Hey, don’t look at me. I didn’t vote for the guy. And the “grownups in the room” did everything they could to try to stop him. But ~65M voters voted for him anyway, and now we’re stuck with him. Tough to impeach a guy because you think he’s unsuited to be president when he just got elected by 65M people, acting not much different than he is now.
No one is asking you to feel sorry for him. We’re not his parole board. We’re just a bunch of guys kicking things around on a MB, and we’re discussing what’s more or less likely to have happened, and what’s evidence for that. IMO, the way Trump acted is consistent with how a person with his temperament, intelligence, and knowledge would act if he was innocent of the charges against him, and is not evidence of guilt as to these specific charges.
Brothers and sisters, pals and gals, the trajectory of the shit has intercepted the locus of the fan. Little brown stinky freckles everywhere. Its the money.
Mueller is empowered to track down stuff that comes up in the course of their investigations, and follow wherever it leads. And its leading to Trump’s money. And his real estate deals. His loans. Rubles and dollars and loans, oh my!
I’m thinking that his is what is more likely to provoke the TrumpBeast to fire Mueller, pretending that his charge does *not *include investigating money stuff. (What was that article about how Mueller is bringing on guys who specialize in money laundering and unwinding the slime trails of cash?)
If you’re not a fan, why are the vast majority of your posts, no matter what the issue is, in defense of him? And often on such flimsy grounds, such as “he’s only making mistakes because he’s incompetent?”
This isn’t an attack on you. Those are serious questions.
I very rarely make points which are in agreement with the majority of other posters. That doesn’t interest me. Generally anything I say on any subject will be a minority view, because if it was a majority view I wouldn’t bother saying it.
In the case of Trump you won’t find me posting that Trump is a great (or even a marginally qualified) president etc. because I don’t think that’s true. But considering the ideological orientation of this board, what you will find is people going way over the top in their antipathy to Trump, and that’s where there will be areas of disagreement.
Your second question is not a “serious question” as you claim. Obviously I don’t think anything I’m posting is “on such flimsy grounds”. To the contrary, I think much of what people like you are posting is on flimsy grounds.
I may have been a little tongue-in-cheek the way I phrased it, but you really do believe that Trump’s lack of experience and understanding of government and laws entitle him to leeway? Sort of like how a pro se defendant shouldn’t be expected to behave like a real attorney?
What I’m saying is that “Trump’s lack of experience and understanding of government and laws” means that his actions are not indicative of guilt as to the charge of collusion with the Russians as they might be if he was an ordinary politician and personality. So if the discussion is “did Trump collude with the Russians?” and someone is saying “he would never act the way he did if he wasn’t guilty of that charge” - IOW, the discussion in this thread - then the correct response is that this is an incorrect inference in the specific case of Trump.
If the question is “should we have elected a guy with no experience with or understanding of politics or policy and the temperament of a spoiled 5 year old?” the answer is of course not. But that’s typically not the question being asked, because the election is behind us and it’s difficult to impeach a president simply for being unqualified.
Roughly half the public thinks Trump is guilty of criminal use of oxygen, just for breathing. Another rough half thinks he is in the midst of Making America Great Again, and any attacks are Fake News. So half don’t need convincing and the other half are impervious to reason.
That’s probably overstating it a bit – those groups are probably about 40% and 30%, very roughly (based on trends for strong approval and strong disapproval) – the opinion of the other ~30% could very well be the difference between impeachment proceedings and continual defense of Trump on the part of his party comrades.
Judging one group by one standard, and one person by a lesser standard, would seem to be the dictionary definition of leeway. Not sure why that is confusing.
It sounds like you’re saying that we can’t ever take anything Trump says or does into account when assessing the situation regarding the investigations that are taking place. That he has carte blanche for any and all actions because he’s too stupid to know how bad he’s making himself look so therefore things he says and does do not matter.
In other words excuses that wouldn’t fly for pretty much anyone else in a similar situation.
What about the half of the public who think they have a genuine reason to be disgusted with him because of what he actually says, does and promises to do?
No-you don’t “got it”.
Ok, then can you give me an example of something that he could do or say regarding the investigation that would make him seem more guilty to you.
Seems to me that each case and situation that comes up results in essentially the same reponse from you, so I’m curious where your line is. Theoretically what action on Trump’s part would move you? Because I’m currently failing to imagine what it could be after all we’ve already seen.