The 2024 Presidential Nomination Thread

[flere-imsaho]

Pence has never struck me as a bright individual.

[Atocep]

Originally Posted by Ksyrup

It's particularly ridiculous for Pence to do so, since he's not winning over any of the people he thinks he's courting by not outright going after Trump. You can't play both sides when one side hates your guts.

Exactly, his best play would have been as the guy that gives insight into Trump's true personality and tells horror stories of his time in the oval office.

I honestly don't think the unswayable MAGA block is as big as many believe. It's sizable, probably 15-20% of the GOP base, but I really believe there's a path to winning without them and considering the fact that it plays better to moderates it likely has a better chance in the general.

Everyone seems to think the only way to beat Trump is to try to steal his voters that aren't voting for anyone else.

[Ksyrup]

I don't think it's all about "stealing" his voters as much as it is about hoping to do enough (by not being overly critical) to get them to vote for someone else because that seems to be the only portion of the GOP electorate that is overly energized, and it's all about turnout for them (combined with targeted supression efforts).

[NobodyHere]

Right now I'm thinking Pence is hoping that Trump drops out of the race one way or another. Then maybe he has a chance to pick up some of the MAGA voters.

And lets face it. If Trump is in the race then Pence has zero chance. So he might as well court the MAGA voters and hope that Trump doesn't run.

[GrantDawg]

How do you not at least hedge a bit? Give yourself some wiggle room in-case the evidence is just ridiculously bad? The level this part has completely sold out to this orange freak is astounding.

[Solecismic]

I think many people would be relieved if Trump just went away.

I'm not sure it's a good look to get him on campaign finance rules that are hard to parse and seem arbitrary coming from his political opponents. Or boxes of documents when classified documents was an issue with Hillary and now with Biden. The Russian pee-document turned out to be a big nothing, and that was the impetus for one of the impeachments, originally.

So if they've got something different, by all means. But it's been looking like the Democrats just don't like Trump and have been abusing the impeachment process and the judicial system for a long time now. That's a better take if you're a Republican.

This is not to argue any one of the many charges against Trump. I really don't know if he broke the law or if there's a case that he should be locked up because it's just so bad that not even Nixon's spying is in the same ballpark. The one charge that sticks with me is the pending case in Georgia - if he actually tried to do what he apparently threatened to do... that should be enough. But it has to be more than the usual bluster that comes from politicians who are upset about an election. Which is not to argue that it isn't - I know this is a heavy D board and arguing politics here is simply not productive.

I think the end game is to ensure he wins the nomination by making the primaries all about Trump, then muddy up the post-convention decision period with trials and such.

So what do you do if you're one of the already too-large group of Republican candidates? If you support prosecution or even hedge right now, you're toast in the debates because the timeline is all wrong - this won't be settled before Iowa - not even close. Your best play is a statement about the weaponization of the judicial system, then try to ignore the circus - maybe even hope it works.

But if you make a big deal about the weaponization issue, you're making Trump the center of attention. Which is just what he wants and just what the Democrats want. So that's a lose, too.

I think the only play is to stamp your feet a little right now, then keep quiet about it. If you're feeling a little itchy, maybe promise a pardon for Trump as your first act as president. But itchy takes aren't exactly going to fly around with this crowd - they just aren't looking to inspire right now, except maybe Ramaswamy, who might be trying to position himself as an answer if the judicial system moves faster than it's going to move in this case.

[GrantDawg]

Eh, nevermind. Both sides going to both sides.

[Atocep]

Originally Posted by Solecismic

Or boxes of documents when classified documents was an issue with Hillary and now with Biden.

What Trump is accused of doing and what Biden and Hilary did with classified materials is apples and orangutangs. They're so far far apart they shouldn't even be discussed together.

Without trying to come off as an ass, if you can't see the difference between these situations then you're part of the problem. What Trump did was far closer to Robert Hanssen was doing than Hilary or Biden. He was planning to use our intelligence for his own gain. This should be the biggest presidential scandal in our nation's history, but it's difficult for many to wrap their heads around the seriousness of this issue when it's tied to the President of the United States.

