US Politics Thread 2016-2020

[August]

Originally Posted by Mr Quatro

Surely a big break down is coming soon ... we will hear about it on twitter for sure.

We've been waiting for this break for what a year now? We still don't even know what law Trump has supposedly broken.

[vienna]

It took Ken Starr almost exactly four years to issue his report on Clinton in 1998, so a year is not a very long time at all; if its any consolation, the extent and ability to gather organize and process data (emails, phone recordings, documents, etc.) is far more advanced now than twenty years ago, so the findings shouldn't take as long as in the Clinton case...

...so, we'll be rid of the farce and detriment that is Trump fairly soon, so don't fret...




<O>

[Platapus]

Originally Posted by vienna

It took Ken Starr almost exactly four years to issue his report on Clinton in 1998, so a year is not a very long time at all; if its any consolation, the extent and ability to gather organize and process data (emails, phone recordings, documents, etc.) is far more advanced now than twenty years ago, so the findings shouldn't take as long as in the Clinton case...

...so, we'll be rid of the farce and detriment that is Trump fairly soon, so don't fret...




<O>

Took 2 years with Nixon

[Rockstar]

LOL four years for the 'Starr Report'. Ever read it? It a 70,000,000 dollar joke. It has nothing to with the original Whitewater investigation. Since neither Bill Clinton nor Hillary were ever prosecuted, after three separate inquiries found insufficient evidence linking them with the criminal conduct of others related to the Whitewater land deal.

What the Starr report does contain is what I mentioned before. An intern, a stained dress, a cigar, and the definition of the word 'is'.

Personally I think the Starr report is a national embarrassment.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv...t/icreport.htm

I'd wage the Mueller report is gonna be no different.

[Buddahaid]

I actually completely agree with you for once.

[vienna]

Originally Posted by Platapus

Took 2 years with Nixon

...and Nixon was pretty much a slam dunk, given the tapes of his actual conversations in the Oval Office regarding his administration's efforts and activities in the execution and subsequent cover-up of Watergate and related issues...





<O>

[Mr Quatro]

I never got a chance to listen to those tapes ... I just assumed he was guilty and never bothered to even read the transcripts, but turns out that he lied before the watergate crimes were even committed:

https://www.nytimes.com/2016/12/31/o...treachery.html


Nixon’s Vietnam Treachery
By JOHN A. FARRELLDEC. 31, 2016

Richard M. Nixon always denied it: to David Frost, to historians and to Lyndon B. Johnson, who had the strongest suspicions and the most cause for outrage at his successor’s rumored treachery. To them all, Nixon insisted that he had not sabotaged Johnson’s 1968 peace initiative to bring the war in Vietnam to an early conclusion.

“My God. I would never do anything to encourage” South Vietnam “not to come to the table,” Nixon told Johnson, in a conversation captured on the White House taping system.

Now we know Nixon lied. A newfound cache of notes left by H. R. Haldeman, his closest aide, shows that Nixon directed his campaign’s efforts to scuttle the peace talks, which he feared could give his opponent, Vice President Hubert H. Humphrey, an edge in the 1968 election. On Oct. 22, 1968, he ordered Haldeman to “monkey wrench” the initiative.

Just in case you don't click on links ...

Throughout his life, Nixon feared disclosure of this skulduggery. “I did nothing to undercut them,” he told Frost in their 1977 interviews. “As far as Madame Chennault or any number of other people,” he added, “I did not authorize them and I had no knowledge of any contact with the South Vietnamese at that point, urging them not to.” Even after Watergate, he made it a point of character. “I couldn’t have done that in conscience.”

Nixon had cause to lie. His actions appear to violate federal law, which prohibits private citizens from trying to “defeat the measures of the United States.” His lawyers fought throughout Nixon’s life to keep the records of the 1968 campaign private. The broad outline of “the Chennault affair” would dribble out over the years. But the lack of evidence of Nixon’s direct involvement gave pause to historians and afforded his loyalists a defense.

