Presidential Prediction...Our own Crystal Ball

[Catonahottinroof]

I think that is how it falls too. The impeachment train and Trump’s declassifying of that phone call transcript will throw Biden under the bus in the primary.

OK...

Trump vs Warren. Trump wins as the nation comes full grasp that she is a socialist, and basically the antithesis of what this nation is found on.

[kingcat]

A huge bump for Biden, as the president eventually tries to lay blame on his personal lawyer Giuliani. A White House increasing in chaos while the military veteran finds honor and integrity still matters to most Americans. Biden>Trump in 2020

And Republicans start to ask themselves,
just who the face of our party?
And for a generation the answer will always be Donald Trump.

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/polit...cid=spartanntp

[CitizenBBN]

That part I don't care about. I've done enough hijacking before ha. Just wanted it to be easier to come back and look at the predictions later.
The impeachment discussion is more important. I get it. And its pressing. Just thought the prediction thing would be fun.

More topical, but in the end a rabbit hole just as you said. And honestly it won't matter next November. People who think Trump is sent here to destroy America will still think it either way, those who think he's great will still think that, and those like me who think he's an ass but our best choice given the other option is socialism (versus rampant corruption as the option in 2016) will still hold our nose and deal with it.

The only thing the impeachment process will do really is destroy Biden and secure the nomination for Warren. There's no way it won't hurt him to have him come up constantly in a negative light and it will be from both sides of the aisle in effect.

The only real question is if Trump can do anything to make himself more palatable (he could but I doubt he can control himself) and if Warren being a far left candidate with serious ethical questions will be enough to get Trump the key battleground states.

[CitizenBBN]

A huge bump for Biden, as the president eventually tries to lay blame on his personal lawyer Giuliani. A White House increasing in chaos while the military veteran finds honor and integrity still matters to most Americans. Biden>Trump in 2020

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/polit...cid=spartanntp

Given what we know about Biden I'd say they're going to be looking hard and long to find any honor or integrity in his candidacy.

They won't find any with Trump either mind you, or Fauxahontas. If you're looking for honor and integrity in this race you'll be sorely disappointed, lol.

But politics isn't about honor and integrity. It's about power and wealth.

[kingcat]

But what if Biden is innocent, as Lutsenko stated today?

Just the opposite would happen.

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/polit...cid=spartanntp

[kingcat]

Given what we know about Biden I'd say they're going to be looking hard and long to find any honor or integrity in his candidacy.

They won't find any with Trump either mind you, or Fauxahontas. If you're looking for honor and integrity in this race you'll be sorely disappointed, lol.

But politics isn't about honor and integrity. It's about power and wealth.

Not to me.

The man has nothing to prove and has served his country his whole life.. absent bunions or the like. He is respected, and I venture to say loved across the political landscape, and deep partisan divides.

So the odds are set against your hypothesis, imo..

Biden-O'Rourke 2020

[CitizenBBN]

Not to me.

The man has nothing to prove and has served his country his whole life.. absent bunions or the like. He is respected, and I venture to say loved across the political landscape, and deep partisan divides.

So the odds are set against your hypothesis, imo..

Biden-O'Rourke 2020

His son, with no qualifications whatsoever, has taken in millions of dollars from foreign powers (mostly Chinese and Russian), often flying with his father on Air Force Two for those meetings, and yet Biden has integrity?

Please.

I've read his Senate hearings from the 80s. he was just as much of a buffoon then as now, and given this new news he's also a corrupt buffoon, or at least allows his family to be corrupt on his knowing coattails.

If Eric Trump were in China and the Ukraine cutting deals worth millions upon millions, flying in on Air Force One, and getting paid for jobs for which he has no qualifications, you'd be pointing to it as conclusive proof of Trump's corruption.

As much as I respect Puma it won't be our lack of civil discourse that ends our nation. It will be our limitless willingness to accept hypocrisy.

[CitizenBBN]

Oh, and I hope Biden does win the nomination, and I pray any Dem nominee picks Beto as the VP candidate. PLEASE pick Beto. Boy I'd take that deal in a heartbeat.

[kingcat]

I wager you a pack of spearmint Chiclets, as was stated today, he did nothing illegal.

I saw the the Beto thing and thought it was funny. I knew it would get a rise.

