Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
More like the opposite. I think Mueller will be ready for the laughing academy when this whole thing blows up in his face and he's looking at prison time.
I just read back a few pages to see what all the furor is about. The link indicates that:
Is it the typical practice for politicians - who represent the people - to utilize confidentiality agreements? Personally, I associate them with those in the public eye who want to keep private matters (often dirty laundry) out of the tabloids or perhaps after private settlements.
Trump supposedly is doing the people's business. Sure, if an employee breaches his confidence he/she should be fired. If national security information is disclosed, then charged.
But a civil suit? From a POTUS?
Is this really NORMAL or in any way usual?
Maybe it's only me, but this just strikes me as downright strange.
I think you've done an fine job of understanding the salient points
More like the opposite. I think Mueller will be ready for the laughing academy when this whole thing blows up in his face and he's looking at prison time.
Seems like Trump is the one getting the pie thrown in his face.
Heresay that's true enough to cause Trump's lawyers to issue a cease and desist letter, lol. It appears he has broken his confidentiality agreement and disclosed confidential information. And here I thought this whole thing was totally made up.
Well, admittedly, I'm not a lawyer (nor do I play one anywhere, ), but would it be out of the ordinary to send a cease-and-desist letter even if what was written in the book was completely false? Didn't Carol Burnett do something similar to the National Enquirer? (Honest questions, no snark.)
"NBC News has not confirmed much of the book. Wolff has been accused in the past of suspect reporting, most notably in his 1998 book "Burn Rate." In its review, the defunct media review Brill's Content cited 13 people depicted in the book as saying that Wolff invented or changed quotations and that they couldn't recall his taking any notes or recording their interviews."
"NBC News has not confirmed much of the book. Wolff has been accused in the past of suspect reporting, most notably in his 1998 book "Burn Rate." In its review, the defunct media review Brill's Content cited 13 people depicted in the book as saying that Wolff invented or changed quotations and that they couldn't recall his taking any notes or recording their interviews."
Maybe we should start another thread as people start saying Wolff lied about them. Tony Blair just did: Blair
We all know Trump family & co are traitors for even willing to have support of a foreign enemy to win the elections.
The emails shown by Don Jr show it all. He knew dirt was coming from Russians, and still replied "I love it" and took on the meeting to learn more.
Up to 19th century, half of trump's associates would be hung on the tree by now. Thankfully, we have a due process now where Mueller will "crack Don Jr. like an egg" according to Mr Bannon:
After news of the meeting surfaced last year, Bannon reportedly said: “The three senior guys in the campaign thought it was a good idea to meet with a foreign government inside Trump Tower in the conference room on the 25th floor – with no lawyers. They didn’t have any lawyers."
“Even if you thought that this was not treasonous, or unpatriotic, or bad ****, and I happen to think it’s all of that, you should have called the FBI immediately," Bannon said, according to the book
It's in his new book, so trump snowflakes calling everything they don't like "fake news", won't have much room to do it this time.
Good news. But of course, it will be said it is just sour grapes for him to state this. Not that I think that Bannon is such a great guy, but is a type that tRump surrounded himself with, who is coming back to bite him. So fine. This sort of thing was sure to happen under the circumstances, with other stories surfacing and more books to come.
What is Bannon's angle here? I'm asking honestly, I don't understand what he's been doing lately
He attacked Trump's son to get revenge. He knew that Trump would respond by belittling his role in the Presidential campaign and the White House. He also knew that media would viciously attack Trump on this and point to the power he had over Trump and this would further hurt Trump's credibility in the Party. So, it was win-win for Bannon.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
), but would it be out of the ordinary to send a cease-and-desist letter even if what was written in the book was completely false? Didn't Carol Burnett do something similar to the National Enquirer? (Honest questions, no snark.)