Time has yielded Nixon’s secrets. Haldeman’s notes were opened quietly at the presidential library in 2007, where I came upon them in my research for a biography of the former president. They contain other gems, like Haldeman’s notations of a promise, made by Nixon to Southern Republicans, that he would retreat on civil rights and “lay off pro-Negro crap” if elected president. There are notes from Nixon’s 1962 California gubernatorial campaign, in which he and his aides discuss the need to wiretap political foes.

When Johnson got word of Nixon’s meddling, he ordered the F.B.I. to track Chennault’s movements. She “contacted Vietnam Ambassador Bui Diem,” one report from the surveillance noted, “and advised him that she had received a message from her boss … to give personally to the ambassador. She said the message was … ‘Hold on. We are gonna win. … Please tell your boss to hold on.’ ”

In a conversation with the Republican senator Everett Dirksen, the minority leader, Johnson lashed out at Nixon. “I’m reading their hand, Everett,” Johnson told his old friend. “This is treason.”

“I know,” Dirksen said mournfully.

Johnson’s closest aides urged him to unmask Nixon’s actions. But on a Nov. 4 conference call, they concluded that they could not go public because, among other factors, they lacked the “absolute proof,” as Defense Secretary Clark Clifford put it, of Nixon’s direct involvement.

Nixon was elected president the next day.

Sad day for 20,000 more would die from that day on

[Rockstar]

Two sides to every story Mr. Quatro, two sides to every story. According to FARRELLDEC's story Dirksen and Johnson had no proof only conjecture.


Here is the otherside of FARRELLDEC's story

https://www.nixonfoundation.org/2017...monkey-wrench/

Here are Haldeman's hand written notes:

https://assets.documentcloud.org/doc...ct-22-1968.pdf

enjoy

[vienna]

The Nixon Foundation?

They are the same people who basically tried to run the Nixon Presidential Library, who, for years, obliterated any full mention of Watergate from the Nixon Library's display of Nixon's life. The Library's display of Nixon's life and timeline used to just basically get to a point just before Watergate and then skip to something along the lines of 'Nixon decided to resign', with no real depiction of why Nixon left office; it was kind of like, 'Well, Dick needed a vacation'. Historians, of all political stripes, decried such a blatant effort to rewrite historical fact and whitewash what is, perhaps, our nation's worst Presidential criminal scandal. Eventually, the Nixon Foundation was ousted from having any major influence on the Library's exhibits and other content and actual historians were brought in to bring the exhibits closer to reality. However, even when the Library's historical exhibit record was set straight, the Nixon Foundation still tried to take another swing:

http://articles.latimes.com/2011/apr...nixon-20110401

As for the Nixon Foundation's posting in the link supplied, the second to the last paragraph says this:

Of course, Mr. Farrell is entitled to his interpretation of the Haldeman notes, and the conclusions he draws from them. But the alternative interpretation, if nothing else, more clearly reflects the context of the actual Haldeman document. Therefore, it deserves consideration before accepting Mr. Farrell’s interpretation, and the very serious charge he bases on it.

So, it would seem, the intent is to discredit a conjecture with another conjecture, which is what an interpretation is, rather than with any actual fact...

The actual fact is that Nixon did act criminally and there is ample proof, in his own words and voice, to prove he acted criminally. NO amount of partisan 'historical' revision is going to erase those facts...

It should be noted Nixon's pardon was not entirely unconditional; he was still obligated to cooperate with any legal investigations of the conduct of others in his administration; this included being deposed or possibly being called to testify at court or Congressional hearings; as it was, he later gave testimony, under oath, to investigators that was found to be untrue, something that opened him up to further charges not covered by his pardon...

If anyone is interested, this is a link to an article in the August 1983 issue f The Atlantic giving a very detailed account of the motives and machinations behind the Nixon pardon:

The Pardon - Nixon, Ford, Haig, and the Transfer of Power --

https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine...pardon/305571/





<O>

[Bubblehead1980]

Something to ponder....

