President Trump - Page 128 - Politics version 7.0 -- Two Plus Two Poker Forums

So, Broadway is arguing that the nation's most important lawyer, in the most important moment of his life that he studied for weeks for, was merely incompetent? That's reason alone to be fired. His reaction right after his lie is such a tell as well.

Nope, I'm arguing that you can't say he lied unequivocally without proving intent.

03-07-2017 , 04:21 PM

#3177

ogallalabob

veteran

Join Date: Jun 2008 Posts: 2,448

Quote:

Originally Posted by BroadwaySushy

Nope, I'm arguing that you can't say he lied unequivocally without proving intent.

Yeah and I have yet to hear any rational arguments why he would intentionally lie on that question when it really would have been simple to answer the question without getting into his contacts because the question was not asking directly about contacts. Further there is also no reason to lie about his Senate meeting nor his brief meeting at the RNC with the ambassador.

03-07-2017 , 04:42 PM

#3178

spanktehbadwookie

Carpal \'Tunnel

Join Date: Apr 2009 Posts: 19,374

Did anyone else lie about it?

03-07-2017 , 04:53 PM

#3179

bahbahmickey

Carpal \'Tunnel

Join Date: Mar 2011 Posts: 15,268

Quote:

Originally Posted by Trolly McTrollson

This is a conversation that's been had before. He literally thinks it's a scam if he's paying $X in insurance and gets paid <$X in insurance claims.

You are thinking of another poster. I have never made any post related to what you are suggesting.

I think a lot of insurance agents are bad people that should feel bad, but the idea of insurance is good and of course the majority of people get less than $x back after paying in $x.

03-07-2017 , 04:58 PM

#3180

spanktehbadwookie

Carpal \'Tunnel

Join Date: Apr 2009 Posts: 19,374

Republican trumpcare looks like some more of the usual 45ish supremacy/stupefaction for apparent sake of clutched tax costs.

03-07-2017 , 05:37 PM

#3181

BroadwaySushy

banned

Join Date: Nov 2015 Posts: 3,237

Quote:

Originally Posted by goofyballer

MAGA!

03-07-2017 , 06:06 PM

#3182

Trolly McTrollson

Carpal \'Tunnel

Join Date: Oct 2010 Posts: 36,772

Quote:

Originally Posted by bahbahmickey

You know what, I am confusing you with the poster named negs, my fault.

03-07-2017 , 06:09 PM

#3183

bahbahmickey

Carpal \'Tunnel

Join Date: Mar 2011 Posts: 15,268

No worries.

03-07-2017 , 06:58 PM

#3184

einbert

Carpal \'Tunnel

Join Date: Jan 2005 Posts: 14,911

Quote:

Originally Posted by ogallalabob

Yeah those are great questions that need to be answered. So having said that, why DID he lie after all?

03-07-2017 , 07:11 PM

#3185

einbert

Carpal \'Tunnel

Join Date: Jan 2005 Posts: 14,911

https://twitter.com/kylegriffin1/sta...50647392321536

03-07-2017 , 07:32 PM

#3186

ogallalabob

veteran

Join Date: Jun 2008 Posts: 2,448

Quote:

Originally Posted by einbert

Yeah those are great questions that need to be answered. So having said that, why DID he lie after all?

Don't think he did. Believe him when he said he was answering a question concerning campaign contacts. There is no reason to intentionally lie about that question. Nor the contacts he had with Russia.

You have to be pretty deep into conspiracy theories to believe that Sessions, as a sitting Senator would be involved in some campaign hacking crime (which is really the only possible criminal conduct that could come out of the Trump campaign), passing on nefarious messages or that he would be the go to contact for such a crime at the RNC convention when all of the other Trump campaign staffers were also in attendance. It is almost laughable anyone would go to those lengths to benefit Trump when your a Senator who is pretty well set for life.

Bottom line is he probably rather have had the Secretary of State position met with 25 Ambassadors to other countries at his office personally and congratulated a large % of the 50 ambassadors attending his speech to help bolster his resume when trying to convince Trump to give him the SoS job and none of it was at the request of the Trump campaign.

03-07-2017 , 07:49 PM

#3187

pokerodox

The Situation

Join Date: Nov 2012 Posts: 4,889

Sessions thing is a non-issue.

The question was "in the course of" the campaign. That's a quote from Franken's question. In the course of easily means "dealings of", "in relation to", whatever.

It would be nice if Sessions had stopped Franken and said, please clarify, when you say in the course of, do you mean during the time of, or do you mean in the dealings of, because I certainly spoke to them during that time, but not on behalf of the Trump campaign.

If we are down to pointing out how Franken out maneuvered/lawyered Sessions, fine, but now you're just saying Sessions is bad at his job. A non-issue, cuz this one event is not determinative.

