TLB, how do you respond to the charge (which appears to be undeniable fact although of course I wasn't there so I'm relying on news outlets) that right after one of the officials giving testimony heard Trump's phone call, he was so concerned he filed a complaint with the white house lawyer, who then moved the report to a classified server and has refused to acknowledge its existence until being compelled now because of the investigation?
I haven't been on top of all the happenings - those presented as statements (opinion, interpretation), nor facts (what as moved to secure server, how secure, and for what reasons). Anything I say on the matter is my conjecture and assumptions on extremely faulty footing. I do believe we won't hear the truth from any news agency, any of them. I could see someone being upset with the call (I can easily imagine the supposed whistle blower who is very pro-Ukraine and anti-Trump being appalled by the conversation, for example) and reacting by trying to get someone to pay attention to what they took from it. Very possible, IMO. What does it mean? A hundred possibilities. Trump fkd up (again) with how he spouts shit anywhere anytime. He could easily walk into the wrong statements, even intentionally without recognizing how bad it is. Or, he could skate close to the line (again, likely unwittingly) but be taken out of context by someone with a strongly opposing philosophy. Moving stuff to a secure server is, as I understand it, pretty routine regarding calls with other countries - was this one different, and why, we can't answer. As to not acknowledging it, who is asking? Do they have clearance to know? So many unknowns at this point. I do believe Trump honestly believes he's done nothing wrong - not that he is denying what he did, but that he believes it was acceptable, whatever it was. Part of my personality is to consider a LOT of possibilities, in hopes I don't blindly assume one is correct and miss the truth. As such, I can imagine a dozen situations that support either side's take on this. Which is true? I can't say.
There has appeared to be plenty to go on ever since the Mueller report. The Mueller report does state that Trump did not knowingly aid the Russians. However it says a lot that is quite incriminating and concerning as well. Now these various officials giving testimonies are producing some quite damning evidence. Unless they all made it up and the dems created fake paperwork and a whole lot of people were involved, it means Trump has done plenty wrong and plenty we should be concerned about a president doing. Occam's razor suggests that Trump is the one lying, it involves a whole lot less people and complexity, and plus we already know he lies constantly about all sorts of little things, it is literally impossible to deny that he lies regularly, even if it's about dumb shit that doesn't even matter. It seems like a huge leap of faith to suggest that he's not lying about this, considering all that and then on top of it, considering his behaviors even make him look like he's flailing to cover it up (trying to get foreign governments to discredit the Mueller report which he previously said exonerated him for example).
if it quacks like a duck...
I don't listen to Trump. I don't. If I did, I think I'd lose my mind and be in a constant state of
I do know he's faced more opposition than any President I've ever heard of, and continued to do his job as best he can despite the antagonizing distractions. I have a soft spot for underdogs, even if they are less than stellar at whatever it is they are doing. I do know the string of things he's been accused of since 2016 has solidified into nothing thus far, which makes it hard to believe accusations going forward and more fabrications of nothingness. Do they have substance? Possibly, but thus far, no. If past performance is any indication of future potential.... and that is what leads me to question the latest round of Dem mania and have a little more belief in the right side conspiracy connections.
I've always felt Trump will shoot himself in the foot. The question has always been, how bad will it be? Will he blow a leg off and claim it was a mine he stepped on in the war? Will it be a slow bleeder that costs him a baby toe nephew or son-in-law but overall is just a mild distraction? That's part of the magic of Trump. You know there is a surprise lingering somewhere out there. You just don't know when, and if it's going to be a spectacular catastrophe or a dud (which claims is YUGE, the biggest ever!). So far, I haven't seen him shoot himself in the foot (though I feel strongly Giuliani is the loaded gun he left rolling around that will do him in). But that's another angle I can get into later.
I also listen to the right, where discussions paint a web of conspiracy against him. Tbph, a lot of it not only steps over the line, I believe it pirouettes and does a few tangos, in to the land of amusing ludicrousness, it just gets silly. Now, with all those voices saying it is deep state shenanigans, does quantity make truth? No. Same for all those giving testimonies. I do believe the left has failed at several attempts to find fault with Trump, and this current one is yet another attempt. Do I believe Trump is 100% clean? I have no idea. Do I think he's 100% dirty? I have no idea. I do believe Dems have tried several angles to trap him and failed, and the current is to hold inquiries and subpoena his staff - which separation of powers, I believe, allows him to deny lest we create a White House under the whims of the Congress. Does that mean he's guilty or hiding something? No, it means he's exercising his Presidential rights to retain autonomy. He 'could' be guilty, but simply exercising Presidential rights does not mean he IS guilty. However, watch the 'count' of 'congressional obstruction' mount and be swung about as if it mattered. I'm no expert on law, and to be absolutely truthful, I'm holding BOTH your hands in hopes we can get to a point where ALL politicians are held accountable. But I also believe in the preservation of balance of power, and in doing your elected job. I think Trump is trying to do his. I don't think Congress is trying to do anything beyond the one of their duties that is listed as 'impeach'.
Another angle I'm hearing put into the discussion is Trump going against US foreign policy. Who makes the US foreign policy? Congress? No. Ambassadors? No, they carry it out. It's the President who sets foreign policy, and anyone who works for him but operates counter to his direction can consider looking for other employment. Another story line I see the left building is his firing of the ambassador to the Ukraine. I'm always open to correction, but don't the US Ambassadors all work for the State Dept? And who does the State Dept operate under? The President. So, it is within his role to hire, fire, or reassign ambassadors, and he doesn't need a lot of reason, especially when the person was put in place by the previous President of another party.
Let me ask you this, if he's being asked a hundred times a day about crimes he either didn't commit, or isn't aware / doesn't believe he committed....how many questions, and accusations, does it take to make it fact that he did something wrong? Not to speak for you, but I suspect you, like me, have to wait for the 'facts' to come out if they ever do. Until then, we have our beliefs and suspicions, but no truth. Not yet.
) middle and ask why Dems are spending all their time in office chasing imaginary ghosts and doing nothing for the people...I have to look at the Reps and say 'wtf are you doing?'. If pressed for why they aren't doing anything for America, they may respond that they don't have enough support to get laws passed with the Dems holding the House. To that I say, 'make a fn effort'. To date, since Trump was elected, I've seen very little out of ANYONE in Congress, and that is frightfully disappointing.
![:\](https://bluelight.org/xf/BL_Images/Orig_Emoji/wrygrin.gif "wry grin :\")
