âBut not if I can help it! Hail Hydra!â Graham concluded.
âYou may be the first president in history to go down because you canât stop inappropriately talking about an investigation that, if you just were quiet, would clear you,â Graham said.
So, Graham has seen and heard all kinds of exculpatory evidence that others havenât? Or heâs just admitting to the fact that thereâs a pre-determined outcome already decided on by the Republicans? (unless the President really screws it up and they have to reluctantly abandon that pre-determined result).
Trump cannot stop Tweeting. So where does the problem lie?
Itâs because Graham is a big fat fucking fuck. Thatâs my legal opinion.
Itâs not the tweeting at all.
Itâs the allegations of money laundering, collusion with Russia, obstruction of justice, etc., that may bring him down.
Very serious allegations that Lindsay would do well to thoroughly investigate rather than poo-pooing it by talking about tweets.
Oh, Lindsey, Lindsey, Lindsey,âŚ
Heâll go down but not due to his childish tweeting. Heâll go down for his actual crimes - obstructing justice, colluding with a hostile foreign power, lying under oath (if he ever allows himself to testify).
Heâll go to prison for NY state money laundering and racketeering charges. No future president can pardon him for non-federal crimes. (Iâm clearly not an attorney so my hope is that the state of New York can bring indictments and succeed in convictions)
And the inability to stop tweeting is in itself very concerning as it represents an out of control individual too stubborn and reckless to frankly be President.
And if anyone knows what it takes to âgo downâ, itâs Miss Lindsey
Iâm no expert on Washington-speak but I know you canât always take whatâs said at face value. I think itâs likeliest Graham is doing some complicated prevention and damage control work here. He wants people on the believer end of the scale to keep believing maybe Trump himself wasnât involved in collusion. And he wants Trump to STFU because the yammering hurts him two waysâit reveals information he should keep hidden, and it hurts his political support, because even his base thinks the tweeting is stupid and that he should stop and get on with his job. With support going down, the case for some sort of impeachment or forced-resignation scenario goes up. Trumpâs mouth is a catalyst there. So the less political damage and fewer damaging revelations, the less of a comprehensive disaster this is for the post-Trump GOP. I doubt Graham sees a scenario in which Trump is cleared of all wrongdoing. Heâs originally a military lawyer himself, he knows better than that. But he really does want Trump to shut up. That much I think you can believe. : )
So, maybe Graham is presenting the outcome of being cleared as an incentive for Trump to STFU. Wonât work. Not with Trump. But, I see your point of some post-Trump preservation.
Mueller has brought a top prosecutor on board. I donât think Trump is going to be cleared.
Not if they are looking into his financial ties with Russia.
Sure all of Trumpâs allies and supporters want him to stop tweeting and have since he took the oath. Thank dog he doesnât listen and doesnât give a shit.
If heâs impeached, it wonât be because of Twitter, but a lot of the evidence is there. And for dogâs sake, donât stop tweeting now, Mr. Prezdinent.
That was my thought too: #45âs twitter sputum might sink him in court (taken as admission of guilt) but the investigation and the evidence it acquires is not contingent on that.
OTOH, Graham could be implying the Republicanâs would cover #45âs misdeeds provided it didnât become politically dangerous to do so, something his incessant blabbing certainly could affect.
âSen. Lindsey Graham (R-SC) on Sunday said President Donald Trump could be the first president to âgo downâ as a result of his inability to stop tweetingâŚâ
Yeah, thatâs what took down Nixon.
âItâs not the crime that gets you; itâs the tweeting.â
Is it possible to erase 18 minutes of tweets?
Nixon was all thumbs when it came to technology.
Off topic, but I was intrigued by this Weigel-Beutler exchange.
In other words, the facts of the case, would strongly detract from the âHillary is Wall Streetâs (and therefore Satanâs) concubine who should have campaigned more in Wisconsin and reached out to WWC voters and itâs entirely her fault.â
As Josh said recently Clintonâs loss canât be attributed to facile appeals to ideology, but rather to a perfect storm of intersecting contingencies (or words to that effect, I canât find his blog entry right now), one of which, and a major influence on the election, according to Nate Silver, was Comeyâs letter to Chaffetz, just prior to the election; another as weâre finding out was Russian election tampering.
My point is that the alt left and alt right are fact averse in the face of ideology. As Paul Krugman puts it, facts have a center-left bias.
Yes always - why do you think they screamed so loudly and have been so quiet since?
The Populist Left were Putinâs useful idiots in the last election and man Iâm really tired of hearing anything at all from the Populist Left -
Ivanka or Tiffany?