Trump is Not Well

[Bodigger]

@Serotoninluv Agreed......Love you all

[abrakamowse]

21 hours ago, giglio said:

@abrakamowse Good thoughts.

Thanks!

[giglio]

@Mason Riggle @Mason Riggle @Mason Riggle That's a long stretch on the definition of a contribution or a donation. I highly doubt they will try to use that code section to impeach or convict  Trump. Trump wasn't asking for a financial contribution or donation to his campaign.  And a thing of value is very much open to interpretation. Trump was asking that Ukraine president look into the 2016 interference in the election and alleged corruption of Joe Biden. The Ukrainian president said he was not pressured by Trump. Yes it looks like a conflict of interest because Biden is a candidate, but I don't think he violated any laws. Obviously Trump is going to say why is Biden above the law just because he's a candidate. That shouldn't be a protection for Biden because he's a candidate otherwise he can do whatever he wants just because he's a candidate and Trump can't highlight any of Biden's alleged wrong doing. I mean either Biden did something wrong or he didn't. Let Ukraine investigate it and see what they come up with. If Biden did nothing wrong, then he has nothing to worry about. Trump's position is he was trying to get to the bottom of the source of the 2016 election interference corruption. Which I don't know what to believe at this point until I see further evidence. However if you see it from Trump's side he has been under investigation since he became president and the justice department is currently looking into whether that investigation should have started in the first place or not and if it was handled properly or not. They already said Comey acted inappropriately. So I'm not excusing the behavior completely but I'm trying to understand it from his perspective. I would be pretty frustrated if I was being investigated from day one as the president and it was impeding my ability to do my job. Especially if it was a bogus investigation from day one. There is evidence that he possibly obstructed justice but if you think about it from his point of view he knew he was innocent from colluding with Russia from day one. Anyone would be frustrated if they were constantly being investigated for no good reason and they knew they were innocent. Us here on this forum are of higher consciousness so we don't think like that but people at lower stages of spiral dynamics, it's easy to see how someone at his stage would react if he felt he was being treated unfairly. Someone at his stage would probably try to stop investigation that they knew was bogus and lash out. We would probably react differently and allow the investigations to go forward without resistance. But we have to consider what stage of spiral dynamics he is at and account for that. I know that in other times of my life if someone accused me of something that I knew I was innocent about I would lash out and push back a lot. 

But to impeach him, he doesn't have to have violated any laws in theory. The impeachment process is a political matter. We'll see if they try to hold him to that US code section. 

Edited October 11, 2019 by giglio
Added cotent

[Mason Riggle]

@giglio I'm not sure where to start... and I'm not sure it's useful to waste everyone's time responding to most of this... but here goes.

6 hours ago, giglio said:

That's a long stretch on the definition of a contribution or a donation.

Is it though? It seems I'm not the only one who makes this stretch... 

“There’s very clear evidence, as reflected in the memo of the call, that President Drumpf specifically asked the president of Ukraine to help in the process of digging up dirt on Joe Biden,” says Elliot Mincberg, a former chief counsel for oversight and investigations of the House Judiciary Committee, who is now a senior fellow at a liberal advocacy group People for the American Way. “That is clearly asking a foreign national to provide something of value to his campaign and that’s illegal under federal law.”   

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Campaign finance law states: “It shall be unlawful for a foreign national, directly or indirectly, to make a contribution or donation of money or other thing of value, or to make an express or implied promise to make a contribution or donation, in connection with a federal, state, or local election.”

Campaign finance expert Trevor Potter, who is president of the nonpartisan Campaign Legal Center, says this: "the president’s call violates this rule and serves as a “classic case” of a candidate illegally requesting help from a foreign government."

“The president, who is a candidate and has a campaign, asked a foreign government — which is included in the definition of a foreign national — for a favor, for help in a way that would benefit his campaign, harm his opponent,” he says. “And that would fit within the ban on soliciting foreign national contributions or taking anything of value.”

An investigation into Joe Biden conducted by the Ukrainian government qualifies as a “thing of value” contributed by a foreign entity, he says.
 

6 hours ago, giglio said:

The Ukrainian president said he was not pressured by Trump.

Ah yes, let's believe the guy who is counting on Trump for $391 Million in Military Aid to confirm whether or not he was pressured. I'm not sure you understand how blackmail works... 
 

6 hours ago, giglio said:

That shouldn't be a protection for Biden because he's a candidate otherwise he can do whatever he wants just because he's a candidate and Trump can't highlight any of Biden's alleged wrong doing.

