Deleted
Posts: 0
May 2, 2024 4:23:12 GMT
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 10, 2017 11:44:04 GMT
I don't think for a minute there are tapes (and he's already said people are going to be very disappointed). I (like he's been known to do during business transactions), and then has deleted them, or moved them somewhere else (another format), and that's why tapes was in quotation marks, and that he won't hand any over. I can't imagine he'd hand over anything self incriminating. Good point, he might have. Let's see if we actually hear anything legit or just excuses. I'm going with excuses. After his "tape" tweet, I remember thinking that was at worst a threat, or at a minimum intimidation. And I think that tweet, compounded with everything else he's said and done, might lead to the big downfall. |
|
|
|
Post by LavenderLayoutLady on Jun 10, 2017 12:00:49 GMT
I'm wondering if he recorded their conversations on his phone (like he's been known to do during business transactions), and then has deleted them, or moved them somewhere else (another format), and that's why tapes was in quotation marks, and that he won't hand any over. I can't imagine he'd hand over anything self incriminating. Good point, he might have. Let's see if we actually hear anything legit or just excuses. I'm going with excuses. After his "tape" tweet, I remember thinking that was at worst a threat, or at a minimum intimidation. And I think that tweet, compounded with everything else he's said and done, might lead to the big downfall. That's the thing. He's running the presidency like he's the Godfather. There's a lot to be said for the way things are said, the inflection, who is saying it and what his reputation is. "I hope you can let this go" coming from the president is not just an idle wish. The president is supposedly the leader of the free world. He fired Comey. Common sense needs to be taken in this case. |
|
|
|
Post by ScrapsontheRocks on Jun 10, 2017 13:12:35 GMT
I don't think for a minute there are tapes (and he's already said people are going to be very disappointed). I I'm wondering if he recorded their conversations on his phone (like he's been known to do during business transactions), and then has deleted them, or moved them somewhere else (another format), and that's why tapes was in quotation marks, and that he won't hand any over. I can't imagine he'd hand over anything self incriminating. I agree; however, post-Watergate (I read this somewhere- perhaps on the tweets thread?) there are restrictions on any POTUS deleting stuff; doing so is an offence in itself. Can anyone confirm this? |
|
|
|
Post by SockMonkey on Jun 10, 2017 13:17:19 GMT
What difference would it make if he testified under oath? He's a liar. Liars don't give a fuck about oaths. I don't think for one hot second swearing to tell the truth means absolutely ANYTHING to him.
He's a garbage human.
|
|
|
|
Post by LavenderLayoutLady on Jun 10, 2017 13:19:18 GMT
I'm wondering if he recorded their conversations on his phone (like he's been known to do during business transactions), and then has deleted them, or moved them somewhere else (another format), and that's why tapes was in quotation marks, and that he won't hand any over. I can't imagine he'd hand over anything self incriminating. I agree; however, post-Watergate (I read this somewhere- perhaps on the tweets thread?) there are restrictions on any POTUS deleting stuff; doing so is an offence in itself. Can anyone confirm this? I have no idea about the restriction (I admittedly am not up to speed on every law about the presidency). But, really, just because there is a law doesn't mean he won't disregard it. |
|
|
|
Post by mrssmith on Jun 10, 2017 13:23:26 GMT
He's got a long list of things to do before he gets around to testifying under oath. You know, like finalize his taxes so they can be released and check to see if there is a recording system in the Oval Office. I'm sure there are a few more.  I do think if he testifies under oath in an open session he WILL get the biggest TV audience ever so it will be very tempting for him. I personally hope it happens but was listening to a discussion about how Reagan testified via written answers to questions during the Iran Contra investigation. I could see Trump's lawyers pushing for this option if it is available to keep him from going off on tangents or rambling. LOL! Yes, he will brag that he had more viewers than the Comey hearing. Save |
|
Deleted
Posts: 0
May 2, 2024 4:23:12 GMT
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 10, 2017 13:25:54 GMT
Excerpt from this article www.washingtonexaminer.com/byron-york-the-sordid-case-behind-jared-kushners-grudge-against-chris-christie/article/2620427Five years later, in a 2014 interview with the New York real estate publication The Real Deal, Jared called his father's treatment "obviously unjust" and said the experience had soured him on an earlier ambition to become a prosecutor. "If you're convicting murderers, it's one thing," Jared said. "It's often fairly clear. When you get into things like white-collar crime, there are often a lot of nuances. Seeing my father's situation, I felt what happened was obviously unjust in terms of the way they pursued him." So Jared, was it unjust for your father to break the law? "If you're convicting murderers, it's one thing," Jared said. "It's often fairly clear. When you get into things like white-collar crime, there are often a lot of [expensive legal] nuances [ for which my dad and billionaires like him pay handsomely to make it virtually impossible to prove a single person "criminally responsible" beyond plausible deniability for corporate actions.]" There, Jared. Fixed it for you. |