03-07-2017 , 08:12 PM

#3188

goofyballer

Carpal \'Tunnel

Join Date: Jun 2005 Posts: 70,719

Quote:

Originally Posted by pokerodox

The question was "in the course of" the campaign. That's a quote from Franken's question. In the course of easily means "dealings of", "in relation to", whatever.

See here:

Quote:

Originally Posted by patron

Right, and also, the "context" doesn't even matter the way that Trump supporters imagine, since Sessions didn't answer the question as asked. For example, let's use a different question, and see how this "context" defense holds up:

Franken: Russians like to eat Big Macs, how about you?

Sessions: I have been called a Big Mac eater before, and I did not have communications with the Russians.

Media: That's not true, you met with the Russian ambassador.

Sessions: Okay, yes, I did have communications with the Russians, but not in my capacity as a Big Mac eater. We never discussed Big Macs!

The perjury issue isn't particularly interesting to me since you can go back and forth about intent forever, but it's suuuuuuper dumb to act like Sessions wasn't lying in saying "I did not have communications with the Russians" because of the context of a question he didn't even answer.

03-07-2017 , 08:15 PM

#3189

einbert

Carpal \'Tunnel

Join Date: Jan 2005 Posts: 14,911

He lied and he lied intentionally. If not, why did he never correct his testimony? He waited until reporters revealed the truth before telling us the truth. He must resign!

03-07-2017 , 08:24 PM

#3190

einbert

Carpal \'Tunnel

Join Date: Jan 2005 Posts: 14,911

https://www.wsj.com/articles/what-in...are-1488906247

Quote:

. Mario Molina, chief executive of Molina Healthcare Inc., a major Medicaid insurer that also offers ACA plans in nine states, said he believes that defanging the coverage mandate could help push individual-plan premiums up by 30% or more next year—and they could rise considerably more in the future, when the reduced federal assistance for low-income enrollees kicks in. That shift, he estimated, could shrink enrollment in ACA plans by three-quarters or more, leaving a smaller, less-healthy group of consumers.

“You’re going to see big rate increases, and you’re going to see insurers exit markets…this is going to destabilize the marketplace,” he said. Dr. Molina added that the proposal’s help for insurers, including the penalty for consumers who have gaps in their coverage, wasn’t enough to offset the negatives. Molina has said it is reconsidering its ACA marketplace offerings.

03-07-2017 , 08:29 PM

#3191

einbert

Carpal \'Tunnel

Join Date: Jan 2005 Posts: 14,911

https://twitter.com/kylegriffin1/sta...07037003313153

https://twitter.com/ANDREWTI/status/839270387603013632

03-07-2017 , 08:39 PM

#3192

mongidig

Pooh-Bah

Join Date: Jan 2004 Posts: 5,682

I haven't watched the news the last couple of day's. Did I miss anything! Lol lol lol!

03-07-2017 , 08:54 PM

#3193

BroadwaySushy

banned

Join Date: Nov 2015 Posts: 3,237

Nah, just more left wing lunacy.

They're so far down the rabbit hole now, I don't think they can get out.

03-07-2017 , 09:00 PM

#3194

goofyballer

Carpal \'Tunnel

Join Date: Jun 2005 Posts: 70,719

Quote:

Originally Posted by mongidig

I haven't watched the news the last couple of day's. Did I miss anything! Lol lol lol!

Quote:

Originally Posted by BroadwaySushy

Nah, just more left wing lunacy.

They're so far down the rabbit hole now, I don't think they can get out.

No news the last two days, Sushy? Muslim ban 2.0, Trumpcare = "left wing lunacy"? Sounds like you're quite deranged.

03-07-2017 , 09:33 PM

#3195

mongidig

Pooh-Bah

Join Date: Jan 2004 Posts: 5,682

Obama is not President anymore. He's just a President monitor.

03-07-2017 , 10:30 PM

#3196

einbert

Carpal \'Tunnel

Join Date: Jan 2005 Posts: 14,911

Why Jeff Sessions must resign

Quote:

When the Attorney General of the United States is caught misleading or lying to Congress, such an occurrence is shocking and has historically forced the Attorney General to resign. After all, as Sen. Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) said last week, “There cannot be even the scintilla of doubt about the impartiality and fairness of the Attorney General, the top law enforcement official of the land.”

But for Jeff Sessions, the particular misleading statements are much worse, because of what he was testifying to Congress about: illicit contacts with a foreign power that was in the process of interfering with a U.S. election in order to try to swing the outcome. It is not only shocking — it is completely unprecedented in our nation’s history.

Consider the two disgraced Attorneys General of the past 50 years: Richard Kleindienst and Alberto Gonzales. In 1972, Kleindienst was asked at his confirmation hearings whether he had discussed a pending Justice Department antitrust investigation with the Nixon White House. He denied such a discussion took place, but the infamous Nixon tapes, once they came to light, clearly proved that Kleindienst lied. Kleindienst ultimately resigned. As for Gonzales, he was less than candid with Congress about the surveillance programs being conducted by the National Security Agency, and ultimately he too was forced to resign.

