is not suppose to be like "a lot of people." He must have a "filter."
You amaze me, Wayne. But I suppose I shouldn't be shocked. So you're now going to compare President Bill Clinton and President Barack Obama to Donald Trump by calling Mr. Clinton and Mr. Obama..."narcissists?" You wrote that "2 of our last 3 presidents were without a doubt" "narcissistic" and you throw out President George W. Bush from the group. Narcissism is a mental disorder, Wayne. Psychiatrists and psychologists nationwide and worldwide have stated definitively that Donald Trump shows every symptom of narcissistic personality disorder. Of course nobody can "diagnose" Trump from afar, but doctors can recognize every symptom and basically connect the dots. President Clinton and President Obama do not in any way fall in to that category.
As for Michael Cohen telling the truth. You seem to forget that a federal judge and prosecutors from the Southern District of New York are believing him. That's good enough for me.
GBD
END OF PART THREE OF THREE
1 – The Iran deal was and is a bad deal, it did nothing for America and gave Iran billions of dollars some as cash as ransom money, much of it being used for terrorism, good thing getting out, we should have never gotten in.
Delete2- Here you go twisting words again, I never said ISIS was destroyed in the Middle East, I said “destroyed ISIS’s land grab in the middle east” they now control basically no territory in the area. Good thing!
3- Once again I never said the USMCA was ratified, I said “negotiated”, if the Dems would work for America instead of being the party of “NO” it would pass.
4- North Korea hasn’t tested a nuclear warhead or fired test missiles since the talks started, that’s a start and a good thing.
5- The wall is what will help protect America, nothing is being stolen, hopefully the courts will follow the “Law” and the wall will be built where needed.
6- Hopefully we will get a new trade deal with China, once again I said its being “negotiated” which would be a good thing, I love your pessimism!
7- From the left-leaning Tax Policy Center and Bloomberg “The vast majority of Americans get some tax cut, at least at first. Just one in 20 families face a higher tax burden this year because of the law, the left-leaning Tax Policy Center estimates, including 7.3 percent of middle-income groups.” I did say good thing but it could have been better, maybe if the Dems would have participated, it may have helped.
8- America has cut carbon emissions greatly over the last 20 years and will continue to but we shouldn’t be paying for other countries as the Paris Accords required America to pay an unfair burden of the cost. Good thing to get out and do it on our own.
9- I never said the Democrats would agree with the Presidents picks for the USSC, most of them do not believe in the Constitution as written, the Dems want to interpret it not apply it! Trump’s picks Great Thing!
10- I don’t believe they all hate us, they need to know that we aren’t paying all their bills and protecting them and then they vote against us in the UN, that’s another group we pay too much for and get to little back.
As for my comments on 2 of the past 3 Presidents, Clinton and his wife are power hungry (mad) and Obama thinks he can walk on water.
As for Cohen telling the truth, that makes me laugh, the prosecutor team are Trump haters, the Judge, who knows, my opinion anyone who believes Cohen without evidence in stone (there has been no corroborating evidence shown) is either a Trump hater, a fool or a democrat, it even could be that some of you are a little of each.
The response to the above reader will be in three parts.
DeletePART ONE OF THREE
Wayne, I was not going to respond to you, as this is pointless to go 'round and 'round when you're just too blind to see the facts. However, I will make one more set of comments, and then if you insist on responding again, I will give you...as Lawrence O'Donnell would say at the end of his MSNBC program..."the last word."
1 - President Obama was 100% correct with the Iran deal. And what Donald Trump did is going to bite us in the ass.
2 - No twisting of words. The bottom line is that Donald Trump has not "destroyed" ISIS, as he told the country and the world that he would do.
3 - When you make a declarative statement like...Donald Trump has "negotiated new trade deals with Canada and Mexico, all good things" then you are insinuating that the United States has made a new trade deal with those two nations. And that's clearly not true yet. As I said...Canada, especially, has reservations and concerns. So stop trying to spin it to your benefit when you are clearly not correct. As for the Democrats being the party of "NO," you obviously have that backwards. The Democrats only say "YES" when it benefits the American people. If Republicans would realize there are too many concerns, and then try to compromise, maybe something could get done. As of right now, the "deal" - which isn't yet a deal since it's not a "DONE DEAL" - will not get passed through Congress.