|
|
|
Post by papercrafteradvocate on Jun 10, 2017 13:42:09 GMT
I'm wondering if he recorded their conversations on his phone (like he's been known to do during business transactions), and then has deleted them, or moved them somewhere else (another format), and that's why tapes was in quotation marks, and that he won't hand any over. I can't imagine he'd hand over anything self incriminating. I agree; however, post-Watergate (I read this somewhere- perhaps on the tweets thread?) there are restrictions on any POTUS deleting stuff; doing so is an offence in itself. Can anyone confirm this? Remember trump is above the rules. In cases we're he's being sued, he has defied orders by a judge to produce documentation--he destroyed it and said none existed. He'd do it again in a heartbeat. |
|
|
|
Post by revirdsuba99 on Jun 10, 2017 13:42:41 GMT
Not about deleting, but blocking on twitter.... Trump's blocking of Twitter users violates U.S. Constitution: rights instituteBy Dustin Volz Jun 7th 2017 6:06PM WASHINGTON (Reuters) - A free-speech institute on Tuesday sent a letter to President Donald Trump demanding the prolific tweeter unblock certain Twitter users on grounds the practice violates the First Amendment of the U.S. Constitution. Trump's @realdonaldtrump account recently blocked a number of accounts that replied to his tweets with commentary that criticized, mocked or disagreed with his actions. Twitter users are unable to see or respond to tweets from accounts that block them. The Knight First Amendment Institute at Columbia University in New York said in its letter that the blocking suppressed speech in a public forum protected by the Constitution. The White House did not respond to a request for comment. Twitter Inc said it had no comment. Alex Abdo, the institute's senior staff attorney, likened Twitter to a modern form of town hall meeting or public comment periods for government agency proposals, both venues where U.S. law requires even-handed treatment of speech. Eric Goldman, a Santa Clara University law professor who focuses on internet law, said that previous cases involving politicians blocking users on Facebook <FB.O> supported the Knight Institute's position. If the institute should sue, Trump could claim his @realdonaldtrump account is for personal use and separate from his official duties as president, Goldman said. But he called that defense "laughable." Trump also has a presidential @potus Twitter account. The Knight Institute said its arguments would apply with "equal force" to both accounts. Trump's Twitter use has drawn intense media attention for his unvarnished commentary about his agenda and attacks on critics. His tweets are often retweeted tens of thousands of times, and can shape the news cycle. Legal experts have said his tweets may directly affect policy. A chain of postings about his travel ban may hamper his administration's defense in courts. The letter said Trump or his aides blocked the accounts @aynrandpaulryan and @joepabike, belonging to songwriter Holly O'Reilly and professional cyclist and author Joseph M. Papp, respectively. O'Reilly was blocked on May 28 after posting a brief animated clip of Pope Francis appearing uncomfortable during a meeting with Trump with a caption, "this is pretty much how the whole world sees you," the letter said. Papp learned he was blocked on June 4 after responding to a Trump tweet with a tweet labeling the president a "#fake leader." The accounts are just two of several that have been blocked by Trump or his aides, Abdo said. (Reporting by Dustin Volz; Editing by Jonathan Oatis) www.aol.com/article/news/2017/06/07/president-donald-trump-twitter-Constitution-free-speech-blocking-white-house/22131434/ |
|
|
|
Post by papercrafteradvocate on Jun 10, 2017 13:44:13 GMT
He's got a long list of things to do before he gets around to testifying under oath. You know, like finalize his taxes so they can be released and check to see if there is a recording system in the Oval Office. I'm sure there are a few more. I do think if he testifies under oath in an open session he WILL get the biggest TV audience ever so it will be very tempting for him. I personally hope it happens but was listening to a discussion about how Reagan testified via written answers to questions during the Iran Contra investigation. I could see Trump's lawyers pushing for this option if it is available to keep him from going off on tangents or rambling. LOL! Yes, he will brag that he had more viewers than the Comey hearing. SaveI think this is in part why he's making the statements that he'll 100% testify. I think he was jealous of the attention Comey had, the photos of him surrounded by press, all attention and eyes on Comey. There was nary a blip of anything about Trumps rally that day. |
|
|
|
Post by epeanymous on Jun 10, 2017 13:52:45 GMT
You know, Mr. President, the losers and haters really don't want you to testify. The Democrats are shaking in their boots; they are terrified that you will come in and captivate the nation with your eloquent, thoughtful, and above all, truthful testimony.
