The Trump Thread

Published

I confess to back pedaling into Trump territory when I wanted to leave discussions about him in the garbage can.  My thread on the read-only break room site has 9,600 replies so I thought I'd bring up a new one.  

He's not going away.

Haberman's book is out based on interviews.  I won't read it, but the excerpts are interesting.  Especially what he says about McConnell, a description that's against the Terms of Service here, but I actually don't disagree with.  LOL

Quote

“At one point, Trump made a candid admission that was as jarring as it was ultimately unsurprising. ‘The question I get asked more than any other question: “If you had it to do again, would you have done it?”’Trump said of running for president. ‘The answer is, yeah, I think so. Because here’s the way I look at it. I have so many rich friends and nobody knows who they are.’ … Reflecting on the meaning of having been president of the United States, his first impulse was not to mention public service, or what he felt he’d accomplished, only that it appeared to be a vehicle for fame, and that many experiences were only worth having if someone else envied them.”

https://www.politico.com/newsletters/playbook/2022/09/25/trump-dishes-to-his-psychiatrist-00058732

Specializes in Med-Surg.
6 hours ago, Beerman said:

Trump's defense was that he believed he was innocent.

Sounds like the book is going to back up his claim that it was a witchunt.

I'd be willing to stretch my brain that it was a witch hunt and one can call it that if they feel better,  and that Pelosi and Democrats really really wanted to go after Trump and perhaps that's what this book is going to show was how determined they were.    

His defense seemed to be "I'm innocent, it's all made up and it's a witch hunt".  Not "I'm innocent, I'll prove it and I'll see you in court."

At the end of the day all the acquittal showed was that it was it was not an offense that should have him removed from office, not that he was innocent. Some republicans agreed he was not innocent, just that he shouldn't be removed.  Shcumer said there will always be an asterisk after the acquittal but all his supporters are going to think is that he was innocent and it was a witch hunt and it emboldens them to dig in.    Republican Senator Alexander (TN) said a guilty verdict would "rip the country apart" but not that he was innocent.  

I don't know what an impeachable offense would be and as always have to trust the process, I'm not that savvy but know the Democrats gambled and lost.  They had to know they didn't have the votes from the very start but I appreciate the efforts to expose him.  From the "lock her up!, but what about her emails..Benghazi Benghazi Benghazi" crowd I was happy for it.  Of course during the 2nd impeachment it was "BLM violence! BLM violence!".  

 

 

2
Up Vote Up Vote ×
3 hours ago, Tweety said:

I'd be willing to stretch my brain that it was a witch hunt and one can call it that if they feel better,  and that Pelosi and Democrats really really wanted to go after Trump and perhaps that's what this book is going to show was how determined they were.    

His defense seemed to be "I'm innocent, it's all made up and it's a witch hunt".  Not "I'm innocent, I'll prove it and I'll see you in court."

At the end of the day all the acquittal showed was that it was it was not an offense that should have him removed from office, not that he was innocent. Some republicans agreed he was not innocent, just that he shouldn't be removed.  Shcumer said there will always be an asterisk after the acquittal but all his supporters are going to think is that he was innocent and it was a witch hunt and it emboldens them to dig in.    Republican Senator Alexander (TN) said a guilty verdict would "rip the country apart" but not that he was innocent.  

I don't know what an impeachable offense would be and as always have to trust the process, I'm not that savvy but know the Democrats gambled and lost.  They had to know they didn't have the votes from the very start but I appreciate the efforts to expose him.  From the "lock her up!, but what about her emails..Benghazi Benghazi Benghazi" crowd I was happy for it.  Of course during the 2nd impeachment it was "BLM violence! BLM violence!".  

 

 

We don't really know the extent of Trump's defense.  Trump didn't get the same opportunity at defending himself that others got.

"Nadler's frustration with the pair of Democrats grew. Research conducted by his team proved that presidents facing impeachment from Congress had been allowed to defend themselves before the House Judiciary Committee, with attorneys for the president having the opportunity to attend hearings as well as cross-examine testifying witnesses or call their own."

This quote below from the article is very telling.  Maybe "witchhunt" isn't the right term, but if true does go to show this was more about getting Trump and politics than it was about national security concerns.

"The book noted that Pelosi and Schiff were concerned with what Trump's attorneys would say at the hearings, worrying that it could upend Democratic messaging ahead of the 2020 presidential election and stifle Biden's election chances."