4 - Once again, Wayne, you can't spin your words to your liking. The facts are that North Korea has expanded its nuclear weapons' base, is building more nuclear weapons and missiles, and they are under construction for another new facility. What the hell do you think they are going to do with all that power...organize a knitting club? Get real, Wayne.
5 - THERE WILL NEVER BE A WALL ON THE U.S./MEXICO BORDER. I have written those words for more than three-and-a-half years. You can engrave those words on the wall of your office, your bedroom and anywhere else. A "WALL OF HATE" IS NOT AMERICA!!!
6 - As I said before..."No China trade deal. Negotiations are going nowhere." Not pessimism, Wayne...just being realistic.
GBD
END OF PART ONE OF THREE
PART TWO OF THREE
Delete7 - Wayne, according to Bloomberg..."A year after the middle class tax cut, the rich are winning." Bloomberg also says..."The benefits of the tax law are spread pretty evenly in the next few years. But, measured as a percentage of their tax bills, the group getting the largest cut is clear: Families earning from $200,000 to $1 million will see their tax bills drop about 9 percent next year according to Congress’s official scorekeeper, the nonpartisan Joint Committee on Taxation. That’s 1 percentage point more than the tax cut for households earning $75,000 to $100,000." Bloomberg also writes...that the "average rates dropped in 2018, but they'll return to 2017 levels by 2026." Bloomberg continues by writing..."And, the cuts for middle-class wage earners fade over time. By 2026, changes to individual tax rules expire, while corporate changes are permanent. Unless Congress acts, 53 percent of all taxpayers will see a modest tax hike by 2027, the Tax Policy Center says, including almost 70 percent of middle-income families." The bottom line is that Democrats in Congress care about the middle-class and the poor. The Republicans in Congress - and Donald Trump - only care about the rich. And Bloomberg says..."Workers are still waiting for their raises as inflation eats into modest increases. Hourly wages, adjusted for inflation, were up 0.8 percent in November, according to the Labor Department. While the number has been steadily rising for the last few months, it's still significantly LOWER than real wage increases in 2015 and early 2016 (under President Obama), when inflation-adjusted raises occassionally topped 2 percent." So obviously, Wayne...Trump and the Republicans' tax plan isn't helping the average worker, and neither is the economy, despite what Trump and the Republicans think.
8 - I repeat myself from earlier..."Doing away with the Paris Accords - totally, totally BAD. Period."
9 - You know, Wayne, I am really so sick and tired of hearing you spew your venom that Democrats "do not believe in the Constitution as written." The Constitution was written more than 200 years ago. It is perhaps the most perfect document the world has ever seen. But it is NOT perfect. The world was different back in the late 1700s. Our Founders - as I have written in the past - didn't have a crystal ball to see the future. If they had, many parts of the Constitution would have been written differently. For those reasons, "interpret(ation)" of certain parts of the Constitution is the only sensible avenue to go in the 21st century. More liberal-thinking Supreme Court justices realize that. Conservatives do not...and I believe that such conservatives can be destructive for the United States of America.
10 - No Wayne...the other countries in NATO do hate us...and when I say us...I mean, they hate Donald Trump. Once a new president is elected - A DEMOCRAT - and hopefully Joe Biden...the nations of NATO will love America again.
GBD
END OF PART TWO OF THREE
PART THREE OF THREE
DeleteWayne, your hatred towards President Bill Clinton, Secretary Hillary Clinton and President Barack Obama is crystal clear. None of your vicious venom is true.
Wayne, unless you agree with them, everyone in your eyes is a "Trump hater." You call the career prosecutors "Trump haters." You call the judge a "Trump hater." You call Democrats "Trump haters." And now you add that if any of us are not "Trump haters"...we're "fools"...and that "some of (us) are a little of each." No Wayne...YOU ARE A HATER. The end is coming, Wayne, for Donald Trump and his crooked family. Even if Special Counsel Robert Mueller's report doesn't reveal what I hope it will, Trump and his three adult children and son-in-law have a hell of a lot more to be worried about with other legal matters that are being investigated by Congress, by the Southern District of New York and by the New York State Attorney General's Office. I don't know when it's going to happen, but there will be a time when Donald Trump and his off-spring will be indicted. And my words are not hate, Wayne...but words of logic based on evidence that we already know and already can see. It's all right there, Wayne...in plain sight...and as clear as a bell.
GBD
END OF PART THREE OF THREE