45th President of the United States, Donald Trump (Vol. 7)
Discussion
Prolex-UK said:
2 cracking posts above.
Agree. It should be remembered that trump is an unindicted co-conspirator named in Cohens case. He did the crime, it's proven in the Cohen case, he's just not been charged with it, because Barr. He got Barr to somehow shut down some of the SDNY cases and under Barr, the DOJ is protecting trump, so no charges will be brought until trump/Barr are removed.An obvious example of this is the DOJ fighting to not have trumps tax returns given to Congress or investigations, Barr's fighting to keep huge sections of the Mueller report redacted, Barr's alternative investigation into trumps russia scandal and obstruction, etc etc.
trumps loaded all the bases in his favour, yet with the public voting the Dems back in charge of the house, there is a legal way to challenge him which is whats being done. The senate won't convict trump because a lot of the leadership is heavily involved. Moscow Mitch took the dodgy russian NRA money, as did a lot of the GOP. Russian Oligarchs pumped money into the GOP and especially trumps campaign through it, which is why the GOP blocked any investigation of the NRA. Nunes is up to his eyeballs in team trump obstruction.
At least a dozen Republican congressional campaigns used materials stolen from the Dems by Russian goverenment hackers during the 2016 election. Several other Republican campaigns received millions in contributions from an oligarch with close ties to Russian President Vladimir Putin. As with everything in America, it's all about the money.
Back in 2018, the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee called on the National Republican Congressional Committee to make a bipartisan pledge not to utilize stolen or hacked information in House elections. After months of negotiations, in September of 2018, House Republicans backed out and refused to sign the pledge. These are just some of the often-overlooked reasons why Republicans have been so reluctant to criticize President Trump’s willingness to accept “dirt” on an opposing candidate from a foreign government.
At the time trump said there was nothing wrong with this and he would do it again. We now now he did do this again, not only trying to pressurise Ukraine, but with China, Italy, Australia and using the Attorney General Barr to do it - acting as trumps emissary rather than for the Government he actually is supposed to work for. McConnel has blocked any attempts to fix the faulty, hacked voting systems, blocked any form of voting reform, fought to keep gerrymandered districts (especially his own).
trump will be indicted and go down in history as such. The Dems will then use that as a stepping stone to vote trump out in 2020.
I now think thats the only route for him to go because trumps obstructed all the other legal ways, with the help of Moscow Mitch and the other GOP members, well those that are still standing. I think it's now 18 house and for senate GOP seats have said they will not stand, which incidentally is similar to the trend in 2018 which helped power the 'blue wave' and let the Dems take the house.
Edit: I should add the impeachment vote in the senate is a no win situation for the GOP
Edited by Byker28i on Saturday 23 November 08:04
The State Department have released nearly 100 pages of records in response to ethics watchdog group American Oversight's lawsuit seeking a range of documents related to the Trump administration's dealings with Ukraine.
There are emails that confirm multiple contacts in March of 2019 between Secretary of State Mike Pompeo and Trump lawyer Rudy Giuliani, at least one of which was facilitated by President Trump's assistant Madeleine Westerhout. No wonder Pompeo ignored his subpoena.
Exec Director of American Oversight Austin Evers: "We can see why Mike Pompeo has refused to release this info to Congress. It reveals a clear paper trail from Rudy Giuliani to the Oval Office to Secretary Pompeo to facilitate Giuliani's smear campaign against a U.S. ambassador."
https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/6557889-St...
Pompeo's in deep trouble. This will almost certainly be used against im by the impeachment investigation and I suspect charges brought.
There are emails that confirm multiple contacts in March of 2019 between Secretary of State Mike Pompeo and Trump lawyer Rudy Giuliani, at least one of which was facilitated by President Trump's assistant Madeleine Westerhout. No wonder Pompeo ignored his subpoena.
Exec Director of American Oversight Austin Evers: "We can see why Mike Pompeo has refused to release this info to Congress. It reveals a clear paper trail from Rudy Giuliani to the Oval Office to Secretary Pompeo to facilitate Giuliani's smear campaign against a U.S. ambassador."
https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/6557889-St...
Pompeo's in deep trouble. This will almost certainly be used against im by the impeachment investigation and I suspect charges brought.