It will certainly be a woman..
Michelle perhaps?

[CitizenBBN]

I wager you a pack of spearmint Chiclets, as was stated today, he did nothing illegal.

I saw the the Beto thing and thought was funny. I knew it would get a rise.

You're moving the goalposts. The "not illegal" thing is a Clinton defense. You started talking about honor and integrity. You can do a lot of things that are still legal but hardly ethical.

I imagine what Biden did was technically legal, just as Trump broke no laws either. But his son getting rich at jobs for which he has no qualifications, paid by people who very much need influence with the US administration? I think I can figure it out, and while not illegal it's certainly corrupt.

Re Beto I figured that was a bit of a jest, but boy I hope he somehow lands on the ticket. He won't of course, none of the potential winners are so foolish. Beto burned his political career to the ground faster than I've seen someone do it. Jeb Bush's burned but not so much from his actions but just from being another Bush. Beto burned it in a bid for attention, like a giant bonfire.

[kingcat]

I was talking about Joe's son not him. I believe everything said in the article I posted is exactly the situation, and this is no more than an attempt by our president to manufacture an appearance of malfeasance by both. And that HE tried to blackmail Ukraine to trump up some charge against the younger Biden.
And by doing so, intentionally broke the the laws of this nation.

I think the evidence is clear, but we will see if it can be sidestepped by executive authority and the help of his congressional puppets.
One thing is certain, this is no good news for Mr Trump. (Nor we as Americans)

Imo, it can't be spun as such this time. He screwed up royally. The cover up just didn't work here.

But I do agree much more info will come out.
Anyway, a long way to go with this situation, and I don't envy the work that must be done to mount a defense of the indefensible and excuses for the inexcusable.

[CitizenBBN]

It's not an attempt by Trump to manufacture a negative spin on Biden. It came up before Trump was the nominee, and multiple sources have reported that it was troubling to Biden's staff etc. even when it was happening.

Step back from the bias and look at the big picture. The son of a VP who has no experience or ties to an industry in a foreign nation ends up with a cushy high dollar job that pays huge money for no real work.

That's how these politically tied Directorships work, even in the US. Lots of boards of big companies have politically well connected members, for the purpose of having those relationships and ties. Why is this any different?

the problem is those ties with a sitting VP stink of corruption. It's influence buying, and it's rampant in Washington.

This is no different than a Duke recruit's family suddenly getting really good job offers from North Carolina companies, just out of the blue. We all know what is going on, but it's technically not a violation.

Same thing here.

And go look at Biden's work in China, putting together an investment group in meetings where he flew over with his father on Air Force Two.

You can't tell me that if this were Trump's kids you wouldn't be losing your mind, and that's the double standard and hypocrisy that is dooming any kind of real discussion. Hold both to the same standards.

[Catfan73]

You guys don’t get it. It’s about the Constitution and that’s why the Republicans in the Senate will eventually turn on Trump and force him to resign before it ever gets to a vote. I need to change my prediction on the election too since Trump is apparently intent on taking Pence down with him. President Pelosi decides not to run. The prediction:

Warren defeats Sasse. 9.27.19

[ukpumacat]

Since we are fully down the rabbit hole...my thoughts:

This thread, to me, is indicative of the problem. One side does something....so the other does...and both justify their actions by the other side's reaction. And it goes back so far that certainly no one will prove who started it. But you can guarantee both sides will say the other did.

I turned on Fox News for 30 minutes yesterday. The ENTIRE 30 minutes (Hannity) was on Biden and his son. Literally, not one mention of impeachment, Trump's call, Maguire, etc. I have no doubt if I turned on MSNBC they wouldn't mention Biden.

And my point: One does not justify the other.

Chuck, to your point...If Biden is guilty, then he is guilty. Bottom line. He shouldn't be President and should resign. Is he? Don't know. But I am all for an investigation to see if anything was illegal or otherwise "impeachable" (he is running for President so I think it applies).
But whether he is guilty or not doesn't negate any guilt by Trump, Rudy, etc. If Trump is guilty than he is guilty. And he shouldn't be President. Is he? Don't know. But I am all for an investigation to see if anything was illegal or otherwise "impeachable".

