POLITICAL BULLSHIT

[Matt]

Will that have any sort of effect on Trump, considering his Russia connections?

[Anderson]

Will that have any sort of effect on Trump, considering his Russia connections?

Not directly. But, it helps give us justification for what we do to Russia after Trump leaves.

What does help the current case is the 2200 page analysis that FINCEN dumped on the Intel Cmte on Monday.

[Matt]

Yeah, saw that. From what I understand, they can go after him at the state level for that meaning he can't be pardoned for it. He's toast.

[Anderson]

Yeah, saw that. From what I understand, they can go after him at the state level for that meaning he can't be pardoned for it. He's toast.

They're all right on that edge. I'm just waiting for the push.

I did learn something fascinating about the WH Briefing Room/Press Pit today.

It's built over an indoor pool that JFK had built in the 1960s but never used. They didn't fill the pool in when they built the Briefing Room. They just laid floor over the pool area.

[Nathan]

They're all right on that edge. I'm just waiting for the push.

I did learn something fascinating about the WH Briefing Room/Press Pit today.

It's built over an indoor pool that JFK had built in the 1960s but never used. They didn't fill the pool in when they built the Briefing Room. They just laid floor over the pool area.

That's right! Love that bit of trivia.

Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk

[Anderson]

JUST IN: Trump’s lawyers are postponing filing a Comey complaint, source says, in a bid to stop antagonizing Mueller https://bloom.bg/2shfWVP

[BMichaelKrol]

Yeah, saw that. From what I understand, they can go after him at the state level for that meaning he can't be pardoned for it. He's toast.

Maybe. It's not clear a sitting president can be charged with crimes.

[Anderson]

Maybe. It's not clear a sitting president can be charged with crimes.

A President can be charged with crimes. There's a lot more procedure to it, but the process has been clear for a bit. The lack of clarity on the matter started with the hand-wringing during the Lewinsky bullshit of the late 90s, but even those classic papers ended up backing up the claims that a sitting President can be charged.

http://scholarship.law.georgetown.ed...context=facpub

[Anderson]

Then there's a current take on the matter that uses the Constitution as the jumping-off point.

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/05/29/u...-indicted.html

A President can't be hit with petty and common prosecution, but the Constitution allows for extraordinary circumstances. But, to quote Dennis Reynolds...it's all in the "implication".

[Anderson]

Late night political bullshit Part 3:

But, that opens up the big sticky wicket. If the GOP refuses to impeach, then we're looking at a scenario where everyone has fallen away from Trump due to criminality, prosecution and not enjoying the same protections.

The NY AG case won't go away and will hang on him until the day he shuffles off this mortal coil.

So, this puts the GOP in a very precarious situation (even more precarious than the Healthcare plan that half of the GOP despises). When the time comes, they either support Trump and publicly defend his guilt. (The levels of Intel are staggering now, but we're entering the phase of where it's going to hit OH COME THE FUCK ON levels.)

Or they save their asses and call the Trump Administration a loss. This option lets them have a party moving forward. While the Left loves to believe that the GOP is a great big Evil Empire of Old White Men, the party is schisming HARD. The schism is creating new factions, some good and some far worse.

It's kinda why I want Mueller or somebody to get the fucking lead out already. The longer this draws out, the nuttier key figures are going to get.

[BMichaelKrol]

Then there's a current take on the matter that uses the Constitution as the jumping-off point.

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/05/29/u...-indicted.html

A President can't be hit with petty and common prosecution, but the Constitution allows for extraordinary circumstances. But, to quote Dennis Reynolds...it's all in the "implication".

Until the SCOTUS rules that he can be indicted, it's just two sides flapping their dicks.

[Anderson]

Until the SCOTUS rules that he can be indicted, it's just two sides flapping their dicks.

At this point, I don't see how SCOTUS wouldn't rule for indictment.

[BMichaelKrol]

At this point, I don't see how SCOTUS wouldn't rule for indictment.

I've got five reasons they won't against your four that they will.

[Anderson]

I've got five reasons they won't against your four that they will.

It's not like we are talking about a blowjob or a hotel break-in. Treason still looks bad regardless of the party.

[BMichaelKrol]

It's not like we are talking about a blowjob or a hotel break-in. Treason still looks bad regardless of the party.

I don't see the SCOTUS weighing in on this. They can punt by calling it a political question and moving on. They would have to design an entire system of how indicting a sitting President would work and I don't see Roberts doing that. For example, let's say that the President can be indicted. Can he be tried? What happens when he's found guilty? Is he removed from office? If yes, that goes against the Constitution. If no, then the President can murder someone, be tried, convicted, and continue serving.

It's a sticky wicket that I don't see them handling.