Edited by Byker28i on Saturday 23 November 07:58
Rachel Maddow went after GOP politicians who keep pushing the Ukraine did the hacking angle, like Chuck Grassley and Ron Johnson
https://www.msnbc.com/rachel-maddow-show
She said it’s theoretically possible that Trump’s underlings and House Republicans don’t know they’re spreading false information when they keep claiming Ukraine meddled in the election, but then went on to point out that the U.S. intel community has in fact briefed Republican Senators on the fact that the whole “Ukraine meddled in the U.S. election” narrative is a false one that was specifically crafted by Vladimir Putin
Maddow rammed home the point that these two Republican Senators know they’re pushing lies and running a bogus investigation, because they were briefed on the fact that none of it is true. At this point Grassley and Johnson are participating in a felony criminal conspiracy against the United States by pursuing this phony probe.
https://www.msnbc.com/rachel-maddow-show
She said it’s theoretically possible that Trump’s underlings and House Republicans don’t know they’re spreading false information when they keep claiming Ukraine meddled in the election, but then went on to point out that the U.S. intel community has in fact briefed Republican Senators on the fact that the whole “Ukraine meddled in the U.S. election” narrative is a false one that was specifically crafted by Vladimir Putin
Maddow rammed home the point that these two Republican Senators know they’re pushing lies and running a bogus investigation, because they were briefed on the fact that none of it is true. At this point Grassley and Johnson are participating in a felony criminal conspiracy against the United States by pursuing this phony probe.
trumps desperate to keep the GOP on his side
https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/trump-open...
Mulvaney and top White House officials have hosted weekend getaways for Republicans at the historic lodge, seeking to butter up Republicans before the big impeachment vote. The casual itinerary includes making s’mores over the campfire, going hiking, shooting clay pigeons and schmoozing with Trump officials, some of whom stay overnight with lawmakers.
During dinners, Trump has called in to compliment members personally.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/trump-open...
Mulvaney and top White House officials have hosted weekend getaways for Republicans at the historic lodge, seeking to butter up Republicans before the big impeachment vote. The casual itinerary includes making s’mores over the campfire, going hiking, shooting clay pigeons and schmoozing with Trump officials, some of whom stay overnight with lawmakers.
During dinners, Trump has called in to compliment members personally.
NY State charges.
Manhattan District Attorney Cyrus Vance Jr is targeting Trump Organization CFO Allen Weisselberg – “among others” – for potential criminal charges in Donald Trump’s hush money scheme that trump was an unindicted co-conspirator in Cohens case, and the Trump organisation was also named.
We know that Weisselberg cooperated in the case against Cohen, in exchange for some degree of immunity. This was dropepd when Cohen decided to plead guilty, but that shows that that Weisselberg can be pressured into cooperating.
This is about getting Weisselberg to testify against those in power in the Trump Organisation, not only trump but the siblings as well who are all on the board and signed off anything daddy wanted or did.
Remember the federal prosecutors got Vance to 'stand down' because they were investigating, which was then dropped earlier this year, Barr putting delays into the case? The Manhattan DA’s office argued in court that the delay caused by the SDNY’s request to stand down has harmed its ability to bring a case. The clock is now running out on the DA’s ability to bring misdemeanor false-records charges. Because the last disguised reimbursement payment, signed by Trump, is dated Dec. 5, 2017, the two-year statute of limitations expires next month.
General counsel for the DA’s office have frequently complained that the feds were aiding Trump’s efforts to run out the clock: “It is what they want in the end. … What that means, if they get further delay, basically they win and we lose, without an adjudication by this court, and that’s not what should happen today.”
Trump’s business turned over 3,376 pages of documents, court filings show. Those documents did not include tax records. A subsequent filing by the DA asserted that “approximately two-thirds” of those 3,376 pages consisted of “non-substantive Google alerts.”
https://www.rawstory.com/2019/11/prosecutors-inves...
Worth a read to see how much Barr is obstructing investigations into trump
Manhattan District Attorney Cyrus Vance Jr is targeting Trump Organization CFO Allen Weisselberg – “among others” – for potential criminal charges in Donald Trump’s hush money scheme that trump was an unindicted co-conspirator in Cohens case, and the Trump organisation was also named.
We know that Weisselberg cooperated in the case against Cohen, in exchange for some degree of immunity. This was dropepd when Cohen decided to plead guilty, but that shows that that Weisselberg can be pressured into cooperating.