This is a huuuuge stawman.. nobody is 'protecting Biden' because he's a candidate.  The US is attempting to protect it's elections from interference and corruption, which Trump's behavior clearly is (his singling out Biden, and no other person, as the target of an investigation, all the while holding $391 Million in congress approved military aid hostage). You can't place the relatively minor 'everyday' corruption above National Security, because undermining national security is vastly more important to US Citizens than Corporate Corruption, although both are unacceptable.  You wouldn't authorize the local Sheriff's Office to start conducting unlimited 'warrantless' searches of people's homes just for the 'Noble Cause' of eliminating 1 notorious pot dealer... this isn't to say pot dealing is good and can't be investigated..  you just can't undermine the rule of law itself in order to do it.
 

7 hours ago, giglio said:

Trump's position is he was trying to get to the bottom of the source of the 2016 election interference corruption. Which I don't know what to believe at this point until I see further evidence.

I'll just take it you don't believe the FBI, who laid out in a 400 page report what happened in 2016.   

A total of thirty-four individuals and three companies were indicted by Mueller's investigators. Eight have pleaded guilty to or been convicted of felonies, including five Trump associates and campaign officials. 

Lieutenant General Michael Flynn, who had been appointed as National Security Advisor by the incoming Trump administration, was convicted of making false statements to FBI investigators about his conversations with Russian ambassador Sergey Kislyak during the presidential transition, and he was dismissed from his position.

Former Trump campaign chairman Paul Manafort was found guilty on eight felony counts of tax evasion and bank fraud,[14] pursuant to his earlier lobbying activities for the Party of Regions of former Ukrainian president Viktor Yanukovich.[15][16] He later pled guilty to conspiracy to defraud and obstruction of justice; in total, he was sentenced to over seven years in jail.[19] 

In February 2018, Mueller's team indicted thirteen Russian citizens and three Russian entities, including the Internet Research Agency (IRA), for conducting social media campaigns about the U.S. elections,[20] and twelve members of the Russian GRU cyber espionage group known as Fancy Bear, for hacking and leaking DNC emails.  

You choose to ignore the evidence. 
 

8 hours ago, giglio said:

 There is evidence that he possibly obstructed justice but if you think about it from his point of view he knew he was innocent from colluding with Russia from day one.

Ya think? There are good reasons even innocent people are not allowed to interfere with investigations of themselves.  Shall we just dismiss the actions of every person accused of a crime which they feel they didn't commit?  How well do you think that defense will play out in court?  
 

8 hours ago, giglio said:

Anyone would be frustrated if they were constantly being investigated for no good reason and they knew they were innocent.

Not 'anyone' would be frustrated, as you later point out only low consciousness people do this. Mature people, they type of people you want as President, do not behave this way.  This is a strange defense of Donald Trump, which just seems to be more evidence that he is not fit for the office of President, regardless of his guilt or innocence.  Obstructing an Official Investigation is not a good look for the supposedly innocent. Obstructing an investigation into foreign corruption surrounding US elections does not personally instill me with much confidence that Trump is all about 'rooting out corruption and getting to the bottom of what happened'.. 
 

8 hours ago, giglio said:

I'm trying to understand it from his perspective. I would be pretty frustrated if I was being investigated from day one as the president and it was impeding my ability to do my job. Especially if it was a bogus investigation from day one.

Was there interference by Russians or not?  Was the investigation 'bogus', or was this investigation warranted?  The investigation clearly outlined ways the Russian's, who, by all appearance at the very least, were in contact with Trump Campaign officials, vehemently attempted to influence US elections.  The investigation also clearly outlined the many ways Trump and his team attempted to obstruct this investigation. 

 

9 hours ago, giglio said:

But to impeach him, he doesn't have to have violated any laws in theory. The impeachment process is a political matter. We'll see if they try to hold him to that US code section. 

Yes, I'm glad you pointed out the larger picture of all of this, which is that it doesn't really matter if the now infamous 'phone call' violated any specific laws.  This is exactly why tossing out all of these side bars, what-about-isms, and 'musings' about WHY Trump is unfit for office, really don't have much to do with the fact that he IS unfit for office.. they reek of desperate 'justification' for the indefensible actions of Donald Trump. 

