So, no comments from the anti Trumpers on Comey's testimony today?
The DON / redux
- Thread starter Gordon Gray
- Start date
Help Support MartinLogan Audio Owners Forum:
- Status
Not really, but I saw where they gutted Dodd-Frank. Now the banks can sell loans to unqualified people and buy and sell high risk loans as a commodity again.
It's funny how quickly people forget the crap that Wallstreet was getting away that lead up to the last big crash.
This is the really sad part of what is happening right now. We are all kept completely distracted by the 3 ring circus. The New Networks HAVE to go after the sensational stories for ratings which leaves all the actual meat being ignored which allows all kinds of very serious bad things to happen with far reaching effects without getting any press to speak of.
It got stories, but no one is talking about this with everything else going on.
http://money.cnn.com/2017/06/08/news/economy/house-dodd-frank-repeal/
Last edited:
Not real familiar with Dodd-frank. But, wasn't that debacle essentially started because of something Bill put into action so poor people could have a 'home'? So can't the republicans say 'this is for all people ...so we can make it so everyone can have a home....'. Yadayadayada. See what spin can do for you ??
I did not see much. Read excerpts. I Just don't think they have enough to overturn a presidential election. And let's face it. That is what they have been trying to do since day 1. 1) vote recount. 2) urging electoral college with a marketing campaign with famous people to try and influence them to 'vote your conscience'. 3) Russian hackers changed the vote 4) Russian hackers influenced people to vote for Trump via bots. 5) Trump colluded with the Russians to fix the vote. 6) Russian hackers started the email scandal against Hillary and did nothing against Trump. 7) obstruction claim because 'hope' is obviously obstruction.
So now given all of this the special prosecutor has to make the leap based on trying to fill in the blanks. Not based on known facts.
This to me seems egregious. And not because of one particular act - but because of the accumulated charges that are going nowhere... all of them with the same intent. To stop a non- insider from being the president. Let's figure a legal way to change who got elected. It feels desperate to me.
So now given all of this the special prosecutor has to make the leap based on trying to fill in the blanks. Not based on known facts.
This to me seems egregious. And not because of one particular act - but because of the accumulated charges that are going nowhere... all of them with the same intent. To stop a non- insider from being the president. Let's figure a legal way to change who got elected. It feels desperate to me.
Not real familiar with Dodd-frank. But, wasn't that debacle essentially started because of something Bill put into action so poor people could have a 'home'? So can't the republicans say 'this is for all people ...so we can make it so everyone can have a home....'. Yadayadayada. See what spin can do for you ??
It was bad when Bill helped put it through and it is bad now.
Many blamed Bill in part for the housing bubble and collapse and rightly so.
I'm not playing party favorites on this. It is still a bad thing. Some people can't afford a mortgage. There is no sin in that.
The key issue is that it allows banks to take much bigger risks that put the whole financial system in jeopardy and which can require the government to bail them out to prevent a financial collapse.
Gordon Gray
Well-known member
Not real familiar with Dodd-frank. But, wasn't that debacle essentially started because of something Bill put into action so poor people could have a 'home'? So can't the republicans say 'this is for all people ...so we can make it so everyone can have a home....'. Yadayadayada. See what spin can do for you ??
timm,
Dodd - Frank was passed to prevent "bank meltdowns" that occured in the past and caused great harm to the American economy. I strongly suggest you do your research before you make statements about a piece of legislation.
Best,
Gordon
I'm being lazy so I'm just going to cut someone's pertinent reddit comment and paste it here ...
Ok, the rest of this is my own comment:
timm, if you are being intellectually honest, you will admit that there is a lot more evidence supporting obstruction charges than just an "I hope" statement. Prosecutors build cases based on the totality of the evidence. The "I hope" statement is a specific direction to Comey about the President's wishes. Trump firing him later and specifically referencing the Russia investigation when asked about it on television is evidence that Trump fired him specifically for not dropping the investigation. And then there is the question of the loyalty oath. Several other facts also support a case for obstruction, including Trump making threats about possible tapes of their conversations and then later trying to impugn Comey's credibility. All the facts taken together make a very strong case for obstruction, from a legal perspective.