This is about getting Weisselberg to testify against those in power in the Trump Organisation, not only trump but the siblings as well who are all on the board and signed off anything daddy wanted or did.
Remember the federal prosecutors got Vance to 'stand down' because they were investigating, which was then dropped earlier this year, Barr putting delays into the case? The Manhattan DA’s office argued in court that the delay caused by the SDNY’s request to stand down has harmed its ability to bring a case. The clock is now running out on the DA’s ability to bring misdemeanor false-records charges. Because the last disguised reimbursement payment, signed by Trump, is dated Dec. 5, 2017, the two-year statute of limitations expires next month.
General counsel for the DA’s office have frequently complained that the feds were aiding Trump’s efforts to run out the clock: “It is what they want in the end. … What that means, if they get further delay, basically they win and we lose, without an adjudication by this court, and that’s not what should happen today.”
Trump’s business turned over 3,376 pages of documents, court filings show. Those documents did not include tax records. A subsequent filing by the DA asserted that “approximately two-thirds” of those 3,376 pages consisted of “non-substantive Google alerts.”
https://www.rawstory.com/2019/11/prosecutors-inves...
Worth a read to see how much Barr is obstructing investigations into trump
Parnas is giving us some gems and may cause the GOP some real problems;
https://edition.cnn.com/2019/11/22/politics/nunes-...
The only concerns I guess would be how credible he is as a witness and how much he can spill whilst protecting his 5th amendment rights.
https://edition.cnn.com/2019/11/22/politics/nunes-...
The only concerns I guess would be how credible he is as a witness and how much he can spill whilst protecting his 5th amendment rights.
Prolex-UK said:
Blue62 said:
Prolex-UK said:
2 cracking posts above.
Indeed. Tartan Pixie has put a really thought provoking piece together, particularly his point about taxes. Transnational
The graph was very powerful.
Tax take
Since c2000, U.K. tax collection has broadly doubled. Income tax has increased by c80% and CT by more than that, at c85%. The delta to doubling taxes is mainly made up by more than doubling the take of VAT and NIC. The NIC take covers both employer and employee. There have been lots of changes to the scope and rate of NIC, and whilst I can’t find a breakdown of classes of NIC, and especially a breakdown of employee/er class 1s, with the introduction of class 1A and B, I suspect employers have taken the main hit on the increase in NI.
“Transnational”
I think the phenomenon of tax authorities not being capable/able to tax multinationals “fairly” is transient. Business has changed a huge amount in the past 10-20 years, becoming more digital (volume and scope), and not requiring the same presence as traditional businesses. Tax is catching up with that. Tax is changing at an incredible pace, and becoming far more focused on the digital economy. The “advantages” digital players benefited from will erode. Examples in the U.K. include diverted profits tax, changes in CFC rules, BEPS implementation, digital services tax, etc etc. We’re seeing a harmonisation of approach from tax authorities, which should result in both a higher tax take, and a “fairer” one.
Edited as I had misread the US graph.
Edited by Alpinestars on Saturday 23 November 09:15
Sn1ckers said:
Parnas is giving us some gems and may cause the GOP some real problems;
https://edition.cnn.com/2019/11/22/politics/nunes-...
The only concerns I guess would be how credible he is as a witness and how much he can spill whilst protecting his 5th amendment rights.
Parnas is indeed going to be interesting. Feels slighted by trump 'I don't know him' comments when he's obviously been heavily involved with trump for sometime, having meetings etc, and with Nunes before that. We've seen that trump isn't clever in hiding his crimes, providing paper trails etc. He should take lessons from Kushnerhttps://edition.cnn.com/2019/11/22/politics/nunes-...
The only concerns I guess would be how credible he is as a witness and how much he can spill whilst protecting his 5th amendment rights.
Byker28i said:
Sn1ckers said:
Parnas is giving us some gems and may cause the GOP some real problems;
https://edition.cnn.com/2019/11/22/politics/nunes-...
The only concerns I guess would be how credible he is as a witness and how much he can spill whilst protecting his 5th amendment rights.
Parnas is indeed going to be interesting. Feels slighted by trump 'I don't know him' comments when he's obviously been heavily involved with trump for sometime, having meetings etc, and with Nunes before that. We've seen that trump isn't clever in hiding his crimes, providing paper trails etc. He should take lessons from Kushnerhttps://edition.cnn.com/2019/11/22/politics/nunes-...