Amazing and scary the times in which we are living. An attempted coup against President Trump by the combined "deep state" is playing out before our eyes. Instead of using the military like in a lot of third world countries, or assassination (they did that already, in 1963) they are trying to manufacture a phony legal case, use propaganda from the media to create the appearance of impropriety and sell that. Of course for those who suffer from confirmation bias, Trump Derangment Syndrome, it's just what they want to hear but any objective person would ask. What has he done that is illegal or an investigation even ? Easy name quite a few things other Presidents have actually done, but stayed in office, and no mention of impeachment etc was made , because they played ball and were part of the machine.

Ask yourself, why do they want him gone so bad? Because they can't control him and force him to serve their intrests .They hate his agenda, America First.

[Catfish]

^ Sry to bother you but the "Deep State" concept of takeover is a politically entirely right-wing club, with interests of big oil and "defense".

Also the term "fake news" was originally coined to describe media companies like Breitbart, Fox and such. They are trying to turn this round 24 hours a day i know, but just saying that black is white or the moon is made of green cheese does not make it true.
Problem is that so many people seem to fall for that.
Not that the "left" cannot also lie, but the main media are usualy center and neutral, and only look "left" from the extreme (alt) right spectrum.

If there is any "coup" against Trump it must consist of level-headed people who want reason and common sense to return to America

[vienna]

"Deep State" takeover; is it anything like Hillary's claim of a "Vast Right-Wing Conspiracy"?...

Actually they are alike: they're both self-serving bull designed to deflect and distract from the flaws and failures of those who propose such idiotic concepts and the inherent flaws in their arguments...




<O>

[vienna]

<O>

[Bubblehead1980]

Originally Posted by Catfish

^ Sry to bother you but the "Deep State" concept of takeover is a politically entirely right-wing club, with interests of big oil and "defense".

Also the term "fake news" was originally coined to describe media companies like Breitbart, Fox and such. They are trying to turn this round 24 hours a day i know, but just saying that black is white or the moon is made of green cheese does not make it true.
Problem is that so many people seem to fall for that.
Not that the "left" cannot also lie, but the main media are usualy center and neutral, and only look "left" from the extreme (alt) right spectrum.

If there is any "coup" against Trump it must consist of level-headed people who want reason and common sense to return to America

This is not about right or left, there is and has been a power structure in this country for a long time, motivated mainly by globalist policies and money. The two parties are part of the same power structure, but it masters with competing interests. Bernie found that out in the primary, when the chosen one was selected to run the primary. People do have votes and some power, but in past population was far easier to control, manipulate etc.

Deep state is the powerful interests that have required us to pursue globalists policies at the expense of the american worker, act as the world's beat cop keeping us in perpetual war.

Population is more difficult to control now than in the past. A lot of people are awake, and voted in the one person they can not control. Why ? Trump has enough money, he can't be purchased. Skeletons we don't know about? None.

They are scared because he will no longer allow us to surrender to the false song of globalism(great line of his). Plans to stop the foolish, wreckless immigration and trade policies. Stop allowing us to be bullied around the world. Actually confront and defeat the savages of isis. Stop coddling those who follow the ideology of the enemy.

With a twitter account, he has made the established press largely irreleavant and shown the congress is a useless band of idiots.

Finally, we have a President pursuing America First. Reagan was a good man but like many, once in he decided to play within the system. People like Clinton who meant well, were purchased with ease. That is the issue, most people, especially those who would have never dreamed to have such wealth love the status and perks. Trump finally decided to run to make a real difference.

Last time anyone tried and really resisted deep state, he was executed in 1963. JFK refused to let the deep state get us in a nuclear war and was against their banking cartels. People know the truth about that, many accept it.

They are doing everything they can to try and bring down this President, who really is our obi wan, our only hope.

[Bubblehead1980]

Originally Posted by vienna

<O>

Colbert is a no talent hack, alwyas has been.