 

[Forestluv]

10 hours ago, giglio said:

That's a long stretch on the definition of a contribution or a donation. I highly doubt they will try to use that code section to impeach or convict  Trump. Trump wasn't asking for a financial contribution or donation to his campaign.  And a thing of value is very much open to interpretation. Trump was asking that Ukraine president look into the 2016 interference in the election and alleged corruption of Joe Biden. The Ukrainian president said he was not pressured by Trump.

An investigation by a foreign government into a political opponent is considered a thing of value relative to an election. It's been previously established that a "thing of value" is not restricted to direct financial donations. 

To think that Trump was merely trying to root out corruption in general is very naive. Trump has only targeted investigations into his political rivals. When Trump was asked if he ever tried to start an investigation into corruption that was not a political rival, Trump could not give a single example. Even days after the question, he never offered an example. 

Regarding the president of Ukraine saying he was not pressured. . . you are not considering power dynamics within mafia-like game theory. Of course the Zelensky will say he was never pressured. Ukraine is a much much smaller and weaker country than the U.S. and is dependent on the U.S. for military aid and their own survival. As well, you are not considering underlying leverage Trump imposed by withholding funds, withholding a visit from the vice-president, and framing the situation as "we've been good to you, yet you haven't been reciprocal to us. We want you to do something". Political authoritarians/dictators/mafia bosses communicate implicitly, they don't directly say "If you don't investigate my political rival, we will cut you off from all support". That's not how it works. Doing so would make the authoritarians/dictators/mafia bosses more vulnerable to legal prosecution. It would be like a Mafia leader with lots of power calling someone who is dependent on the mafia leader for the own survival. The mafia leader witholds financial support and says "I've been good to you Joe, haven't I? You and your family have benefited from my assistance. Yet it hasn't been reciprocal, you just haven't done enough for me. Yes, yes I realize you are dependent on me for your survival, yet I want a favor from you though. My rival leader in the mafia has done some bad things and I want you to use your connections to investigate him". . . It would be very naive to think the mafia leader is motivated by a genuine honest desire to root out corruption, in general. . . Several career diplomats involved with Ukraine have called out this dynamic. 

The lens Trump supporters are using is distorted. It requires distortion and selective filtering to see Trump as having an innocent genuine desire to reduce corruption in politics. As more strain is placed on this distorted lens, more and more people will wake up.  Yet this is a difficult process because the person will need to admit that they were wrong. As well, many Trump supporters are in a "us vs. them" and want to "own the libs". Seeing things clearly involves letting go of attachment/identification to "us vs. them" and "owning the libs" mentality. For many people, this is extremely difficult and requires a big jump up in consciousness - from red/blue to orange/green. That jump will involve a lot of resistance at the personal level and at the Trump collective ego level.   

[Bodigger]

How can someone only see things from one point of view?  Most likely, the answer is due to what is being viewed.  If we don't flip the channel or read the other sides articles, our vision becomes more and more narrow, thus narrow minded.  Keep in mind that 63 million people voted for Trump and yes, many are narrow minded, but not all.  If it is a struggle to understand how people could vote for Trump, maybe we need to do more searching.....on the other side.  If we do this, truth will stare back at us, and if our ego is tamed, we will acknowledge what is truth.

[Mason Riggle]

27 minutes ago, Bodigger said:

How can someone only see things from one point of view?  Most likely, the answer is due to what is being viewed.  If we don't flip the channel or read the other sides articles, our vision becomes more and more narrow, thus narrow minded.  Keep in mind that 63 million people voted for Trump and yes, many are narrow minded, but not all.  If it is a struggle to understand how people could vote for Trump, maybe we need to do more searching.....on the other side.  If we do this, truth will stare back at us, and if our ego is tamed, we will acknowledge what is truth.

@Bodigger at least 100 million people in the US think Jesus is going to return in their lifetime. It's no mystery that 63 million are easily duped by 'one sided' or narrow minded arguments and candidates such as Trump..  It's not a 'struggle' to understand how people could vote for Trump any more than it's a struggle to understand how 1 in 4 Americans think the Sun goes around the Earth.. there are a lot of stupid people out there. 

Just be sure to recognize which way the arrow points in the evolution of consciousness.. and the direction the spiral moves.  It's not an easy task to drag the status quo into higher states.. but it's fairly easy to recognize what the status quo is. 

[Bodigger]

I am amazed with all of the investigations going on that the Dems haven't found anything significant on Trump.  I thought for sure they would find a zinger somewhere over the past three years.  Oops, four years.  I forgot that "Obama was tapping his phones" LOL.