The only concerns I guess would be how credible he is as a witness and how much he can spill whilst protecting his 5th amendment rights.
Byker28i said:
Sn1ckers said:
Parnas is giving us some gems and may cause the GOP some real problems;
https://edition.cnn.com/2019/11/22/politics/nunes-...
The only concerns I guess would be how credible he is as a witness and how much he can spill whilst protecting his 5th amendment rights.
Parnas is indeed going to be interesting. Feels slighted by trump 'I don't know him' comments when he's obviously been heavily involved with trump for sometime, having meetings etc, and with Nunes before that. We've seen that trump isn't clever in hiding his crimes, providing paper trails etc. He should take lessons from Kushnerhttps://edition.cnn.com/2019/11/22/politics/nunes-...
The only concerns I guess would be how credible he is as a witness and how much he can spill whilst protecting his 5th amendment rights.
Source for the is beau of the 5th on YouTube who’s often interesting (and surprising; take a look) to listen to.
Nice post TP; on the polarisation/demagoguery you'll also recall your 'duopoly' post - I sincerely think that the political divide is an illusion fed to the gullible to perpetuate the incompetent.
Political divide: We're inculcated into thinking that the way a country is run can generally be seen through the lens of opposing ideology whereas ideology isn't a tenet for life but a restrictive practise, one that makes it difficult to be agile and adaptive to changing circumstances - the crux of our continuing success against a backdrop of current exponential change.
Gullible: We're all gullible to some degree (if you want to explore how much then read Metzinger; Ego Tunnel [it's the pop version of 'Being No One', thank goodness]) or any good neuroscience / psychology / evolutionary treatise. In general we only explore deeper than the surface to either bolster our pre-existing opinion or denigrate the opposite view - we don't know more generally, but know more about what we know, about what we know, about what we know... We're not good truth engines, but instead seek to persuade others of our truth, from an evolutionary point of view. Edward Bernays [nephew of Sigmund Freud] knew all of this when he 'invented' PR/spin. Pulitzer and Hearst knew it when they started yellow journalism - these two examples go back a century, yet here we are, no wiser as a collective. Darwinian wetware...'man is a beast that should be overcome, what have you done today to overcome him?' Not a lot by the looks of it.
In our own political playground, there are arguably very good ideas buried deep within each party's manifesto, but they are isolated within a non-functional greater mechanism of ideology that robs then of their usefulness. These humbug circus performers aren't great wizards, they are performers within their virtual world that unfortunately impacts the reality of the everyday. Why did Boris present the 'get it done' Boris to the crowd where the 'get it done' crowd are already convinced and he could have appealed to the more undecided with a more nuanced argument? Why did all the party's present huge post-Brexit spending sprees even when a. they don't know [and haven't planned] post-Brexit conditions and b. they all (except CON) seem to think Brexit will be a financial disaster? Uncertain conjecture abounds.
On taxes, some excellent points - one I'd pick up on though is that an adaption to transnational taxation streams wouldn't necessarily lessen personal taxes - game theory - but would be happily gobbled up by a voracious government with cuts and increases being much more to do with popularity and votes than fiscal responsibility or the egalitarianisation of society.
"I prefer the company of peasants as they are not sufficiently educated so as to reason incorrectly" has some truth to it; there are plenty of experts and intellectuals that have wrung 4 years of copy out of the circumstances we are in, but none has really illuminated beyond the obvious the more fundamental problems, perhaps because they are part of it or are so far down the tunnel they cannot see beyond their own intellect.
Political divide: We're inculcated into thinking that the way a country is run can generally be seen through the lens of opposing ideology whereas ideology isn't a tenet for life but a restrictive practise, one that makes it difficult to be agile and adaptive to changing circumstances - the crux of our continuing success against a backdrop of current exponential change.
Gullible: We're all gullible to some degree (if you want to explore how much then read Metzinger; Ego Tunnel [it's the pop version of 'Being No One', thank goodness]) or any good neuroscience / psychology / evolutionary treatise. In general we only explore deeper than the surface to either bolster our pre-existing opinion or denigrate the opposite view - we don't know more generally, but know more about what we know, about what we know, about what we know... We're not good truth engines, but instead seek to persuade others of our truth, from an evolutionary point of view. Edward Bernays [nephew of Sigmund Freud] knew all of this when he 'invented' PR/spin. Pulitzer and Hearst knew it when they started yellow journalism - these two examples go back a century, yet here we are, no wiser as a collective. Darwinian wetware...'man is a beast that should be overcome, what have you done today to overcome him?' Not a lot by the looks of it.