Haha. I could make this statement about plenty of posts on this forum. And yes. I know it is related to bank melt downs. But banks don't just melt down. And my point was there were plenty of people stirring that pot and causes for it. One of them being wanting to give poor people better opportunities to purchase housing that were otherwise unqualified. A noble and honorable thought.
Hope that clarifies it
Rich. We shall see. Because we have some cases that this was held to be true does not mean there are many that were not. Those don't ever get referenced.
my examples are trying to show that a group of people have an on-going agenda which is to change the result of the election. And when one thing doesn't work they move on to the next. I get it they don't like trump. But I think it is because of way more than policy. I think it is because he is an outsider and threatens their way of life and or their idealogical message.
Quite frankly I think they just continue to throw mud at the wall hoping something will stick. There is a good chance that something might at one point - given you have a bunch of lawyers looking at your every move and statement with support from the reality tv we currently call the news. Throw on top of that the fact that this outsider has this I don't give a F*** attitude which creates animosity in the first place.
my examples are trying to show that a group of people have an on-going agenda which is to change the result of the election. And when one thing doesn't work they move on to the next. I get it they don't like trump. But I think it is because of way more than policy. I think it is because he is an outsider and threatens their way of life and or their idealogical message.
Quite frankly I think they just continue to throw mud at the wall hoping something will stick. There is a good chance that something might at one point - given you have a bunch of lawyers looking at your every move and statement with support from the reality tv we currently call the news. Throw on top of that the fact that this outsider has this I don't give a F*** attitude which creates animosity in the first place.
Gordon Gray
Well-known member
It certainly does. Enough said.
While this may be true, you act like it is something new and different with Trump because of his "outsider" status. That's a false narrative. The same things happened with Obama, Bush, and Clinton. In particular, remember the birther controversy with Obama, one which Trump gleefully stoked. This was an attempt to de-legitimize Obama's presidency by promoting a false story about his birth. Hard to have any sympathy for Trump given his previous behavior regarding the birther stuff. You can't engage in that behavior and then try to call foul when the tables are turned. Too hypocritical.
Bottom line is that both sides do it and it gets more vicious with each new presidential cycle. The difference between Trump and those other Presidents is that he doesn't even try to follow the rules or act the least bit "presidential." He provides more fodder for the opposition to use against him than probably any President in history. Most of the controversy in his short presidency he has brought upon himself with his own behavior. No surprise the opposition is taking advantage of his mistakes. Again, hard to have any sympathy for him in these circumstances.
Gordon Gray
Well-known member
Bottom line is given this "cloud" that 45 has fostered and / or created absolutely nothing, within the context of fulfilling campaign promises, has become reality from a legislative perspective. Nothing. And this, given the fact that the Reps control all the elected branches. And he's been in office for five months.
For me, that's the standard of efficacy of any President. And by that standard, he's a complete failure regardless of all other self inflicted wounds.
For me, that's the standard of efficacy of any President. And by that standard, he's a complete failure regardless of all other self inflicted wounds.
Scumurculum
Well-known member
I note that trump has tweeted about Comey. His legal team must be pulling their hair out.
Accusing Comey of "illegal" acts. I wonder if a president can be sued for defamation?
Accusing Comey of "illegal" acts. I wonder if a president can be sued for defamation?
Gordon Gray
Well-known member
Someone had to replace Barnum and Bailey my friend.
and man-o-man did we get a trainload of clowns !
Plus, the price of admission is free from my living room. Certainly someone can photoshop him in a Ring Masters outfit.
Trump names son’s wedding planner to lead federal housing office.
I guess anyone Trump knew that he liked is getting a position in government.
He seems to be saying that running the government takes no understanding of the areas they run so he'll throw the least qualified people at positions.
Since he has no idea how to be president they don't need any understanding of what they need to do either.
Of course if there is a billionaire who wants a position because it serves their personal interests that they actually knows something about, they just work to screw over the average citizen for personal gain.
I guess anyone Trump knew that he liked is getting a position in government.
He seems to be saying that running the government takes no understanding of the areas they run so he'll throw the least qualified people at positions.
Since he has no idea how to be president they don't need any understanding of what they need to do either.
Of course if there is a billionaire who wants a position because it serves their personal interests that they actually knows something about, they just work to screw over the average citizen for personal gain.
Last edited:
- Status