Psst. Think of the ratings.
Only manly, powerful, important, successful men testify under oath before Congress, Mr. President. Any lawyer who tells you not to has forgotten who is paying the bills.
(Well, in theory, anyway.)
|
|
katybee
Drama Llama
Posts: 5,378 
|
Post by katybee on Jun 10, 2017 14:28:36 GMT
OK… I have watched the tape several times, and I am confused. I do not think that he meant to say that he was 100% willing to testify under oath. It is very unclear (are you surprised?). I think he thought the reporter was asking him if HE made Comey swear his loyalty under oath. I don't think he understood the reporter was asking if he, himself, would be willing to testify under oath… "And I didn't say under oath. I hardly know the man. I'm not gonna say 'I want you to pledge allegiance. Who would ask a man to pledge allegiance under oath I mean think of it. I hardly know the man. It doesn't make sense. No i didn't say that and I didn't say the other." I think Donald Trump accidentally committed to testifying under oath when he actually did not mean to do that… Listen to what he says in the video ver carefully... starting about 54 seconds in,.. www.latimes.com/politics/washington/la-na-essential-washington-updates-president-trump-says-he-s-willing-to-1497036173-htmlstory.html |
|
|
|
Post by revirdsuba99 on Jun 10, 2017 14:54:00 GMT
"And I didn't say under oath. I hardly know the man. I'm not gonna say 'I want you to pledge allegiance. Who would ask a man to pledge allegiance under oath I mean think of it. I hardly know the man. It doesn't make sense. No i didn't say that and I didn't say the other." I have been trying to remember what program I watch Nikki Haley. She was taking about the request for the oath of loyalty DT asked for.... Maybe about a month ago... 'This Week' with George Stephanopoulos? I just don't know... |
|
trollie
Pearl Clutcher
Posts: 3,580
|
Post by trollie on Jun 10, 2017 16:03:02 GMT
What difference would it make if he testified under oath? He's a liar. Liars don't give a fuck about oaths. I don't think for one hot second swearing to tell the truth means absolutely ANYTHING to him. He's a garbage human. I am not expecting him to be truthful, but he will be opening himself up to perjury charges. |
|
|
|
Post by SockMonkey on Jun 10, 2017 16:11:44 GMT
What difference would it make if he testified under oath? He's a liar. Liars don't give a fuck about oaths. I don't think for one hot second swearing to tell the truth means absolutely ANYTHING to him. He's a garbage human. I am not expecting him to be truthful, but he will be opening himself up to perjury charges. And MAYBE that would get Republicans to move on his impeachment? But I think it might take a blow job. |
|
trollie
Pearl Clutcher
Posts: 3,580
|
Post by trollie on Jun 10, 2017 16:14:20 GMT
I am not expecting him to be truthful, but he will be opening himself up to perjury charges. And MAYBE that would get Republicans to move on his impeachment? But I think it might take a blow job. Anyone willing to take one for the team??!!! LOL1!!  |
|
katybee
Drama Llama
Posts: 5,378
|
Post by katybee on Jun 10, 2017 16:57:23 GMT
I am not expecting him to be truthful, but he will be opening himself up to perjury charges. And MAYBE that would get Republicans to move on his impeachment? But I think it might take a blow job. Nope...they would justify a blowjob, too. They are in way too deep to turn against him now... |
|
Peal
Pearl Clutcher
Posts: 2,524
Jun 25, 2014 22:45:40 GMT
|
Post by Peal on Jun 10, 2017 17:02:21 GMT
I am not expecting him to be truthful, but he will be opening himself up to perjury charges. And MAYBE that would get Republicans to move on his impeachment? But I think it might take a blow job. **shudder** Save |
|
Nanner
Drama Llama
Posts: 5,962
|
Post by Nanner on Jun 10, 2017 17:11:40 GMT