But neither Kleindienst nor Gonzales was ever involved in a potential conspiracy with a foreign power to interfere with a U.S. presidential election. Sessions, on the other hand, conducted at least two meetings with Sergey Kislyak, the Russian Ambassador to the United States, during the time Sessions was acting as a high-level surrogate for the Trump campaign. As Richard Painter, George W. Bush’s chief ethics lawyer in the White House from 2005 to 2007, has said, “the facts now in this investigation are much worse than the facts in the early stages of Watergate.”

The content of Sessions’ meetings with Kislyak may well be innocent. But the fact that Sessions failed to disclose to Congress that the meetings took place is an independent problem that, as with Kleindienst and Gonzales, requires Sessions to resign. And of course, if these meetings were so innocent, one wonders why Sessions went out of his way to deny their very existence during his confirmation hearings.

Furthermore, the meetings Sessions concealed did not take place in a vacuum. Trump’s original National Security Advisor, Mike Flynn, has already resigned after unsuccessfully trying to disguise the nature of his conversations with Kislyak. Now, we have news of another Flynn meeting with the Russians, along with Jared Kushner, the president’s son-in-law. And at least two other Trump campaign officials, Carter Page and J.D. Gordon, also met with Kislyak at the Republican National Convention last summer. Perhaps not coincidentally, Gordon was also the person who — on behalf of Trump — worked to soften language in the Republican Party Platform regarding how forcefully to defend Ukraine against Russian aggression.

[...]
The White House continues to insist that there is nothing at the heart of all these Russia ties. And that may turn out to be true. But we will never know unless there is a full investigation conducted by an independent counsel. This should not be a partisan issue. As Painter argues, Republicans should not want to become the pro-Putin party, so both parties should be able to agree that a complete accounting of Russian ties to the White House is crucial. Regardless of the ultimate result of that investigation, we should all be able to agree that Sessions at a minimum did not testify truthfully and completely to Congress on a key issue of national security, and as a result he is no longer fit to be Attorney General.

Paul Schiff Berman is the Walter S. Cox Professor of Law at George Washington University Law School and the author of Global Legal Pluralism, published by Cambridge University Press in 2012.

http://thehill.com/blogs/pundits-blo...ns-must-resign

03-07-2017 , 11:24 PM

#3197

bahbahmickey

Carpal \'Tunnel

Join Date: Mar 2011 Posts: 15,268

Quote:

Originally Posted by einbert

https://www.wsj.com/articles/what-in...are-1488906247

I didn't read the article - just your quote and the bolded is a pretty bad argument. We have seen the effects of government throwing more and more money at college costs to make them more affordable. Why wouldn't reducing government subsidies for health care do the exact opposite of what throwing money at college kids did for college costs?

03-07-2017 , 11:32 PM

#3198

spanktehbadwookie

Carpal \'Tunnel

Join Date: Apr 2009 Posts: 19,374

Quote:

Originally Posted by einbert

https://twitter.com/kylegriffin1/sta...07037003313153

https://twitter.com/ANDREWTI/status/839270387603013632

They brought a visual aid which demonstrates their own stupefaction about other people.

03-07-2017 , 11:35 PM

#3199

goofyballer

Carpal \'Tunnel

Join Date: Jun 2005 Posts: 70,719

Quote:

Originally Posted by WSJ

Mario Molina, chief executive of Molina Healthcare Inc., a major Medicaid insurer that also offers ACA plans in nine states, said he believes that defanging the coverage mandate could help push individual-plan premiums up by 30% or more next year—and they could rise considerably more in the future, when the reduced federal assistance for low-income enrollees kicks in.

Quote:

Originally Posted by bahbahmickey

...the bolded is a pretty bad argument. We have seen the effects of government throwing more and more money at college costs to make them more affordable. Why wouldn't reducing government subsidies for health care do the exact opposite of what throwing money at college kids did for college costs?

In other words, we need to raise premiums by 30% and possibly more in the future in order to lower healthcare costs?

What drugs are you on?

03-07-2017 , 11:43 PM

#3200

goofyballer

Carpal \'Tunnel

Join Date: Jun 2005 Posts: 70,719

If the AARP is against it, stick a fork in this bill, it's done. Which begs the question: why did the GOP and Trump introduce us to this piece of ****?

Page 128 of 562

First

28 78 108 118 123 124 125 126 127 128 129 130 131 132 133 138 148 178 228 328

Last

...

Page 128 of 562

First

28 78 108 118 123 124 125 126 127 128 129 130 131 132 133 138 148 178 228 328

Last