• Welcome to OGBoards 10.0, keep in mind that we will be making LOTS of changes to smooth out the experience here and make it as close as possible functionally to the old software, but feel free to drop suggestions or requests in the Tech Support subforum!

First Charges Filed in Mueller Investigation

Really? I don't think the right to pardon was ever intended as a means of self-protection vs. justice.

If that happens, I sure as heck hope there's a ton of outrage.
 
ConnorEl said:
Really? I don't think the right to pardon was ever intended as a means of self-protection vs. justice.

If that happens, I sure as heck hope there's a ton of outrage.
Click to expand...

i don't either, but I don't think it'll translate into massive seats in 2018 or 2020.
 
RJKarl said:
One thing a pardon does is eliminate the ability to use the 5th Amendment in many cases. If you have already been pardoned, you can't truly incriminate yourself according to most legal experts. If Trump pardons Flynn and/or others it could be a major double whammy. First, it will be a hugely negative political move. He is already underwater in approval, this would leave him with only the hardest of the hard core. Secondly, if the people he pardons can't take the fifth and without going to jail for perjury or contempt, they will talk.
Click to expand...

Unless Trump goes on a spree of dozens of pardons of anyone who is remotely related to the Russia probe, pardons won't even be an issue in the 2018 midterms. Anyone who would find the pardons to be an egregious overreach of presidential power are already going to vote Democrat, and anyone who thinks Trump is allowed to do whatever he wants because he's President were already going to vote Republican. There is next to no chance that there is a significant bloc of voters that will think, "Well I was leaning toward voting Pub, but by golly Trump pardoning Manafort was just a step too far for me!"

There's no need to overthink it in 2018. The Republicans have given Democratic campaigns every bullet they need to load in their advertising guns. They tried to take health care away from millions, and when they failed that, they tried to sneak taking health care away from millions into the tax bill. They are likely going to give billionaires a tax break at the expense of the middle class while doing what they excoriated Democrats for doing all of Obama's presidency by raising the deficit. They supported a child molester for the Senate, equivocated peaceful liberal protestors with neo-Nazis, and in general have done everything possible to alienate every American that is not a white male. Pardons are a non-issue unless Trump tries to pardon himself (unlikely). Don't try to make it one.
 
ImTheCaptain said:
i don't either, but I don't think it'll translate into massive seats in 2018 or 2020.
Click to expand...

538 keeps harping on the fact that the generic ballot for congress and senate seats has a nation wide average of 11% in favor of the Dems. They say that is an unprecedented level of favoring the minority party. They also note that in the special elections held thus far, although Pubs have won more of them, there has been an average of a 16% swing from Pub to Dem over previous elections. That number includes the over 30% swing in Alabama so it might be a bit biased high by an outlier event in a small sample size but even before the sexual assault allegations Alabama was looking at an 20% swing according to the polls. None of these general numbers will be good predictors of any specific race across the country, however the 538 politics podcast crew pretty firmly believe that the House is in play for 2018 but that the Senate is likely to keep a very small republican majority. None of this has anything to do with pardons, but adding a bunch of questionable pardons to the list of bullshit out of this administration won't help the Pubs.
 
Well said. Democrats have to focus on health care, repealing the tax cuts, and owning the debt issue and other big domestic issues. There's a good chance there will be a new foreign issue to address too.
 
AsesinoDeTortugas said:
Unless Trump goes on a spree of dozens of pardons of anyone who is remotely related to the Russia probe, pardons won't even be an issue in the 2018 midterms. Anyone who would find the pardons to be an egregious overreach of presidential power are already going to vote Democrat, and anyone who thinks Trump is allowed to do whatever he wants because he's President were already going to vote Republican. There is next to no chance that there is a significant bloc of voters that will think, "Well I was leaning toward voting Pub, but by golly Trump pardoning Manafort was just a step too far for me!"

There's no need to overthink it in 2018. The Republicans have given Democratic campaigns every bullet they need to load in their advertising guns. They tried to take health care away from millions, and when they failed that, they tried to sneak taking health care away from millions into the tax bill. They are likely going to give billionaires a tax break at the expense of the middle class while doing what they excoriated Democrats for doing all of Obama's presidency by raising the deficit. They supported a child molester for the Senate, equivocated peaceful liberal protestors with neo-Nazis, and in general have done everything possible to alienate every American that is not a white male. Pardons are a non-issue unless Trump tries to pardon himself (unlikely). Don't try to make it one.
Click to expand...

Fair enough, though I think the timing of the pardons could whip up enthusiasm among the Democrats that were going to vote against him/Pubs anyway.
 
birdman said:
Fair enough, though I think the timing of the pardons could whip up enthusiasm among the Democrats that were going to vote against him/Pubs anyway.
Click to expand...

Oh I think it will. But Democrats shouldn't run on that.
 