[Ksyrup]

We need to get to a point in our society where we can choose to take sides on a particular issue, person, etc., without people feeling like they are automatically joining "the other side." It's OK to be a free-thinking, independent voter and say that Trump is a criminal, what is known about the Hillary and Biden situations is not the same, and that if Biden is shown to have done the same, charge the fucker!

I want criminals charged. I do not care what their party affiliation is. No one is above the law.

[Solecismic]

Originally Posted by Atocep

What Trump is accused of doing and what Biden and Hilary did with classified materials is apples and orangutangs. They're so far far apart they shouldn't even be discussed together.

Without trying to come off as an ass, if you can't see the difference between these situations then you're part of the problem. What Trump did was far closer to Robert Hanssen was doing than Hilary or Biden. He was planning to use our intelligence for his own gain. This should be the biggest presidential scandal in our nation's history, but it's difficult for many to wrap their heads around the seriousness of this issue when it's tied to the President of the United States.

That's one take. Sounds extreme. Just like the Russia pee-document. I'm just not going to be suckered at this stage any more. Maybe you're right. Maybe not. I'm not trying to both-sides it, but I have little trust in the media on anything politics-related at this point. They really sold the Russia story like it was dead-solid fact, just like the take above. It wasn't even based on anything real. They just wanted it to be true.

The one piece of that which makes no sense to me (and Trump often makes no sense to me, so there's that) is if he felt he had documents that were worth enough money to be worth treason, and he knew that the DOJ knew he had boxes of documents on his property and had thought that a better lock was the solution, then those particular documents would not have been found with the rest. Not even Geraldo Rivera would have found them. Of course, he might be that stupid. Certainly the Democrats think he is.

I'm not trying to both-sides this. I'm just saying that at some point, drinking the Kool-Aid constantly put out by either one of the sides will make you perpetually angry. Because then you're paying attention to them, not to what actually matters.

[Ksyrup]

Why are you talking about Democrats and the media as if this was some sort of party press conference? A grand jury indicted him!

[Ksyrup]

It seems like you've become so disillusioned by the entire political process that you won't allow yourself to see the obvious.

[JPhillips]

Trump/Russia is basically true. Trump's team did coordinate with Russians. Russians did hack Hillary and the DNC. Multiple people were prosecuted for crimes related to that.

This is what a GOP Senate committee report said.

[Solecismic]

Originally Posted by Ksyrup

Why are you talking about Democrats and the media as if this was some sort of party press conference? A grand jury indicted him!

Because it sounds like a party press conference. Nowhere in the indictment, I think, is there a claim that he intended to use the documents.

Nor is a grand jury indictment anything more than a group agreeing that what the prosecutor has presented is something that can be prosecuted. It's an early stage.

We don't know what's in the secret documents Biden kept. With Hillary, I think the complaint was that she used a home server and copied sensitive information, then tried to destroy it when that was revealed. At least that's what I think the "lock her up" nonsense was all about.

None of this is helpful. If you want to paint me as some sort of right-wing extremist, I don't think you're right. I don't even vote Republican. But I am skeptical of this prosecution because no similar analysis has been made of Biden's boxes.

[thesloppy]

Can I paint you as someone who wants to loudly declare he is maintaining a strong opinion based on willfull ignorance?

[Ksyrup]

Originally Posted by Solecismic

Because it sounds like a party press conference. Nowhere in the indictment, I think, is there a claim that he intended to use the documents..

Perhaps because it is not relevant to the charge?

[JPhillips]

Biden and Pence returned everything voluntarily when the documents were discovered. There's never been a charge that they revealed any sensitive information or refused to return anything to the government.

[GrantDawg]

Originally Posted by Solecismic

Because it sounds like a party press conference. Nowhere in the indictment, I think, is there a claim that he intended to use the documents.

Nor is a grand jury indictment anything more than a group agreeing that what the prosecutor has presented is something that can be prosecuted. It's an early stage.

We don't know what's in the secret documents Biden kept. With Hillary, I think the complaint was that she used a home server and copied sensitive information, then tried to destroy it when that was revealed. At least that's what I think the "lock her up" nonsense was all about.

None of this is helpful. If you want to paint me as some sort of right-wing extremist, I don't think you're right. I don't even vote Republican. But I am skeptical of this prosecution because no similar analysis has been made of Biden's boxes.

Except he did use the documents. With someone recording it. And him admitting these were Top Secret documents that he never declassified. Not to mention the direct direction to lie to the court and the ordering of the boxes to be hidden so that he can keep them, which most people would call "obstruction." This wasn't a mistake, as with Biden and Pence. This was a direct criminal enterprise.

[Solecismic]

Originally Posted by JPhillips

Trump/Russia is basically true. Trump's team did coordinate with Russians. Russians did hack Hillary and the DNC. Multiple people were prosecuted for crimes related to that.

This is what a GOP Senate committee report said.

It was a bipartisan committee and there was no conclusion that Trump's team was colluding. Only that Manafort was an idiot.

It also concluded that the pee-document which started all of it was a big nothing, which is all I've said.

As for Assange and the hacking, sure. But how is that related to charging Trump with a crime, for what seems like the 20th time?

[Atocep]

Originally Posted by Solecismic

Because it sounds like a party press conference. Nowhere in the indictment, I think, is there a claim that he intended to use the documents.

Nor is a grand jury indictment anything more than a group agreeing that what the prosecutor has presented is something that can be prosecuted. It's an early stage.

We don't know what's in the secret documents Biden kept. With Hillary, I think the complaint was that she used a home server and copied sensitive information, then tried to destroy it when that was revealed. At least that's what I think the "lock her up" nonsense was all about.

None of this is helpful. If you want to paint me as some sort of right-wing extremist, I don't think you're right. I don't even vote Republican. But I am skeptical of this prosecution because no similar analysis has been made of Biden's boxes.

They recovered about 10 documents from Biden's home IIRC. It wasn't boxes. Similar for Pence. It shouldn't have happened, but both Pence and Biden immediately cooperated and invited a full search of their homes.

It's clear in the tape that's evidence that Trump held onto at least some of the documents for his own personal gain. How exactly he was going to use them we don't know, but they're not going to charge the President of the United States with something like that unless they absolutely had to. That's a life in prison type of charge that we're not going to dip our toes into charging a former president with. If this had been your or me caught with that much classified info that we had access to then you had better believe we're getting that charge.

What can fairly safely say is he had hundreds of documents throughout Mar A Lago, including some in his personal desk in his office. He had them spilling outside of boxes in the room where most were stored with an unknown number of people having access to those documents.

If it wasn't a big deal or an honest mistake in the same vein as Biden or Pence then why did he jerk the DOJ around for a year and a half? Why did he obstruct? Why did he try to hide some of them? Why has he lied about being able to declassify?

We also know, based on the indictment that this was some of the most classified stuff we have. Both ours, our allies, and our enemies nuclear and military capabilities. This is the type of stuff Trump was waiving around in his office for people to see. It's the type of stuff that gets people killed because it's so sensitive that if it leaks it's pretty easy for our enemies to figure out who our spy or source is.

[Solecismic]

Originally Posted by Ksyrup

Perhaps because it is not relevant to the charge?

I didn't even know it wasn't part of the charge until I read it in response to your comment, though. I was responding to Atocep's post, which did sound like a campaign press release.

[Ksyrup]

Yeah, to me it's enough that he was so casual with these documents that if someone saw something sensitive and particularly useful to another country, maybe they decide to cash in? There are numerous ways what he did was potentially harmful and why it's illegal.

[GrantDawg]

Originally Posted by Solecismic

It was a bipartisan committee and there was no conclusion that Trump's team was colluding. Only that Manafort was an idiot.

It also concluded that the pee-document which started all of it was a big nothing, which is all I've said.

As for Assange and the hacking, sure. But how is that related to charging Trump with a crime, for what seems like the 20th time?

Except the pee document didn't start the investigation, and the investigation would have proceeded without it.

[Solecismic]

Originally Posted by GrantDawg

Except he did use the documents. With someone recording it. And him admitting these were Top Secret documents that he never declassified. Not to mention the direct direction to lie to the court and the ordering of the boxes to be hidden so that he can keep them, which most people would call "obstruction." This wasn't a mistake, as with Biden and Pence. This was a direct criminal enterprise.

I'm not going to defend what he's actually charged with doing. If there's something there, by all means. Give him his day in court. He'll enjoy that, apparently. If he's dumb enough to show off sensitive material that could actually hurt our country, it probably is a sign he shouldn't be running for president. Among about a million other signs. I'm not going to argue against that.

[JPhillips]

Originally Posted by Solecismic

It was a bipartisan committee and there was no conclusion that Trump's team was colluding. Only that Manafort was an idiot.

It also concluded that the pee-document which started all of it was a big nothing, which is all I've said.

As for Assange and the hacking, sure. But how is that related to charging Trump with a crime, for what seems like the 20th time?

It was way more than Manafort being an idiot. From Roll Call:

The Senate Intelligence Committee report found that Trump campaign chairman Paul Manafort's presence "created opportunities for Russian intelligence services to exert influence over, and acquire confidential information on, the Trump Campaign."

Manafort worked for Russian oligarch Oleg Deripaska and other Kremlin-affiliated Russians to mount influence campaigns in Ukraine, and in the process also hired and worked with Konstantin Kilimnik, a former Russian intelligence officer, the report said.

"The Committee obtained some information suggesting Kilimnik may have been connected to the GRU's hack and leak operation targeting the 2016 U.S. election," the report said, referring to the Russian military intelligence service by its initials.

U.S. intelligence agencies have said hackers working for GRU were directly involved in breaking into the Democratic National Committee's servers as well as breaching the email account of John Podesta, Hillary Clinton’s campaign manager.

Manafort shared Trump campaign’s internal polling data with Kilimnik prior to the 2016 election. And in the months after November 2016, Manafort continued to work with Kilimnik and other Russians “to undermine evidence that Russia interfered in the 2016 U.S. election,” the report said.

"Manafort's high level access and willingness to share information with individuals closely affiliated with the Russian intelligence services, particularly Kilimnik and associates of Oleg Deripaska, represented a grave counterintelligence threat," the report said.

The hack and breaching of the DNC and Podesta email account were ordered by Russian President Vladimir Putin, the committee report said.

The stolen information was then exposed on WikiLeaks, and Trump campaign senior officials worked with Trump confidant Roger Stone to "obtain advance information about WikiLeaks's planned releases," the report said. Stone was later found guilty of lying to Congress, but Trump commuted his prison sentence.

The report said the committee uncovered previously unknown links between the Kremlin and the Russian lawyer Natalia Veselnitskaya, who arranged a meeting with Trump associates at Trump Tower in June 2016. After initially saying that the meeting was about Americans adopting Russian kids, Trump and his associates admitted the Russians offered to help the Trump campaign.

[Solecismic]

Originally Posted by Ksyrup

Yeah, to me it's enough that he was so casual with these documents that if someone saw something sensitive and particularly useful to another country, maybe they decide to cash in? There are numerous ways what he did was potentially harmful and why it's illegal.

OK. Enough for me, too, really. But the maybe standard should apply to everyone - and that would include Hillary's home server use, wouldn't it?

Anyway, that's all I've got. Last thing I want to do is defend Trump. I'd like him out of the race, too. We need to get back to issues that actually matter.

[Ksyrup]

My understanding is that Hillary had no classified documents - I believe it was determined a couple documents were mislabeled? - and she wasn't obstructing justice by trying to hide documents, etc. Trump's DOJ had 4 years to charge her. That's they didn't, tells me there's nothing.

[albionmoonlight]

I'd love to be wrong about the GOP and have them nominate Tim Scott.

That would restore a lot of my faith in a post-MAGA future.

[RainMaker]

I'm cool with them charging Hillary, Biden, Obama or whoever if they have the evidence they committed a crime. No skin off my back. Sorry your boy got pinched.

[flere-imsaho]

Originally Posted by Atocep

What Trump is accused of doing and what Biden and Hilary did with classified materials is apples and orangutangs. They're so far far apart they shouldn't even be discussed together.

Without trying to come off as an ass, if you can't see the difference between these situations then you're part of the problem. What Trump did was far closer to Robert Hanssen was doing than Hilary or Biden. He was planning to use our intelligence for his own gain. This should be the biggest presidential scandal in our nation's history, but it's difficult for many to wrap their heads around the seriousness of this issue when it's tied to the President of the United States.

Amen.

Originally Posted by Solecismic

I'm just saying that at some point, drinking the Kool-Aid constantly put out by either one of the sides will make you perpetually angry. Because then you're paying attention to them, not to what actually matters.

It's actually nitwits like you who can't be bothered to apply some critical reasoning to actual facts that makes me angry, to be honest.

Originally Posted by Solecismic

Because it sounds like a party press conference. Nowhere in the indictment, I think, is there a claim that he intended to use the documents.

Except, you know, the tapes where he said as much.

[Lathum]

They literally have the man on tape saying he had the docs. knew they were classified, knew they were secrets, and showed them to people.

I mean, what is there to argue here?

[Flasch186]

The conspiracy against him to set him up all this time


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Solecismic]

Originally Posted by Lathum

They literally have the man on tape saying he had the docs. knew they were classified, knew they were secrets, and showed them to people.

I mean, what is there to argue here?

Beats me. Sounds serious enough. I guess we'll find out. His response looks like a selective prosecution argument, but not being a lawyer, I don't know if that's compelling. He also seems to go through lawyers rather... quickly.

I was arguing that the "his own gain" piece is missing, that's all. Of course, if being able to brag that he had classified documents is gain in his world...

Interpretation is important, I think. If you want to give Hillary and Biden the full benefit of the doubt, that's fine. Certainly she claimed at one point they were all about yoga or something. But some were erased after an order to preserve them. Bleachbit sounds more effective than hiding things in the shower. I don't care. It doesn't serve anyone's interest to prosecute her.

OK. I'm done with this tangent. I was trying to answer why other candidates might want to answer the way they did. I don't see Pence and DeSantis doing anything other than sitting back after their initial statement and hoping this moves quickly either way (it won't). Because every molecule of air sucked up by Trump will benefit him the way primaries work. I'd like a real choice next November, because there's no way in the world I'd ever vote for Trump. Never have, never will. And I'm very unhappy with all the spending and inflation, so I am genuinely considering voting Republican for the first time. Sorry... I know that's like claiming I kick dogs for the heck of it when it comes to the politics here.

[Lathum]

I'll never vote a republican in the parties current iteration, which actually hurts me because we are super fortunate to be in the tax bracket that dem policies would make us pay more. IF they come back to the middle with a guy like Hogan, Kasich, even a Sununu I would consider it.

I don't get your obsession with his gain, Who gives a shit? What he did was highly illegal and he should spend the rest of his life in prison. What his motive was is irrelevant.

[Solecismic]

I wish those middle-roaders had a chance, but they don't.

It's not an obsession. I responded to a post. The intent is important to me. Lighten up, dude.

[GrantDawg]

It would be better for the country if the middle-of-the-road Republicans could regain their party. I just don't see it happening.

Sent from my SM-S916U using Tapatalk

[CrimsonFox]

Chris Christie kicking ass and taking names!

[Lathum]

Originally Posted by Solecismic

I wish those middle-roaders had a chance, but they don't.

It's not an obsession. I responded to a post. The intent is important to me. Lighten up, dude.

Maybe obsession was the wrong word. His intent may matter to you, but in the eyes of the law it is irrelevant. If I rob a bank because my kid needs a bone marrow transplant I still robbed a bank.

Love you games.

[JPhillips]

Here's a good summary from conservative Heath Mayo on how Hillary's emails are different than Trump's boxes.

Let’s walk through this blow by blow, since it appears to be the last-ditch argument the GOP wants to try to hang its hat on:

Why is the Hillary situation different from the Trump situation and why is it *not* a double standard to charge Trump and not Hillary? (1/)

— Heath Mayo (@HeathMayo) June 10, 2023

[Solecismic]

If it has people here enthusiastic about an organization that reveres John Stuart Mill, Thomas Paine and Adam Smith, I'm on board.

I don't think the argument wins that potential harm through ignorance and potential harm through hubris are all that different.

What's compelling is the idea that particular documents were kept because of their sensitivity. Hadn't really thought about that. That would indicate that he thought of particular sensitive documents as souvenirs, and there would be a much greater risk of exposure. Kind of a mockery of the whole classification process.

[CrimsonFox]

why has it taken this long for other rep candidates to throw their non trucker hats into the ring? were they too waiting for the indictments to come rolling in?

[RainMaker]

Originally Posted by Lathum

I don't get your obsession with his gain, Who gives a shit? What he did was highly illegal and he should spend the rest of his life in prison. What his motive was is irrelevant.

Because he's a right winger who consumes a lot of right wing media and this is what they have told him to be mad about.

The whole "oh shucks I'm just asking questions" or "what about the other side?" Is so transparent. Like I get a lot of people are like that but at least own that shit instead of being scared to come out and say what you really think.

[RainMaker]

This country has been locking up people for mishandling classified information for awhile now. All of which were far less egregious. They literally arrested a guy a couple months ago for sharing much less sensitive information and he's sitting in jail with no bail. Trump's own DOJ got a woman over 5 years for mailing a classified document to a reporter. Heck, Trump has called publically for the execution of Snowden.

If you didn't support those people but are suddenly up in arms about Trump, you either just support Trump or you don't think people of his status should have to comply with the same laws as the rest of us.

For what it's worth, I think the Espionage Act is unconstitutional and he shouldn't be charged with that. But it's also tough to feel sympathy for someone who used that power while in office.

[Lathum]

Originally Posted by CrimsonFox

why has it taken this long for other rep candidates to throw their non trucker hats into the ring? were they too waiting for the indictments to come rolling in?

Not sure what you mean. There is already like, 10 candidates who have entered.

[GrantDawg]

How's anybody taking this guy seriously?

In South Carolina he pledged to resume shelling Fort Sumter

— DCLawyer (@Zuk_DC) June 10, 2023

[RainMaker]

The infatuation with Bragg is so weird because he was wildly incompetent. This county has so many war heroes you could choose to name it after.

[Brian Swartz]

Now that Stephen A. Smith has endorsed Christie, I figure there's no point for this to continue. Election over.

[albionmoonlight]

Pence also just made re-renaming Fort Liberty a campaign point.

[QuikSand]

Originally Posted by CrimsonFox

why has it taken this long for other rep candidates to throw their non trucker hats into the ring? were they too waiting for the indictments to come rolling in?

were you waiting for Mayor Suarez from Miami, perhaps?

[QuikSand]

Originally Posted by JPhillips

Here's a good summary from conservative Heath Mayo on how Hillary's emails are different than Trump's boxes.

Let’s walk through this blow by blow, since it appears to be the last-ditch argument the GOP wants to try to hang its hat on:

Why is the Hillary situation different from the Trump situation and why is it *not* a double standard to charge Trump and not Hillary? (1/)

— Heath Mayo (@HeathMayo) June 10, 2023

good, clear, explainer... thank you