[Mason Riggle]

A zinger.. Like the payments to porn stars, the cheating on his wife, the bankruptcies, the failed businesses, the pussy grabbing, the ease with which he hurls personal insults, the pettiness... The real shock is that anyone can find this person anything other than morally corrupt. 

You don't have to do anything illegal to be a shit person. 

[Forestluv]

14 minutes ago, Bodigger said:

I am amazed with all of the investigations going on that the Dems haven't found anything significant on Trump. 

The Dems aren't the standard. Bernie Sanders is the standard. If you can't see the significant difference between Trump and Sanders, you are wearing a warped pair of glasses. 

Why set the bar so low for Trump? All that does is set a low bar for America and the Globe.  

[Bodigger]

9 minutes ago, Mason Riggle said:

A zinger.. Like the payments to porn stars, the cheating on his wife, the bankruptcies, the failed businesses, the pussy grabbing, the ease with which he hurls personal insults, the pettiness... The real shock is that anyone can find this person anything other than morally corrupt. 

You don't have to do anything illegal to be a shit person. 

It is evident to me that you are in a bubble in, most likely, some large liberal city, surrounded by like thinkers.  If you were to go outside the bubble, you may get a glimpse of the same things you are saying is happening on the other side.  Thankfully, I am in a swing State where I see both sides......in my face.

12 minutes ago, Serotoninluv said:

Bernie Sanders is the standard.  

I have said that I like Bernie, I just don't agree with his policies.

[Forestluv]

55 minutes ago, Bodigger said:

I have said that I like Bernie, I just don't agree with his policies.

If we compare the honesty, integrity, morality, love and good intentions of Bernie vs. Trump. . . the differences are night and day. As well, if we compare Bernie supporters vs. Trump supporters. . . Compare a Bernie rally with a Trump rally. Night and day. 

Bernie is 2-3 conscious levels higher than Trump. There is no comparison. He is a very rare and special politician - perhaps 50 years ahead of his time.  Bernie has been on the right side of history every single time. No other politician can claim that. 

 

[Mason Riggle]

1 hour ago, Bodigger said:

It is evident to me that you are in a bubble in, most likely, some large liberal city, surrounded by like thinkers. 

Well.. You'd be wrong. I live in a rural conservative county, complete with our own rodeo. I'm surrounded by Trumpers. My family, coworkers.. All pro Trump. I'm drowning in 'the other side'  I got to here all about Michelle, Obama's tranny wife, I got to here him called a nig***. I got to hear all about 'the muzzies' and how much fun it is killing them... I have no desire to view things from the perspective of 'the other side.. I have more than glimpsed it. 

Edited October 11, 2019 by Mason Riggle

[Forestluv]

@Mason Riggle Do you have a sense of how Trumpers in your area would perceive Bernie? Would they see him as a good guy with good intentions, but bad socialist policies? Or would they vilify him personally as an evil socialist like Stalin? 

[SerpaeTetra]

2 hours ago, Bodigger said:

I am amazed with all of the investigations going on that the Dems haven't found anything significant on Trump.  I thought for sure they would find a zinger somewhere over the past three years.  Oops, four years.  I forgot that "Obama was tapping his phones" LOL.

Most of the time he is very smart about not directly doing the dirty work.  One of the charges against his personal lawyer Michael Cohen (who is currently in prison) is arranging payments to silence women in the 2016 election, who had affairs with Trump.  The affairs itself don't bother me, just the fact that he ditched Cohen so quick after he was loyal to him for so long.  And how is Cohen being sentenced for that crime, but Trump avoids trouble for this. Now two people who are associates with Giuliani get arrested for campaign finance laws, and there is a lot more to come out of that story as well. Trump is starting to distance himself from this lawyer as well.  

[Mason Riggle]

1 hour ago, Serotoninluv said:

@Mason Riggle Do you have a sense of how Trumpers in your area would perceive Bernie? Would they see him as a good guy with good intentions, but bad socialist policies? Or would they vilify him personally as an evil socialist like Stalin? 

He's definitely vilified as an aging cooky 'socialist'.  Heavy stage orange/blue tribalism. People are solidly 'Christian' or 'Republican' or 'Libertarian'. Liberal and Democrat are dirty words, insults.. And everyone not 'with them' is seen as the enemy, to be defeated at all cost. Words like 'antichrist' are used literally, and there is always an overarching 'agenda' attached to the motives of anyone who isn't in lock step with their team. The most openly racist people I find myself among (mostly in my family) are the most ardent, outspoken, and unwavering Trump supporters. The real die hards also seem to be the ones most likely to be on public assistance/unemployed and also most likely to believe in conspiracy type stuff like big foot, flat earth, faked moon landing, and baby eating.

