Steve Bannon

Nov 2017
3,372
85
FL Treasure Coast & South Central FL
#1
Steven Bannon STILL says that the RCI (Russian Collusion Investigation) is a WITCH HUNT. He obviously must be correct. :smug:
 
Last edited:

tecoyah

Forum Staff
Oct 2012
3,827
624
Louisville, Ky
#2
Steven Bannon STILL say that the RCI (Russian Collusion Investigation) is a WITCH HUNT. He obviously must be correct. :smug:

Political Fray Rules and Policies


Below is an explanation of rules and policies that we expect everyone on the forum to abide by. Being a free resource, all we ask of you is that you abide by the policies of this forum. We have implemented these rules for a reason- in order to maintain the respectful and intellectual environment we hope to create.

1. Write well-thought out and coherent posts. Don't give any short, one line answers that leave people trying to decipher your meaning. Instead, try to explain yourself thoroughly. It will likely save both you and anyone who reads your post some time in the long run.
 
Nov 2017
3,372
85
FL Treasure Coast & South Central FL
#3
In other words, WHY would Bannon lie NOW (i.e. say it is just a witch hunt), since he has no loyalty or obligation to DJT at this point?
 
Likes: 1 person
May 2012
203
32
The motherland
#4
Steve Bannon has described the Trump Tower meeting between Trump's son and a group of Russians during the 2016 election campaign as “treasonous” and “unpatriotic.” As a disgruntled former employee of the administration, he may cooperate with the Muller investigation. Steve Bannon believes Donald Trump Jr. will “crack like an egg” under the pressure of the ongoing investigation into Russian election meddling. Bannon called the Muller investigation a witch hunt in a modified statement but he actually believes that there is a 66% chance that Trump will be either impeached or resign by himself because of the Muller investigation.

In his June 3 email to Trump Jr., Goldstone wrote:

Emin just called and asked me to contact you with something very interesting.

The Crown prosecutor of Russia[a] met with his father Aras this morning and in their meeting offered to provide the Trump campaign with some official documents and information that would incriminate Hillary and her dealings with Russia and would be very useful to your father.

This is obviously very high level and sensitive information but is part of Russia and its government’s support for Mr. Trump – helped along by Aras and Emin.[14]

Trump Jr. responded:

Thanks Rob I appreciate that. I am on the road at the moment but perhaps I just speak to Emin first. Seems we have some time and if it’s what you say I love it especially later in the summer. Could we do a call first thing next week when I am back?[14]

In a June 7 email there was agreement that the material would be delivered to Trump Jr. by an unnamed "Russian government attorney".[14] At the meeting, Goldstone introduced this person as Moscow-based attorney Natalia Veselnitskaya. She stated that she was not a government official,[14] however she is known to have ties to the Russian government.[15] According to Goldstone, she had planned to be in New York for a court appearance on June 9.[14] Trump Jr. offered an in-person meeting that afternoon, which Goldstone confirmed.[14] Trump Jr. forwarded the email thread to Kushner and Manafort.[1]
 
Last edited:

tecoyah

Forum Staff
Oct 2012
3,827
624
Louisville, Ky
#5
Steve Bannon has described the Trump Tower meeting between Trump's son and a group of Russians during the 2016 election campaign as “treasonous” and “unpatriotic.” As a disgruntled former employee of the administration, he may cooperate with the Muller investigation. Steve Bannon believes Donald Trump Jr. will “crack like an egg” under the pressure of the ongoing investigation into Russian election meddling. Bannon called the Muller investigation a witch hunt in a modified statement but he actually believes that there is a 66% chance that Trump will be either impeached or resign by himself because of the Muller investigation.
It is unfortunate and disturbing that so many of our politicians are so dishonest that we cannot believe anything they say. When our President lies with every breath it becomes acceptable for everyone under him as well...no wonder the rest of the world blows us off anymore.
 
Jan 2018
401
162
Arkansas
#7
Steve Bannon has described the Trump Tower meeting between Trump's son and a group of Russians during the 2016 election campaign as “treasonous” and “unpatriotic.”.
You left out a very important point. That statement has not been verified. It is only what has been quoted in a very questionable book.
 
Mar 2011
746
159
Rhondda, Cymru
#8
That's a universal charge levelled against any politician that does not share one's worldview.
No its not; there are huge differences between Tory politicians here about honesty, though the Party, in sum, is pure shite. America, as a result of gerrymandering, has got itself into as ready-for-war mood.
 