About "digging in".  I think that is often a term that is misused.   Many of us arent digging in to support Trump as much as we are objecting to the dispicable tactics of the Democrats to delegitimize his presidency, and then try to remove him from office.  

 

 

2
Up Vote Up Vote ×
Specializes in NICU, PICU, Transport, L&D, Hospice.
4 hours ago, Tweety said:

I'd be willing to stretch my brain that it was a witch hunt and one can call it that if they feel better,  and that Pelosi and Democrats really really wanted to go after Trump and perhaps that's what this book is going to show was how determined they were.    

His defense seemed to be "I'm innocent, it's all made up and it's a witch hunt".  Not "I'm innocent, I'll prove it and I'll see you in court."

At the end of the day all the acquittal showed was that it was it was not an offense that should have him removed from office, not that he was innocent. Some republicans agreed he was not innocent, just that he shouldn't be removed.  Shcumer said there will always be an asterisk after the acquittal but all his supporters are going to think is that he was innocent and it was a witch hunt and it emboldens them to dig in.    Republican Senator Alexander (TN) said a guilty verdict would "rip the country apart" but not that he was innocent.  

I don't know what an impeachable offense would be and as always have to trust the process, I'm not that savvy but know the Democrats gambled and lost.  They had to know they didn't have the votes from the very start but I appreciate the efforts to expose him.  From the "lock her up!, but what about her emails..Benghazi Benghazi Benghazi" crowd I was happy for it.  Of course during the 2nd impeachment it was "BLM violence! BLM violence!".  

 

 

The House Democrats won their impeachment, it is an official and permanent impeachment.  Had the senate done their jobs (either time) and acted on the evidence and law rather than partisan feelings Trump would be ineligible to hold public office again.  

From the aftermath of those Senate impeachment votes we can see that the House democrats didn't lose... the country lost and the republican party lost. The state of the GOP is currently pretty sad and chaotic as they threaten our republic at multiple inflection points. 

1
Up Vote Up Vote ×
Specializes in NICU, PICU, Transport, L&D, Hospice.
1 hour ago, Beerman said:

We don't really know the extent of Trump's defense.  Trump didn't get the same opportunity at defending himself that others got.

"Nadler's frustration with the pair of Democrats grew. Research conducted by his team proved that presidents facing impeachment from Congress had been allowed to defend themselves before the House Judiciary Committee, with attorneys for the president having the opportunity to attend hearings as well as cross-examine testifying witnesses or call their own."

This quote below from the article is very telling.  Maybe "witchhunt" isn't the right term, but if true does go to show this was more about getting Trump and politics than it was about national security concerns.

"The book noted that Pelosi and Schiff were concerned with what Trump's attorneys would say at the hearings, worrying that it could upend Democratic messaging ahead of the 2020 presidential election and stifle Biden's election chances."

About "digging in".  I think that is often a term that is misused.   Many of us arent digging in to support Trump as much as we are objecting to the dispicable tactics of the Democrats to delegitimize his presidency, and then try to remove him from office.  

 

 

It's unfortunate that you are more critical of legal tactics to bring a criminal to justice than you are of the actual lies and crimes of the criminal.  Because the impeachment were legal and constitutional. 

Trump delegitimized his presidency by ignoring precedent, rules and laws governing his behavior before and after elections.  He was the most corrupt president of your lifetime. 

2
Up Vote Up Vote ×
Specializes in Med nurse in med-surg., float, HH, and PDN.
4 hours ago, toomuchbaloney said:

 

Trump delegitimized his presidency by ignoring precedent, rules and laws governing his behavior before and after elections.  He was the most corrupt president of your lifetime. 

"I plead the Fifth" ..... X 400.  There's you an innocent man, huh?

2
Up Vote Up Vote ×
Specializes in Med-Surg.
8 hours ago, Beerman said:

We don't really know the extent of Trump's defense.  Trump didn't get the same opportunity at defending himself that others got.

"Nadler's frustration with the pair of Democrats grew. Research conducted by his team proved that presidents facing impeachment from Congress had been allowed to defend themselves before the House Judiciary Committee, with attorneys for the president having the opportunity to attend hearings as well as cross-examine testifying witnesses or call their own."

This quote below from the article is very telling.  Maybe "witchhunt" isn't the right term, but if true does go to show this was more about getting Trump and politics than it was about national security concerns.

"The book noted that Pelosi and Schiff were concerned with what Trump's attorneys would say at the hearings, worrying that it could upend Democratic messaging ahead of the 2020 presidential election and stifle Biden's election chances."

About "digging in".  I think that is often a term that is misused.   Many of us arent digging in to support Trump as much as we are objecting to the dispicable tactics of the Democrats to delegitimize his presidency, and then try to remove him from office.  

Fair enough and "national security concerns" might be a stretch.  It is clear they went after Trump to remove him from office. That's what impeachment is for.  But it wasn't like "let's just make something up and do a witch hunt".

I agree, that if he was treated unfairly and unable to defend himself due to any obstruction on the Democrat side, that should be brought out.  I do find it hard to believe that Trump and all his legal team wouldn't have asserted themselves to defend himself regardless.  But still pointing out Democrat misbehavior is always fair.

As far as digging in, I was talking in the past tense.  Those that bought into the idea that it was trumped up charges to remove him from the Presidency dug their heels in with conspiracy to the point they then believed him when he said the election would be the most fraudulent election of time, then believed him that he really won the election, and then marched at the White House.  I would call that "digging in".  But that's me.

And yes, I do understand that "many Republicans don't believe....(insert Trump controversy)...."

 

2
Up Vote Up Vote ×
Specializes in NICU, PICU, Transport, L&D, Hospice.

At this point the "many Republicans" who don't believe Trump seem powerless in GOP politics. 

3
Up Vote Up Vote ×
Specializes in Peds/outpatient FP,derm,allergy/private duty.
2 hours ago, toomuchbaloney said:

At this point the "many Republicans" who don't believe Trump seem powerless in GOP politics. 

They do, but I think there is a disconnect between Republicans most often quoted and the party as a whole.  I identified as a centrist Republican years ago when I lived in one of the most liberal cities in the country, therefore I was able to be a delegate up until the state level.

What I noticed was the higher you go, the more partisan zealotry, wealth and groupthink dominates the proceedings. These are the people the media seeks out.

The solution would be if the Republicans who find Trump abhorrent started to be more active at the precinct level, which most are reluctant to do for many understandable reasons.

2
Up Vote Up Vote ×
Specializes in Vents, Telemetry, Home Care, Home infusion.

Trump launches direct attack on McConnell a month out from midterm elections on his truth social website. Called McConnells "China  loving wife, Coco Chow" - -  HIS FORMER Transportation Secretary Elaine Chao.   This type of behavior Republicans are accepting???  Please not 4 more years chaos, pick Larry Hogan instead as your candidate.

 

2
Up Vote Up Vote ×
Specializes in NICU, PICU, Transport, L&D, Hospice.
36 minutes ago, NRSKarenRN said:

Trump launches direct attack on McConnell a month out from midterm elections on his truth social website. Called McConnells "China  loving wife, Coco Chow" - -  HIS FORMER Transportation Secretary Elaine Chao.   This type of behavior Republicans are accepting???  Please not 4 more years chaos, pick Larry Hogan instead as your candidate.

 

There is something dangerously wrong within the republican party right now. 

3
Up Vote Up Vote ×
4 hours ago, toomuchbaloney said:

... This type of behavior Republicans are accepting???  Please not 4 more years chaos, pick Larry Hogan instead as your candidate.

[...]

Some, not all, Republicans are.  I have been, and remain somewhat bewildered that Mr. Trump gets the press he does. 

4 hours ago, toomuchbaloney said:

[...]

There is something dangerously wrong within the republican party right now. 

Perhaps.  I believe there is a slowly growing number of Republicans that are leaving the Trump movement.  Whether there are enough to take the wind out of his sails and make a difference remains to be seen.

3
Up Vote Up Vote ×
Specializes in NICU, PICU, Transport, L&D, Hospice.
3 hours ago, chare said:

Some, not all, Republicans are.  I have been, and remain somewhat bewildered that Mr. Trump gets the press he does. 

Perhaps.  I believe there is a slowly growing number of Republicans that are leaving the Trump movement.  Whether there are enough to take the wind out of his sails and make a difference remains to be seen.

Trump gets press because he is crazy and dangerous, he's chaotic and charismatic and he has every possibility of being the fellow who caused the fall of our democracy.  The fact that the Republican Party is splintering internally BECAUSE of a cartoonish despot is clear evidence that there is something wrong inside conservative politics. 

I get that some, not all republican voters support dangerous election deniers and liars...but there really does seem to be so very many conservative communities who are elevating disruptors, liars, and cheats because they've been manipulated by lies and misrepresentations from republican candidates and politicians.  There's a problem with integrity and honor in republican politics just now. 

2
Up Vote Up Vote ×
+ Add a Comment