In our own political playground, there are arguably very good ideas buried deep within each party's manifesto, but they are isolated within a non-functional greater mechanism of ideology that robs then of their usefulness. These humbug circus performers aren't great wizards, they are performers within their virtual world that unfortunately impacts the reality of the everyday. Why did Boris present the 'get it done' Boris to the crowd where the 'get it done' crowd are already convinced and he could have appealed to the more undecided with a more nuanced argument? Why did all the party's present huge post-Brexit spending sprees even when a. they don't know [and haven't planned] post-Brexit conditions and b. they all (except CON) seem to think Brexit will be a financial disaster? Uncertain conjecture abounds.
On taxes, some excellent points - one I'd pick up on though is that an adaption to transnational taxation streams wouldn't necessarily lessen personal taxes - game theory - but would be happily gobbled up by a voracious government with cuts and increases being much more to do with popularity and votes than fiscal responsibility or the egalitarianisation of society.
"I prefer the company of peasants as they are not sufficiently educated so as to reason incorrectly" has some truth to it; there are plenty of experts and intellectuals that have wrung 4 years of copy out of the circumstances we are in, but none has really illuminated beyond the obvious the more fundamental problems, perhaps because they are part of it or are so far down the tunnel they cannot see beyond their own intellect.
Due to doing my back in mountain biking, I've been off work all this week, therefore I managed to catch pretty much every minute of the hearings.
Apropos of nothing, I was struck by the difference in qualifications of each party on the committee. I decided to wiki them, I tallied up the list below, each list starts with counsel and chair, respectively.
Democrats: Yale College (BA) Stanford Law School (JD) Stanford University (BA) Harvard University (JD) Harvard College (AB) St Edmund Hall, Oxford (MPhil) Princeton University (BA) St Hilda's College, Oxford (MA) Harvard niversity (JD) Concordia University Wisconsin (BA) Indiana Wesleyan University (MS) University of California, Davis (BA) University of California, Hastings (JD) Roosevelt University (BA) University of Chicago (MPP) Loyola University Chicago (JD) University of Maryland, College Park (BA) University of Maryland, Baltimore (JD) Stanford University (BA) Harvard University (JD) Evergreen State College (BA) Portland State University
Georgetown University University of Virginia (BA, JD) Florida State University (BS) Princeton University (BS)
Harvard University (JD) College of the Holy Cross (BA) University of California, Berkeley (JD)
Republicans: George Washington University Law School College of the Sequoias California Polytechnic State University, San Luis Obispo (BS, MS) Texas A&M University–Commerce (BBA) Ohio Northern University (BA) Case Western Reserve University (JD) University of Dayton (MBA) University of Cincinnati (BA) Rosalind Franklin University (BS, DPM) Utah State University (BA) Harvard University (BA) Texas A&M University (BS) University of Notre Dame (BA) Southern Methodist University (JD) University of Wisconsin–Madison (BS) Ohio State University (MA)
Capital University (JD)
Before I get accused of snobbery, I'm from the comprehensive system and a poly-turned-uni.
Apropos of nothing, I was struck by the difference in qualifications of each party on the committee. I decided to wiki them, I tallied up the list below, each list starts with counsel and chair, respectively.
Democrats: Yale College (BA) Stanford Law School (JD) Stanford University (BA) Harvard University (JD) Harvard College (AB) St Edmund Hall, Oxford (MPhil) Princeton University (BA) St Hilda's College, Oxford (MA) Harvard niversity (JD) Concordia University Wisconsin (BA) Indiana Wesleyan University (MS) University of California, Davis (BA) University of California, Hastings (JD) Roosevelt University (BA) University of Chicago (MPP) Loyola University Chicago (JD) University of Maryland, College Park (BA) University of Maryland, Baltimore (JD) Stanford University (BA) Harvard University (JD) Evergreen State College (BA) Portland State University
Georgetown University University of Virginia (BA, JD) Florida State University (BS) Princeton University (BS)
Harvard University (JD) College of the Holy Cross (BA) University of California, Berkeley (JD)
Republicans: George Washington University Law School College of the Sequoias California Polytechnic State University, San Luis Obispo (BS, MS) Texas A&M University–Commerce (BBA) Ohio Northern University (BA) Case Western Reserve University (JD) University of Dayton (MBA) University of Cincinnati (BA) Rosalind Franklin University (BS, DPM) Utah State University (BA) Harvard University (BA) Texas A&M University (BS) University of Notre Dame (BA) Southern Methodist University (JD) University of Wisconsin–Madison (BS) Ohio State University (MA)
Capital University (JD)
Before I get accused of snobbery, I'm from the comprehensive system and a poly-turned-uni.
DeltonaS said:
Slaav said:
RobDickinson said:
Down and out said:
Whats happened with Stormy? Have I missed something? Thought that was the end of Donald.
Should have been. Cohen went to jail on 2 felonies implicating trump as instigator of both But GOP.
My limited understanding is that a Court of law found Cohen guilty of doing stuff that has (obviously) stuck him in jail. He did those crimes at the bequest of his 'boss' DT. He was repaid the illegal money he paid on behalf of DT but DT has dodged even the possible flesh wound he deserved? He actually deserved his own jail time but.....
How is this even possible??
From day one:
- Trump involves members of his family into his presidency, his son in law and his daughter were all given formal jobs in which they represent the USA (it's what dictators do).
- Trump gives jobs to his political sponsors, Sondlond was given an US ambassadorship of the EU (formal jobs are for sale in the US, when the price is right, it's what dictators do).
- Trumps sacks people around him whenever they do not follow his line of thinking (collecting yes men, it's what dictators do) .
- Giuliani, Trumps personal lawyer, seems to have a role, not just in his presidency but as part of the US Foreign Affairs (it's what dictators do)
- Trump organizes congresses and formal government meetings at his own resorts (it's what dictators do).
- Trumps questions an ridicules the free press on a daily basis, making them suspect. So much so they even are exposed to hostility and violence.(it's what dictators do).
- Trump lies and tweets the most ridiculous nonsense on a daily basis.
Every individual line of the above (and I'm probably forgetting something) would've been enough to be removed from office in every Northern European democracy.
The basic foundations of the (appearance) of a conflict of interest, integrity, professionalism and respect for the constitution, Trump doesn't give a f
k. Trump is a mobster, although I doubt he even understands most of it.From whatever political background one may be, the US political system is partisan and rotten to the core.
Edited by DeltonaS on Saturday 23 November 14:23
Trump is a braggart, but he's not a dictator. To be a dictator in a democratic republic, you really need political guile and Machiavellian instincts. He has neither; he is not uneducated (he had the best money could buy) but he is unintelligent (a lifetime surrounded by sychophants); his dad didn't exactly make him work hard to rise up the corporate ladder. He hasn't the first clue about the Constitution let alone knowing ways how to circumvent it. His hubris ("I wanna go on trial") might be his undoing. By contrast, Nixon was a very intelligent man, with strong political instincts, ie. he knew when the game was up, and, in the end, did the decent thing. Trump hasn't the intelligence to know when the jig is up, he still thinks he has done nothing wrong, because favours, hiring/firing is all pretty normal practice in his style of business, so much so, he made a TV career out of it, and made him think he knew about any kind of business.
Sn1ckers said:
Byker28i said:
Sn1ckers said:
Parnas is giving us some gems and may cause the GOP some real problems;
https://edition.cnn.com/2019/11/22/politics/nunes-...
The only concerns I guess would be how credible he is as a witness and how much he can spill whilst protecting his 5th amendment rights.
Parnas is indeed going to be interesting. Feels slighted by trump 'I don't know him' comments when he's obviously been heavily involved with trump for sometime, having meetings etc, and with Nunes before that. We've seen that trump isn't clever in hiding his crimes, providing paper trails etc. He should take lessons from Kushnerhttps://edition.cnn.com/2019/11/22/politics/nunes-...
The only concerns I guess would be how credible he is as a witness and how much he can spill whilst protecting his 5th amendment rights.
Source for the is beau of the 5th on YouTube who’s often interesting (and surprising; take a look) to listen to.
If true, the allegation would mean that Nunes — the chief defender of Trump as ranking member of the House Intelligence Committee, which has been holding impeachment hearings for several weeks — was himself involved in the very plot the committee is investigating.
https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/trump-impeachment...
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff