WyoNation.com

Is anybody else following the Mueller probe? The indictment of Manafort and Gates is probably going to be talked about for the next couple of weeks, but this is crazy. Nobody can accuse Mueller of not being thorough.

What kind of prison sentences will they be looking at for something like this? Who else is likely going down? Papadopoulos already pleaded guilty to making a false statement, but has been cooperating with preventing evidence from being destroyed.

Personally, I don't think they really have anything on Trump, but I could totally see Kushner having his fingers in a few too many pies where they did not belong.

Manafort? Not really. Papadopoulos though, well, don't you find it curious that Trump has avoided talking about him, while ranting and raving about Manafort? Especially today. Keeps wanting to try and switch focus to other topics.

Manafort is going down for his own crimes (i.e. money laundering), but he might sing on 45 to get a reduced sentence. Papadopoulos is the one that proves some level of collusion, and he's been playing "call a criminal" for months. If Mueller didn't have anything on 45, or at least suspect that it was there, we wouldn't be seeing these indictments this week.

Bottom line, 45 is done. He may not be impeached, but he's toxic to his party in a provable way now. His approval rating may be approaching Nixon pre-resignation levels next week (25%). Congressional Republicans will hold him close enough to try to get tax "reform" passed, but if they are able to do that, they'll discard him like yesterday's trash.

By the way, watch the Virginia gubernatorial election next week. If Northam (D) wins by anything close to what current polls are showing (56-35 or so), R's will dump 45 even faster.

I'm not sure Trump is going down, actually, and I could see Mueller getting a few non-R players as well in his investigations. Don't think Tony Podesta's resignation was a coincidence, for example.

That said, Trump Jr. and Kushner in prison isn't a good look either way.

I read that collusion isn’t even a crime. Doesn’t look good but isn’t criminal


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

laxwyo wrote: ↑Tue Oct 31, 2017 4:24 pm I read that collusion isn’t even a crime. Doesn’t look good but isn’t criminal

It depends completely on what is involved. It can be rather innocent, or essentially border on literal treason... or anything in between. If anybody gave certain promises to Russia about lifting of sanctions in exchange for help to win the election, they're in deep doo doo. Speaking of which, the White House was supposed to impose new Congress-approved sanctions on Russia by October 1 at the latest. Tomorrow's November 1, and it still hasn't happened.

Nobody can go down for treason here, though, since we're technically not at war with Russia. They're considered hostile, but that's about it.

Asmodeanreborn wrote: ↑Tue Oct 31, 2017 2:51 pm I'm not sure Trump is going down, actually,

Never said he was, just that he will be a lame duck very early. He's more toxic now than ever, and R's will hold him at least at arm's length. They might get tax "reform" passed, and he'll take credit for it, but he'll get nothing else that he wants. R's won't impeach him, but if the House and/or Senate flip next year, anything's possible.

Asmodeanreborn wrote: ↑Tue Oct 31, 2017 2:51 pm and I could see Mueller getting a few non-R players as well in his investigations.

Probably, but it doesn't matter. 45 is the focus now, and he'll throw everyone he can under the bus to save his own skin.

Welp, Flynn took a deal yesterday, which means somebody higher up than him is going down. Wow.

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-42192080

Interesting developments, but does any of this really matter without a solid, smoking gun against 45? If bragging about the deed harassing women and egregiously targeting specific religious groups (among many other things) isn’t enough to dissuade those protecting him and his followers, will this do anything more?

WestWYOPoke wrote: ↑Fri Dec 01, 2017 12:51 pm Interesting developments, but does any of this really matter without a solid, smoking gun against 45? If bragging about the deed harassing women and egregiously targeting specific religious groups (among many other things) isn’t enough to dissuade those protecting him and his followers, will this do anything more?

I've given up on his hardline followers. Its either deflect, deny, and/or outright ignore with them. Could have Trump, on video tape, proving he committed high treason (hypothetically), and his followers would STILL say something about Clinton and Benghazi, or that he's better then a Democrat, etc.

Agreed. I like to think (and hope) that most of Republicans are more moderate and, while not fans of Hillary or the Dems, are also embarassed by many of his actions since he took office.

For those that are staunch Pro-Trump/Anti-anything close to liberal: I find it ironic and humorous that if Obama had done HALF of the things that Trump has already done, they'd be screaming for his head; but when 45 does them all you get is a heavy dose of deflection and 'whataboutism'.

Meanwhile, I just want politicians to be held responsible for their crimes, no matter which way they lean. Is it really too much to ask to throw them in prison when they commit crimes the rest of us would've been put away for? If anything, they should be held to a higher standard than the common man.

Asmodeanreborn wrote: ↑Fri Dec 01, 2017 6:46 pm Meanwhile, I just want politicians to be held responsible for their crimes, no matter which way they lean. Is it really too much to ask to throw them in prison when they commit crimes the rest of us would've been put away for? If anything, they should be held to a higher standard than the common man.

But that would imply they're NOT above the law! The folks in D.C. just would not stand for such an outrageous thing!

WestWYOPoke wrote: ↑Fri Dec 01, 2017 2:59 pm Agreed. I like to think (and hope) that most of Republicans are more moderate and, while not fans of Hillary or the Dems, are also embarassed by many of his actions since he took office.

For those that are staunch Pro-Trump/Anti-anything close to liberal: I find it ironic and humorous that if Obama had done HALF of the things that Trump has already done, they'd be screaming for his head; but when 45 does them all you get is a heavy dose of deflection and 'whataboutism'.

I wanted to believe that, but the way the GOP in D.C. have been going, and trying to flip anything against Trump into something about someone else that has no connection to the issue, has been the norm since Trump won the nomination.

Its why I left the GOP. I had thought there was still SOME semblance of decent humanity left in the top parts of the party, but nope. Just backpedaling, excuse making, or outright avoiding the issue at hand. They would rather tow the party line, then be decent people. Same goes for the Democrats.

It's why I officially went Independent this year.

fromolwyoming wrote: ↑Fri Dec 01, 2017 6:59 pm

WestWYOPoke wrote: ↑Fri Dec 01, 2017 2:59 pm Agreed. I like to think (and hope) that most of Republicans are more moderate and, while not fans of Hillary or the Dems, are also embarassed by many of his actions since he took office.

For those that are staunch Pro-Trump/Anti-anything close to liberal: I find it ironic and humorous that if Obama had done HALF of the things that Trump has already done, they'd be screaming for his head; but when 45 does them all you get is a heavy dose of deflection and 'whataboutism'.

I wanted to believe that, but the way the GOP in D.C. have been going, and trying to flip anything against Trump into something about someone else that has no connection to the issue, has been the norm since Trump won the nomination.

Its why I left the GOP. I had thought there was still SOME semblance of decent humanity left in the top parts of the party, but nope. Just backpedaling, excuse making, or outright avoiding the issue at hand. They would rather tow the party line, then be decent people. Same goes for the Democrats.

It's why I officially went Independent this year.

I too, went Unaffiliated. I do think there are Republicans who are sane and willing to work with others, and who don't deny science just because it doesn't line up with what their donors want. Kasich got called a libtard for reaching across the aisle, and same with Governor Sandoval in Nevada.

Asmodeanreborn wrote: ↑Tue Oct 31, 2017 4:38 pm

laxwyo wrote: ↑Tue Oct 31, 2017 4:24 pm I read that collusion isn’t even a crime. Doesn’t look good but isn’t criminal

It depends completely on what is involved. It can be rather innocent, or essentially border on literal treason... or anything in between. If anybody gave certain promises to Russia about lifting of sanctions in exchange for help to win the election, they're in deep doo doo. Speaking of which, the White House was supposed to impose new Congress-approved sanctions on Russia by October 1 at the latest. Tomorrow's November 1, and it still hasn't happened.

Nobody can go down for treason here, though, since we're technically not at war with Russia. They're considered hostile, but that's about it.

Kinda late responding here but let me add: "Collusion" itself is not really a legal term, it isn't used anywhere in the law, it's just become media shorthand for the whole pile of potential wrongdoing, criminal or just despicable. But there's all kinds of things that seem possible to have happened here that are illegal. For example, the Wikileaks emails are essentially opposition research, so an enterprising prosecutor could easily argue that the Trump campaign violated federal election laws against accepting donations (or in-kind services) from foreign entities. As noted above, if they accepted opposition research services in exchange for promises of changing sanctions policy or Ukraine policy or any number of other things the Russian government wanted, then you're getting into corruption and bribery territory. If there was any discussion about directing the hacks in any way or foreknowledge on the part of Trump campaign officials, then you're getting into conspiracy or accomplice liability for the hacks. And all that is beside the fact that it's disgusting for an American politician to get into bed with Putin's intelligence services. My god, I can't believe anyone would actually be defending this behavior at this point, criminal or not.

All that said, it's looking likely that there's a whole lot more criminality beyond the quid pro quo allegations. I guarantee the Deutschebank subpoenas have a lot of people poop their pants, Trump and Kushner most of all.