Donald Trump Jr. Expecting to Be Indicted by Mueller Soon

Page 1 of 1 [ 10 posts ] 

thoughtbeast
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 19 Oct 2014
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,337
Location: Scarlet Jungle of Krypton

07 Nov 2018, 2:46 pm

Donald Trump Jr. Expecting to Be Indicted by Mueller Soon

Image

Quote:
Last year, Donald Trump Jr. testified that he never informed his father of a meeting with Russian officials promising “dirt” on Hillary Clinton. It seemed hard to believe that the ne’er-do-well son would neglect to seek credit for his expected campaign coup from the father whose approval he so obviously craves. And now it seems that Robert Mueller has obtained proof that it is not in fact true. The Trump family lies all the time, of course, but doing it under oath is a crime.

Two days ago, Gabriel Sherman reported that White House officials are concerned about Donald Jr. “I’m very worried about Don Jr.,” a former West Wing official told Sherman, who fears Mueller will be able to prove perjury. Deep in a report about Trump’s 2020 campaign plans, Politico drops the news this morning that Trump Jr. “has told friends in recent weeks that he believes he could be indicted.”

If it’s what you’re saying, we love it.

The details of the expected indictment remain to be seen. But if Trump Jr. did lie under oath, the obvious question is why. He had a lawyer, who presumably informed him of the dangers of perjury. Why take the risk of perjury to deny having informed his father about a meeting with Russian officials if the contacts produced absolutely nothing?



Piobaire
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 28 Dec 2017
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,347
Location: Smackass Gap, NC

07 Nov 2018, 4:15 pm

His whole klan should be investigated under RICO.

Yeah; the 'K' was intentional.



Magna
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 21 Jun 2018
Gender: Male
Posts: 6,932

07 Nov 2018, 4:33 pm

I would support this because I support the idea that there should be an automatic special counsel appointed as a matter of course for every single presidential administration, regardless of party, that should be conducted in parallel with said administration. It's not possible to fully vet any person leading up to an election.

Automatic special counsel finds illegal activity in a president's past? Boot the prez. He/She is.....gone.



Kraichgauer
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 12 Apr 2010
Gender: Male
Posts: 47,790
Location: Spokane area, Washington state.

07 Nov 2018, 9:33 pm

Since Sessions is out, I fear for the future of the Mueller probe.


_________________
-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer


B19
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 11 Jan 2013
Gender: Female
Posts: 9,993
Location: New Zealand

07 Nov 2018, 11:30 pm

"When the rat is cornered, it strikes" is an old Dutch saying. Trump will try to insulate himself by making appointments of "official serfs" with whom he will do deals to protect him before making the appointments. He has to do whatever he can to subvert the course of the growing danger of the full exposure of the Trump family's crimes. (That should be Family, as in crime family perhaps).

Donny Jnr seems a slow witted, puffed up and rather stupid man, and his indictment by Mueller would be a huge danger to Trump.

Trump will strike against Mueller very soon, because Mueller is too astute and too clean to be discredited by Trumps usual lies, sneers and character assassinations.

Both Mueller and Trump know two things in common:
-Trump is not a Republican ideologue, he is an opportunist conman (why he has been in some many political parties)
-Trump has committed very serious crimes

And this goes to the heart of Trump's agenda for extended corruption: now he will go manic to make appointments in Federal Agencies to recreate these agencies to solely serve and protect himself, not the American people; that's the next phase of his agenda, to make sure that federal agencies protect him from being held to account for his actions, lies, dirty connections and collusion with foreign powers and to stop any sunlight shining light on his own treacherous dealings and crimes. Now the serious threat to the fundamental integrity of the USA begins. Trump's phase two.

Not only is this phase dangerous to the survival of democratic insitutions, it will greatly rap up the fearful possibility of civil war. Perhaps that will be phase 3.

These are incredibly dangerous times for the USA.



goldfish21
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 17 Feb 2013
Age: 41
Gender: Male
Posts: 22,612
Location: Vancouver, BC, Canada

08 Nov 2018, 1:18 am

:heart:


_________________
No :heart: for supporting trump. Because doing so is deplorable.


Kiprobalhato
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 25 Mar 2014
Age: 27
Gender: Female
Posts: 29,119
Location: מתחת לעננים

08 Nov 2018, 2:05 am

i still think civil war is extremely unlikely.


_________________
הייתי צוללת עכשיו למים
הכי, הכי עמוקים
לא לשמוע כלום
לא לדעת כלום
וזה הכל אהובי, זה הכל.


B19
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 11 Jan 2013
Gender: Female
Posts: 9,993
Location: New Zealand

12 Nov 2018, 4:45 am

Interesting report from the Brookings Institution providing some contextualised backbones re the deliberation of Russian collusion and corruption (a comprehensive analysis, not reality tv soundbite stuff). It's a big read but a careful and very considered one, well referenced, refreshing change that reads as remarkably sane compared with so much of sloganising, often hysterical quality of much of the popular coverage:

https://www.brookings.edu/wp-content/up ... -Primer.pd

(Unrelated, I've wondered tonight if Trump styled his staccato speech style, always so much on display at his MAGA rallies, on the vocal style of the old fashioned showman ventriloquists?)



beneficii
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 10 May 2005
Age: 40
Gender: Female
Posts: 7,245

12 Nov 2018, 7:06 am

Kiprobalhato wrote:
i still think civil war is extremely unlikely.