[giglio]

@Mason Riggle All I know is that Trump has never been convicted of anything. Just like everybody else, he's innocent until proven guilty and we owe that to him. We don't have all the information or evidence at our disposal to make an informed decision about the situation. If he's guilty then he should go to jail and/or be impeached.  Of all the scandals that he's been supposedly involved in nothing has ever been proven in a court of law as far as I know. As far as I know he does not have a criminal record. Again, I dislike Trump. But I would be saying this for any president. I have never voted for a Republican or Democrat so don't have a horse in the race. I say impeach him and try him. Let's see if he comes out clean. Mueller found no evidence that he colluded with Russia after 2 years of investigations. He may have bad judgement surrounding himself with people that were convicted but that doesn't mean he is guilty. Mueller did not come to a conclusion on obstruction. From what I have seen, it doesn't appear he obstructed because Mueller's investigation went forward without hinderace. He may have told people to obstruct and they refused but actual action has to be taken to actually obstruct and the justice department chose not to charge him based on the evidence likely because it would not stand up in a court of law because even though attempts to obstruct may have been made, no obstruction actually happened. And the attempts were made by staff, not Trump himself. I agree it looks bad but he deserves his day in court like everybody else and the chance to defend himself. 

On the Ukraine issue, we we'll see. It's all speculation until we have all the evidence from all sides. Trump will be able to submit evidence in his favor, explaining why he did what he did and why it's not a crime in his view.

 

Edited October 12, 2019 by giglio
Code error

[giglio]

@Serotoninluv Bernie might be a nice guy and higher consciousness but he has terrible political policies. Free health care, free college, free this and free that. Nothing is free. I saw an article saying for Medicare for all it would cost somewhere around 50 trillion dollars. The country would collapse. Even the highest of taxes would not be able to support that. Not to mention we're already in debt way too much. It's a pipe dream. It's unrealistic by a large measure. And nothing should be "free" anyway. That teaches no lessons about working hard. Yes medical care and college is way too expensive but there's other ways to deal with that. It's not a health insurance problem, the problem is that medical costs themselves are too high. medical cost in the United States were significantly lower before the government started to get involved in overregulation. Now companies have whole departments just having to comply with government regulations which drives up costs. And for education the government has a virtual monopoly on education. So private institutions have to raise their costs to be able to compete and survive and comply with over demanding government regulations. Then they have to pay competitive wages, and possibly pay for medical care insurance for employees, plus retirement, etc. All while government is subsidized by the taxpayer. Guaranteed money. And they do a crappy job of education. True competition will fix that problem. Bernie wants to have government take over pretty much everything which is the opposite way that we should be going. The government is full of red tape, corruption, incompetence, laziness, and wastefulness. It's really really bad. I know because I was in government. If you only knew how bad it was you'd be running from Bernie's government takeover. 

 

Edited October 12, 2019 by giglio
Code error

[Forestluv]

7 hours ago, giglio said:

@Serotoninluv Medicare for all it would cost somewhere around 50 trillion dollars. The country would collapse. Even the highest of taxes would not be able to support that. 

You are falling for corporate talking points: hook, line and sinker. Medicare for all would cost 32 trillion over 10 years, yet we currently pay 34 trillion. So we would  save  2 trillion dollars. Even an analysis from a conservative institute concluded this.. M4A is a superior, more efficient system that removes a business model that profits off of people’s illness. As well, people will not be dependent upon and held hostage by employer-based healthcare. 

What would you like to do with the 2 trillion we save after M4A? Free college for all costs 0.8 trillion, so we would still have another 1.2 trillion.  Infrastructure? Pay down the debt?

[abrakamowse]

10 hours ago, giglio said:

All I know is that Trump has never been convicted of anything. Just like everybody else, he's innocent until proven guilty and we owe that to him. We don't have all the information or evidence at our disposal to make an informed decision about the situation. If he's guilty then he should go to jail and/or be impeached. 

@giglio if you can see this documentary, it's free with Hulu. I am just watching it and now I understand why everything happened the way it did. REally eye opening. I don't know now how is it possible that they allow Trump to run for president. It's really astonishing. He was into money laundering since long time ago, no one noticed that before? I don't think so.

Info about the doc:

https://www.imdb.com/title/tt8135494/

 

Trailer: