*** The Official MAGAposting thread ***

[MadMojoMonkey]

Jimmy Carter sold his peanut farm to avoid a conflict of interest as POTUS.

Don't say anything more about him. No matter what it is, it shines a spotlight on just how little I'm doing with my life.


It sucks that we have to go back 40 years to find a POTUS who is so humbling to learn about.


@Poopadoop... you're not turning on the scientist in you when you talk about this stuff. You're speculating about things as though your imagination is a crystal ball. I'm sure you know better, so what gives? Seriously, a non-American cheeba monkey* is talking more sense than you (a trained psychologist, yeah?) about American politics.

*I say that with nothing but love.

[Poopadoop]

@Poopadoop... you're not turning on the scientist in you when you talk about this stuff. You're speculating about things as though your imagination is a crystal ball. I'm sure you know better, so what gives? Seriously, a non-American cheeba monkey* is talking more sense than you (a trained psychologist, yeah?) about American politics.

*I say that with nothing but love.

Trump-as-con-man is about as public knowledge as you can get. Maybe some people don't like to hear it, and others don't want to believe it, but it's not exactly a secret. Honest businessmen don't open 'universities' or stiff contractors or get sued multiple thousands of times.

And it's hardly wild speculation to say he isn't the type to swallow his pride and bow out gracefully. It's only common sense to say how a person acted in the past and present is a good predictor of how they will act in the future.

[MadMojoMonkey]

It's just that you seem to think that it's just happenstance that he's managed to place himself as one of the charismatic icons of America over the past decades. I don't see how you could argue that he's not excellent at selling his own brand. I get that he's not a political heavyweight. I'm not saying otherwise. I'm saying that the man has skills, and talents, and has built an empire (good or bad) which is familiar to us. He cares about that, and is good at it. I don't think he'd fight a losing criminal case after being impeached when there are much safer alternatives for him. Unless he sees a criminal sentence as a boon for his brand, he's not likely to be caught like a deer in the headlights by an impending trial.

C'mon. Post-impeachment, he has to know that he's already lost. Congress isn't interested in prosecuting a criminal trial against a POTUS. It tarnishes the credibility of the office and of themselves by correlation. They're not going to impeach him unless they're 99% sure that he broke laws. Look at Clinton. He clearly lied under oath in a criminal trial. They weren't going to say that he didn't, but they also had no intention of taking a sitting POTUS to trial over some lies about sex. If they were going to do that, he would have lost the trial. It was on tape, there were witnesses, he had no defense. We DO in fact know what the meaning of the word "is" is, and for him to use it in that context in that setting was 100% not "the whole truth."

If Congress wanted to pursue a trial, he would have resigned rather than go through it all, just to face the inevitable guilty verdict. Trump would be no different. He's a con man, probably, but he's not foolish when it comes to selling his brand.

[Poopadoop]

It's just that you seem to think that it's just happenstance that he's managed to place himself as one of the charismatic icons of America over the past decades. I don't see how you could argue that he's not excellent at selling his own brand.

Where did you get that from? I compared him to P.T. Barnum. You know who that is right?

I get that he's not a political heavyweight. I'm not saying otherwise. I'm saying that the man has skills, and talents, and has built an empire (good or bad) which is familiar to us. He cares about that, and is good at it. I don't think he'd fight a losing criminal case after being impeached when there are much safer alternatives for him. Unless he sees a criminal sentence as a boon for his brand, he's not likely to be caught like a deer in the headlights by an impending trial.

Here you seem to be suggesting he's much different person than all available evidence suggests: rational, thoughtful, considered.

What seems more telling to me is the fact that he's never admitted to any wrongdoing, ever. What makes you think he's suddenly going to slink away like a beaten dog if worst comes to worst?

Post-impeachment, he has to know that he's already lost.

Again, that implies that he takes a rational approach to knowing he's already lost. Lots of nutjob leaders throughout history must have known they'd lost and wouldn't admit it.

Congress isn't interested in prosecuting a criminal trial against a POTUS. It tarnishes the credibility of the office and of themselves by correlation. They're not going to impeach him unless they're 99% sure that he broke laws. Look at Clinton. He clearly lied under oath in a criminal trial. They weren't going to say that he didn't, but they also had no intention of taking a sitting POTUS to trial over some lies about sex. If they were going to do that, he would have lost the trial. It was on tape, there were witnesses, he had no defense. We DO in fact know what the meaning of the word "is" is, and for him to use it in that context in that setting was 100% not "the whole truth."

Lying about sex is an order of magnitude different from conspiring with a foreign power to influence an election.

Let's just speculate for a minute: let's say Trump really is in Putin's pocket, has been laundering money for Russian oligarchs for years, etc. etc., or for whatever reason we haven't found out yet is being blackmailed by Putin to do his bidding. AND Mueller finds incontrovertible proof of that. What is in Trump's best interest then? Even a sane person would see it's better to deny everything and accuse Mueller of framing him than admit to what amounts to treason.

If Congress wanted to pursue a trial, he would have resigned rather than go through it all, just to face the inevitable guilty verdict. Trump would be no different. He's a con man, probably, but he's not foolish when it comes to selling his brand.

Like I said Trump's crimes are potentially on a completely different level than Clinton's. But even if Congress was going to try Trump for lying about Stormy Daniels, I still doubt he would give in. The man simply doesn't have it in him to admit doing wrong.