The issue of course is that both sides are so terribly blinded (and this includes voters) by party bias that they can't see one or the other. One watches (or believes) the media which they already agree with.
Except for Fox News where Shep Smith had on their own legal analyst and he said what Trump did was illegal. And then Tucker had his own on and he called Fox News legal analyst a "fool". And now there is infighting at Fox News over it all. Its just all so silly.

How about instead of one guilty party justifying another we just have both be guilty and resign? I am all for it. But that of course will not happen because Dem's don't really care if Biden did it (but would lose their minds if it were Trump) and Reps don't really care if Trump did it (but would lose their minds if it were Biden/Obama). And so nothing happens. And nothing gets done.

[ukpumacat]

Hold both to the same standards.

Will do.
If Biden is guilty (and it seems he may be)...he should resign from running.
If Trump is guilty (and it seems he may be)...he should resign from the Presidency.

All solved.

[ukpumacat]

P.s. My offer (which is weightless) still stands. Have Trump step down and I will personally put a different Republican in office for the next 4 years as long as they are reasonable and respectful.
I can provide a list (ha):
Sasse
Romney
Kasich (who would be my personal choice)

[ukpumacat]

Fwiw...

Fox News' Chris Wallace: "the spinning that's been done by the president's defenders over the last 24 hours since this very damaging whistleblower complaint came out ... [is] not surprising but it is astonishing and I think deeply misleading."

[dan_bgblue]

Have Trump step down and I will personally put a different Republican in office for the next 4 years

You can really do that? Are you really Russian and can stuff the ballot boxes in all the right states to make that happen?

[ukpumacat]

You can really do that? Are you really Russian and can stuff the ballot boxes in all the right states to make that happen?

Haha. As I said..."weightless offer". But if I COULD. Btw, I wouldn't be the only one to make that deal. If that were an actual vote, it would probably win the Dem primary.

[Catonahottinroof]

I think you can pitch media opinions out the window...from either side. I’ve read opinions from constitutional lawyers who are split along the same lines they were during the Russiagate fiasco. I trust their opinions a bit more than talking head media types (even if they have law degrees)
Pelosi needs to put this to a vote on the house floor IMO and let the chips fall.

Fwiw...

Fox News' Chris Wallace: "the spinning that's been done by the president's defenders over the last 24 hours since this very damaging whistleblower complaint came out ... [is] not surprising but it is astonishing and I think deeply misleading."

[CitizenBBN]

Will do.
If Biden is guilty (and it seems he may be)...he should resign from running.
If Trump is guilty (and it seems he may be)...he should resign from the Presidency.

All solved.

Legally I don't think either one is "guilty".

It's all in the gray area of politics based on our current laws. There's no law that says Biden's son can't ride his Dad's coattails to get access and make money. It is unethical, but it's not illegal.

Likewise Trump asking a foreign power to investigate someone isn't illegal. As POTUS he has broad power in foreign policy and he's the chief LEO of the land, so if he thinks someone should be investigated, and there's certainly some probable cause at least here, then it's at least a gray area.

In truth, as Alan Dershowitz pointed out repeatedly in the Russia investigation, it's not illegal necessarily to "collude" with a foreign power. You have to show a lot more than just some kind of cooperation, b/c if that's the standard the DNC's creation of the dossier with Russian sources could be considered "collusion".

I don't think either is guilty. I do think Trump chose to investigate Biden and wouldn't have chosen to investigate an ally, but that's just a given in politics at all levels. I do think Biden's son is using his dad's power to cash in by selling his name for supposed access, and that's corrupt IMO but it's probably not technically illegal.

The "crime" part of this is really hard to prove. Bill Clinton takes $500K in speaking fees from a company in Russia backed by the same group that gets Hillary to sign off on the purchase of Uranium One. Those are facts, cold and hard, and still no prosecution. why? B/c you have to prove a causal relationship.

So you have to prove Trump only mentioned Biden b/c he's a rival, not b/c he may in fact be someone who needs to be investigated for corruption in the Ukraine, when the call was about Ukranian corruption and trying to weed it out.

that's what I mean by the same standards. By Washington's current standard, which I agree is utterly appalling, Trump isn't guilty of anything, and Biden, while unseemly, probably isn't either.