AsesinoDeTortugas said:
Unless Trump goes on a spree of dozens of pardons of anyone who is remotely related to the Russia probe, pardons won't even be an issue in the 2018 midterms. Anyone who would find the pardons to be an egregious overreach of presidential power are already going to vote Democrat, and anyone who thinks Trump is allowed to do whatever he wants because he's President were already going to vote Republican. There is next to no chance that there is a significant bloc of voters that will think, "Well I was leaning toward voting Pub, but by golly Trump pardoning Manafort was just a step too far for me!"

There's no need to overthink it in 2018. The Republicans have given Democratic campaigns every bullet they need to load in their advertising guns. They tried to take health care away from millions, and when they failed that, they tried to sneak taking health care away from millions into the tax bill. They are likely going to give billionaires a tax break at the expense of the middle class while doing what they excoriated Democrats for doing all of Obama's presidency by raising the deficit. They supported a child molester for the Senate, equivocated peaceful liberal protestors with neo-Nazis, and in general have done everything possible to alienate every American that is not a white male. Pardons are a non-issue unless Trump tries to pardon himself (unlikely). Don't try to make it one.
Click to expand...

It won't be just that. It will be the combination of all those things as well as Charlottesville, Dreamers (assuming nothing or very little will be done) and the inevitable fuck ups between now and then.

As I've said many times, I have no confidence in how the Dems message things. They should have an entire office that does nothing but laser focusing on the Republican collar/suburban seats. A lot of Republicans are very angry with Rorabacher and Issa. They are very vulnerable.

I'd bring back Howard Dean to help in 18. He was very successful at getting involvement in previously unwinnable seats. Conversely, I wouldn't let anyone who worked on or was associated with Hillary's campaign within a mile of any Dem office.

The Dems should also replace Pelosi with a younger person ASAP. Get rid of her as a target.
 
PhDeac said:
Oh I think it will. But Democrats shouldn't run on that.
Click to expand...

Agreed, in fact, just like Jones didn't really run on the sexual assault issues. He had one add on the teenage girls stuff, but he himself mostly stayed away from it, letting the rumors swirl while he talked about prosecuting the KKK and the CHIP lapse. I didn't realize the suggestion was the the Dems should build a campaign around Russian collusion and pardons. That would be a bad play on their part and probably only serve to whip up enthusiasm among Trump's base.
 
White House Counsel Knew in January Flynn Probably Violated the Law

Don McGahn was looking at whether the national security advisor violated federal laws just days after Trump moved into the White House.

The White House turned over records this fall to special counsel Robert Mueller revealing that in the very first days of the Trump presidency, Don McGahn researched federal law dealing both with lying to federal investigators and with violations of the Logan Act, a centuries-old federal law that prohibits private citizens from negotiating with foreign governments, according to three people with direct knowledge of the confidential government documents.

The records reflected concerns that McGahn, the White House counsel, had that Michael Flynn, then the president’s national security advisor, had possibly violated either one or both laws at the time, according to two of the sources. The disclosure that these records exist and that they are in the possession of the special counsel could bolster any potential obstruction of justice case against President Donald Trump.

The records that McGahn turned over to the special counsel, portions of which were read to this reporter, indicate he researched both statutes and warned Trump about Flynn’s possible violations.

...

A senior administration official close to McGahn said that the White House counsel felt like the president and others in the administration at times were using him and his office as scapegoats for Trump keeping Flynn, even as serious questions arose regarding his conduct. Trump and others in the administration suggested that McGahn had not done his due diligence

Reince Priebus, then the president’s chief of staff, for example, said on Feb. 19 on “Meet the Press” that Trump did not take sooner action regarding Flynn because “the legal department came back and said that they didn’t see anything wrong.”

The records turned over to the special counsel would appear to contradict such a narrative, according to the two sources. They show that McGahn researched both statutes, clearly raised issues as to whether Flynn possibly violated federal law related to making false statements and also whether he violated the Logan Act, and that McGahn voiced these concerns to Trump after meeting with Yates.

http://foreignpolicy.com/2017/12/20...olated-the-law/amp/?__twitter_impression=true
 
Warner: Firing Mueller would be 'gross abuse of power'

Washington (CNN)Sen. Mark Warner, the top Democrat on the Senate Intelligence Committee, said Wednesday that the firing of Justice Department special counsel Robert Mueller would be a "gross abuse of power" and called for Congress to respond with "significant consequences" if President Donald Trump took that step.

Warner, a Virginia Democrat, took to the Senate floor for a speech, in which he said the firing of Mueller or the pardoning of those charged in the special counsel's investigation would represent crossing his "red line."
"Any attempt by this President to remove special counsel Mueller from his position or to pardon key witnesses in any effort to shield them from accountability or shut down the investigation would be a gross abuse of power and a flagrant violation of executive branch responsibilities and authorities," Warner said. "These truly are red lines and simply cannot allow them to be crossed."

http://www.cnn.com/2017/12/20/politics/mark-warner-mueller-warning/index.html
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top