But it's not impossible. We had a militia group seize control of a government facility over the winter of 2015-2016, for which many members were acquitted by a jury of their peers, including the leader. In the summer of 2016, we had military veterans gun down police officers--and apparently, their combat training led to them becoming very effective. That kind of activity seems to have died down since then, but there was a ratcheting up of violence leading up to this month's election, much of which was politically motivated.

Just before the 2016 election, Cracked magazine came out with an interesting article on why a civil war is possible and what it would look like. They talked to counterinsurgency experts, including David Kilcullen who has trained militaries abroad about how to deal with insurgencies. If it did happen, it would likely start much like the violence leading up to this month's election, though it would probably be more intense; but basically, you will just have people on a wide scale start ratcheting up a lot of violence, get the population used to it. Militants would exploit our declining trust in each other and in the government to render much of the country apathetic while establishing a loyal support base for the fighters, who will either be military combat veterans or will be trained by veterans. There would probably be several groups, each with its own goals and objectives, and they would make use of our copious amount of guns (many of which are not that hard to make fully automatic) and legal explosives like tannerite (which was used in World War II). We would likely end up looking a bit like Syria. Some groups will create chaos just to create chaos, so they can then swoop in and establish order; I imagine some Dominionists will be big on this, in order to create an ISIS-style Christian theocracy in much of the country. The fighting would likely be rural vs. urban, exploiting the vulnerabilities of our highway system; insurgents will attempt to starve the cities by cutting off supplies through roadside bombing campaigns. The Internet would be used as a major propaganda tool and a way to organize insurgencies, and they would present videos of the violence to desensitize us. Here's the link:

http://www.cracked.com/personal-experie ... fying.html

The article also references this Marine Corps counterinsurgency guide (the link in the article is no longer good), which is available for public distribution:

https://www.marines.mil/Portals/59/MCWP ... _Part1.pdf

And this counterinsurgency guide from the Joint Chiefs of Staff published this year gives the prerequisites for an insurgency. The prerequisite of opportunity is quoted below (II-4 to II-5):

Quote:
Opportunity alludes to the emergence of significant gaps in the ability of the national government or local allies to provide security for its territory and population. Specifically, the government should have the capability and capacity to detect the early stages of insurgency—organization and mobilization—a challenge that typically requires a certain awareness and the cooperation of a significant portion of the population. However, if domestic surveillance is perceived as too extensive, it could result in what may be considered a police state. Moreover, the government should be capable of suppressing the insurgency in a way that deters other potential rebels while not feeding the insurgency narrative and not provoking wider resistance to the government. Whether urban or rural, physically definable, or a matter of popular perception, opportunity arises when there is a gap in government control that provides an incipient insurgency with sufficient freedom to begin organizing and maneuvering politically and militarily. This gap may also be seen as a result of security forces either overreacting or appearing to engage in punitive violence not specifically linked to insurgent conduct. Understanding how the gap arose and how the nascent insurgency has exploited it to begin mobilizing an organized resistance provides insights to inform an effective COIN strategy and a planned operational approach. Gaps in government control can stem from insufficient capacity of government security forces, demographic changes, falling government revenues, or eroding legitimacy of governance and declining allegiance among segments of the population.


http://www.jcs.mil/Portals/36/Documents ... 102418-000

The sources on the Cracked article mention the decline of trust in government and institutions like the FBI (especially on the right). They also mention how rural police departments would be ill-equipped to handle an insurgency forming in rural areas in the US due to likely being outnumbered by them. We have over 100 groups that may want to take a shot against the federal government, and apparently a lot of them do have combat veterans who help train the groups' members in military tactics.

It's considered unlikely and unthinkable, but as the sources on the Cracked article warn, it's not impossible and when it does happen it will seem like a bad dream.


_________________
"You have a responsibility to consider all sides of a problem and a responsibility to make a judgment and a responsibility to care for all involved." --Ian Danskin


goldfish21
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 17 Feb 2013
Age: 41
Gender: Male
Posts: 22,612
Location: Vancouver, BC, Canada

12 Nov 2018, 3:36 pm

Kiprobalhato wrote:
i still think civil war is extremely unlikely.


From my nearly omniscient POV here in Heaven above, aka Canada, it really doesn’t seem that unlikely.

With a powder keg of white supremacy & a whole lot of propaganda + an abundance of firearms (101 per 100 people FFS!)... it’s not overly difficult to see how it could very well = all out (un)civil war. Again.


_________________
No :heart: for supporting trump. Because doing so is deplorable.