Jan 2018
401
162
Arkansas
#9
No its not; there are huge differences between Tory politicians here about honesty, though the Party, in sum, is pure shite. America, as a result of gerrymandering, has got itself into as ready-for-war mood.
Define Gerrymandering. This is not an idle question. There is a basic misunderstanding of the concept.
 
Mar 2011
746
159
Rhondda, Cymru
#10
Define Gerrymandering. This is not an idle question. There is a basic misunderstanding of the concept.
Any system of representation where the representational boundaries are not set up by and independent commission to give fair representation.
 
Mar 2011
746
159
Rhondda, Cymru
#12
Define "Fair representation".
Representation whereby political parties have roughly proportional representation in 'natural' rather than deliberately distorted constituencies. In other words, you don't stick nearly all the X party voters in one huge constituency where they get a landslide, the Y party ones in several where they can narrowly win every time.
 
Likes: 1 person
Jan 2018
401
162
Arkansas
#13
Representation whereby political parties have roughly proportional representation in 'natural' rather than deliberately distorted constituencies. In other words, you don't stick nearly all the X party voters in one huge constituency where they get a landslide, the Y party ones in several where they can narrowly win every time.
You have just defined something which is impossible to achieve. Thus a very basic problem is that there will always be complaints about Gerrymandering.

For the moment, lets forget elections. Ideally, you would want everyone in the district to have very similar interests so that the representative can represent those interests in congress. For example, you would want them to all be rural or urban or even more specifically farmers verses non farmers.

There is a problem with reality. For example, Arkansas only has four districts. In general the composition is represented by two groups. Very urban areas such as Little Rock and very rural farming which area wise comprises most of the state. In addition these districts must be nearly identical in population.

Disregard the geographical shape, even though that is what people tend to look at and call it Gerrymandering. Our districts are generally arranged as follows: District 1 is Eastern Arkansas. It comprises most rural flat land farms. But includes some very urban areas. District 2 is basically Little Rock, but includes some rural areas. District 3 includes Urban northeast Arkansas plus the US Highway 65 corridor and US Highway 62/412 corridor. District 4 makes up what is left and is generally SW Arkansas.

Within each of these areas, you will find large groups of people who say they are not fairly represented. As as the name Gerrymandering implies, all of those districts are shaped like some strange animal.

The bottom line is that regardless of how you shape the district, it will be considered unfair by the other party.

In summary, you can't get there from here.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arkansas's_congressional_districts
 
Likes: 1 person
Mar 2011
746
159
Rhondda, Cymru
#14
You have just defined something which is impossible to achieve. Thus a very basic problem is that there will always be complaints about Gerrymandering.

For the moment, lets forget elections. Ideally, you would want everyone in the district to have very similar interests so that the representative can represent those interests in congress. For example, you would want them to all be rural or urban or even more specifically farmers verses non farmers.

There is a problem with reality. For example, Arkansas only has four districts. In general the composition is represented by two groups. Very urban areas such as Little Rock and very rural farming which area wise comprises most of the state. In addition these districts must be nearly identical in population.

Disregard the geographical shape, even though that is what people tend to look at and call it Gerrymandering. Our districts are generally arranged as follows: District 1 is Eastern Arkansas. It comprises most rural flat land farms. But includes some very urban areas. District 2 is basically Little Rock, but includes some rural areas. District 3 includes Urban northeast Arkansas plus the US Highway 65 corridor and US Highway 62/412 corridor. District 4 makes up what is left and is generally SW Arkansas.

Within each of these areas, you will find large groups of people who say they are not fairly represented. As as the name Gerrymandering implies, all of those districts are shaped like some strange animal.

The bottom line is that regardless of how you shape the district, it will be considered unfair by the other party.

In summary, you can't get there from here.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arkansas's_congressional_districts
There will be far fewer if you learn from other countries and stop leading with your chin. Is any other country currently as hysterically divided as the gerrymandered USA?
 
Likes: 1 person
Aug 2017
431
149
Medway Towns, Kent
#20
You left out a very important point. That statement has not been verified. It is only what has been quoted in a very questionable book.
This is a shite fest nothing else. Its about who has the biggest dick in front of the Mercers.... its about money and power. Bannon seems to have overplayed what influence he thought he had for the Mercer largesse and lost, does that need verification? The book is a side show based on a falling out of egos.
 

Similar Discussions