I'm wondering if he recorded their conversations on his phone (like he's been known to do during business transactions), and then has deleted them, or moved them somewhere else (another format), and that's why tapes was in quotation marks, and that he won't hand any over. I can't imagine he'd hand over anything self incriminating. I agree; however, post-Watergate (I read this somewhere- perhaps on the tweets thread?) there are restrictions on any POTUS deleting stuff; doing so is an offence in itself. Can anyone confirm this? Restrictions? Stop him? No way. He does what he wants. And the whackjob followers are good with that. |
|
|
|
Post by annabella on Jun 11, 2017 1:01:47 GMT
I think in this case the witness tampering is a big deal! What Jared's father did to his sister's husband was horrendous and Jared has no sympathy for his aunt?!?!?!? Tells a good tale! Can you elaborate? All I heard was that his father didn't pay his taxes, what is his spin on it? |
|
|
|
Post by pierogi on Jun 11, 2017 1:17:52 GMT
I am not expecting him to be truthful, but he will be opening himself up to perjury charges. And MAYBE that would get Republicans to move on his impeachment? But I think it might take a blow job.  The Party of Trump will never hold him accountable. However, they would absolutely line up to blow him. Paul Ryan would demand to be first! |
|
|
|
Post by revirdsuba99 on Jun 11, 2017 1:47:00 GMT
I think in this case the witness tampering is a big deal! What Jared's father did to his sister's husband was horrendous and Jared has no sympathy for his aunt?!?!?!? Tells a good tale! Can you elaborate? All I heard was that his father didn't pay his taxes, what is his spin on it? It's a long story... In a nut shell... Yes taxes etc were an issue and tampering with a witness.... I thought his sister or her hubby turned him in...... I don't remember all the details... So he tried to get someone else to do it, but they all refused... He hired a 'lady of the night' to seduce the brother-in-law, the first time they only talked and the second time the action was taped. Charles Kushner sent the tape to his own sister to intimidate them! Another brother/brother-in-law got screwed too.. Christie put Kushner in Federal prison in Alabama, or close... Destroyed the family, but Jared went to visit almost every weekend... When I find on e of the articles I will post it... |
|
|
|
Post by papercrafteradvocate on Jun 11, 2017 2:00:43 GMT
Wikipedia
"In the summer of 2004, Kushner was fined $508,900 by the Federal Election Commission for contributing to political campaigns in the names of his partnerships when he lacked authorization to do so.[12] In 2005, following an investigation by the U.S. Attorney's Office for the District of New Jersey,[13] U.S. Attorney Chris Christie negotiated a plea agreement with Kushner, under which he pleaded guilty to 18 counts of illegal campaign contributions, tax evasion, and witness tampering.[14] The witness-tampering charge arose from Kushner's act of retaliation against William Schulder, his sister Esther's husband, who was cooperating with federal investigators; Kushner hired a prostitute to seduce his brother-in-law, arranged to record an encounter between the two, and had the tape sent to his sister.[15][16][17][14] Kushner was sentenced to two years in prison[15] and served 14 months at Federal Prison Camp, Montgomery in Alabama[18][19] before being sent to a halfway house in Newark, New Jersey, to complete his sentence.[18][19][20] He was released from prison on August 25, 2006.[21]
As a result of his convictions, Kushner was disbarred from practicing law in New Jersey,[22] New York,[23] and Pennsylvania.[24]"
|
|
The Party of Trump will never hold him accountable. However, they would absolutely line up to blow him. Paul Ryan would demand to be first!