It's the Clinton defense. They never say "it isn't wrong what I did". They have always said "it's not illegal". And that's true in that it would be so difficult to build a case without some kind of smoking gun.


but the only person being investigated here is Trump. the Clinton machine has gotten numerous passes, including the email scandal which IMO was actually a crime and was easily provable, and so has Biden, and they will continue to do so.

that's the double standard.

And I'm fine with throwing them all in jail, absolutely. I'm sick of the corruption of Washington and the elites. But the only one who will be punished here is Trump, and it's b/c he's a conservative and the media and the bureaucrats in Washington are overwhelmingly liberal. They'd never do this to one of their own.

[ukpumacat]

And I'm fine with throwing them all in jail, absolutely. I'm sick of the corruption of Washington and the elites. But the only one who will be punished here is Trump, and it's b/c he's a conservative and the media and the bureaucrats in Washington are overwhelmingly liberal. They'd never do this to one of their own.

Actually, I have mixed feelings on whether this will hurt Biden or not in the primaries. (and I am saying this from a Dem primary voter point of view) On one hand, it makes it seem like Trump doesn't want to face Biden as he is consistently in his crosshairs.
On the other, its a possible achilles that might keep independents from voting for him.
So, I will likely lean toward this hurting Biden in the General and therefore hurting him now in the primary. But I suppose we will see. I am more of a long term thinker with this stuff.
A lot of Dem voters are not. I have a feeling he gets a bump in the Dem polls after this (even though I think he should not).

[ukpumacat]

Legally I don't think either one is "guilty".

So you have to prove Trump only mentioned Biden b/c he's a rival, not b/c he may in fact be someone who needs to be investigated for corruption in the Ukraine, when the call was about Ukranian corruption and trying to weed it out.

Or both. Because both includes him being a rival...which is illegal. In other words, the President may have asked them to investigate because he thinks what Biden did was wrong. And he's just doing America a service because that kind of person should be caught. That would be good for the government.
But he might have ALSO done it because he's a political rival. And that is illegal. And that would be good for Trump.

It doesn't have to be one or the other. It can be both. And one of "both" is illegal.

The biggest problem for Trump is that he and Rudy just won't shut up. They tweet. They do interviews. They just talk all the time.
And even though I highly doubt they will find a transcript or an email that explicitly says, "Hey Ukraine...investigate my rival Biden because I want him out of the race. Then I will give you your aid." doesn't mean its still not both. And again, one of both is illegal.
And Trump's phone call says he connected the Ukranian leader with Rudy (so did the whistleblower and so has Rudy). So Rudy's actions were at the request of Trump (and now he is saying also the State Dept).

And Rudy Rudy Rudy just keeps talking. And he is likely going to get thrown under the bus and be Trump's fall guy for this.

But this quote by him is the one I think is most damning:

“I’m asking them to do an investigation that they’re doing already and that other people are telling them to stop. And I’m going to give them reasons why they shouldn’t stop it because that information will be very, very helpful to my client, and may turn out to be helpful to my government.”

According to Rudy, it was done for both.

[CitizenBBN]

Done for both actually may not be illegal.

First, I want to see the law that makes it illegal even if it's done just to hurt a rival.

Second, just like the Clinton cash machine, you have to PROVE it was done for nefarious purpose, and that's why it's so hard to win these cases. the UAE just felt moved about the Clinton Foundation's cause in Haiti and send them $10 million, it wasn't b/c that bought them access and influence with the Clintons. Now prove otherwise.

You need a complete smoking gun in these cases, and so far there isn't one.

Your quote from Rudy is absolutely identical to a public letter sent by multiple Democratic Senators to Ukraine urging them to continue investigations that may have helped damage Trump, and they went further and even at least implied a quid pro quo. Are they going to be censured and removed from the Senate?

but let's start at the beginning. Where is it illegal for either Trump or those Democratic Senators to urge a foreign power to investigate or not investigate someone even if it is done for political benefit?

I'm being sincere. I agree it may be "wrong", but I want to know what specific laws are being applied b/c the devil will be in the detail of their language.

[CitizenBBN]

And FWIW, I would be fine if this whole thing made Trump throw up his hands and not run and Pence or whoever stepped in, b/c versus Biden, Warren or Bernie I think we get another GOP President, and if that happens the judiciary in another 4 years will have a lot more judges who believe in following the laws versus making them up as they go along, including possibly 1 or even 2 more seats on SCOTUS.

So I'm good with that, I have no loyalty to Trump, but I end up defending him on here b/c he's being held to a vastly different standard of behavior.

when those Senators sent a PUBLIC letter doing exactly what you just cited from Gulliani, where was the outrage and calls for legal charges?

It seems to only be "illegal" when Trump does something. When anyone else does it, and has done it, it's just politics.

[Catfan73]

Speaking of the Supreme Court, wonder if Obama was nominated if he would accept. Only Taft has ever served as President and on the court.

[Catonahottinroof]

This link describes why the Ukraine incident will sink Biden’s chances in 2020

https://thehill.com/opinion/campaign...-ukraine-story

[ukpumacat]

but let's start at the beginning. Where is it illegal for either Trump or those Democratic Senators to urge a foreign power to investigate or not investigate someone even if it is done for political benefit?

I'm being sincere. I agree it may be "wrong", but I want to know what specific laws are being applied b/c the devil will be in the detail of their language.

Now who's moving the goalpost?

Its a valid question.

I can tell you that the Fox News Legal Analyst said it was illegal. So that is something.

But, to be quite honest..."illegal" isn't the right term at all. The simple fact before congress is "is it impeachable"? And it doesn't need to be illegal to be impeachable.

Alexander Hamilton wrote about impeachment in Federalist No. 65, “The subjects of its jurisdiction are those offenses which proceed from the misconduct of public men, or, in other words, from the abuse or violation of some public trust. They are of a nature which may with peculiar propriety be denominated POLITICAL, as they relate chiefly to injuries done immediately to the society itself.”

A Congressional Research Service report on impeachment and removal prepared in October 2015 says, “Impeachable conduct does not appear to be limited to criminal behavior. Congress has identified three general types of conduct that constitute grounds for impeachment, although these categories should not be understood as exhaustive: (1) improperly exceeding or abusing the powers of the office; (2) behavior incompatible with the function and purpose of the office; and (3) misusing the office for an improper purpose or for personal gain.”

No matter what, what is impeachable is going to be up to the eye of the beholder (voter). According to Rudy, he pushed Ukraine for a Biden investigation because it was "very very good for his client". That sure fits the Congressional definition above Imo. But I am not a voting member of Congress that has to worry about losing my seat in 2020. Many Republicans are. And even if they agree with the above they are not likely to get to 20 Republican votes in the Senate.

But, this was never about actually removing him from office. His conduct may be impeachable but we all know this was a calculated political move. Many on this board have said they think it was a political mistake for the Dems. I am not sure about that.
It seems like its picking up steam with the public. The earliest polls released shows it has.
And some respected Republicans (like Sasse) seem to be troubled by it.
It has certainly gotten under Trump's skin.
There is a lot of infighting amongst Republican brass, Fox News, etc.
And Rudy is just a disaster on television and twitter.
Time will tell what the political consequences will be either way.

[ukpumacat]

This link describes why the Ukraine incident will sink Biden’s chances in 2020

https://thehill.com/opinion/campaign...-ukraine-story

Will Dems care? Will another candidate use it in the primary to go after him? I am not sure they will. And I am not sure it will play well if they do.

It won't matter in the general. Trump's actions have sort of just negated any advantage it would have given them. I am serious about that too. If I were Trump, I would have held on to this until 2 weeks before the General Election. But Rudy has been tweeting about it for 6 months now. This will seem like Ancient history by next November.

[ukpumacat]

And FWIW, I would be fine if this whole thing made Trump throw up his hands and not run and Pence or whoever stepped in, b/c versus Biden, Warren or Bernie I think we get another GOP President, and if that happens the judiciary in another 4 years will have a lot more judges who believe in following the laws versus making them up as they go along, including possibly 1 or even 2 more seats on SCOTUS.

So I'm good with that, I have no loyalty to Trump, but I end up defending him on here b/c he's being held to a vastly different standard of behavior.

when those Senators sent a PUBLIC letter doing exactly what you just cited from Gulliani, where was the outrage and calls for legal charges?

It seems to only be "illegal" when Trump does something. When anyone else does it, and has done it, it's just politics.

Can't disagree. Fair is fair. And neither side is usually fair.