President 'The Donald' Trump and Surprising Consequences - Mod warning in OP

RDM_83 again

Can I ask the people that are believing this stuff? Have you actually read the leaked report?

Forget that your hatred of Trump and the internet points you'l get from criticizing him, its in bad English and reads like a it was a written by a secondary school student.
If you read the report and blank Trump from your mind it reads like something somebody that wants to send an Antisemitic message would write, lots of references to Jews and one of the most prominent players named is Trumps Jewish advisor (incidentally who even sources that are fairly liberal like the Atlantic are pointing to him not being at the location at the time).

Il Fascista

The report is one of the funniest things I've read in awhile. How anyone can take it seriously is beyond me.

Trump's critics are proving they will blindly believe literally anything negative reported about him.

SeamusFX

AnGaelach wrote: »

Yep that's totally going to change their minds and not just end with them thinking you're a condescending asshole:rolleyes:

Do you think the media, Clinton and everyone else telling them they're stupid and deplorable had not effect but you calling them it would change their vote?

The truth hurts!

SeamusFX

Il Fascista wrote: »

The report is one of the funniest things I've read in awhile. How anyone can take it seriously is beyond me.

Trump's critics are proving they will blindly believe literally anything negative reported about him.

Yes and you probably believed the Clinton ran a pedofile ring out of a Pizza Parlor!

Il Fascista

Nope, Pizzagate is of no interest to me.

SeamusFX

SeamusFX wrote: »

The truth hurts!

The actual truth is that it's the blind idiots who voted for Hillary in the primary that are to blame for him winning. It was so obvious that her campaign was going to crash and burn like it did.
The Republican vote count stayed largely the same in the general but the Dems plummeted. The only reason she came anywhere close was because Trump was so bad.

That's not the topic at hand though but you're being wildly abusive and plain wrong.

SeamusFX wrote: »

Yes and you probably believed the Clinton ran a pedofile ring out of a Pizza Parlor!

Abusive, plain wrong and also ridiculous. Do you realise how few people actually believed that? Especially compared to I don't know, maybe the clearly false report being touted as truth.

wonderfullife

RDM_83 again wrote: »

Can I ask the people that are believing this stuff? Have you actually read the leaked report?

Forget that your hatred of Trump and the internet points you'l get from criticizing him, its in bad English and reads like a it was a written by a secondary school student.

I assume you're talking Golden Showers here.

The report was written by Christopher Steele. I feel uncomfortable that his name was printed by The Guardian (and others) and he has apparently now "fled for his life" from Surrey.

Steele is a former MI6 operative who was based in Russia and worked with the murdered Alexander Litvinienko.

The BBC cited a CIA official today that said there are multiple "credible" sources who have claimed there are "multiple" tapes and audio on Trump in the possession of the FSB/Putin.

People seem to be confused as to what this report actually is.

It's raw intelligence. By it's very nature, it could be anywhere from complete, made-up nonsense to actual fact. And it could be anywhere in between in that spectrum.

It's not an accusation or an allegation. It's raw intel.

The fact that this intel went from Steele to a British Ambassador to John McCain to the FBI to the CIA and landed on the desk of Barack Obama shows that there is enough sources to give this credibility.

It still may not be fact. But it was, at least, deemed credible.

For it to be deemed credible, the basic starting point would be to check was Trump in Moscow and St. Petersburg on the alleged dates. That's very simple to check flight records for a man who owns a private plane.

So, he was likely in those cities at the time of the alleged compromised material was gathered.

That, in itself, means nothing. But it's a starting point. Then they have to ascertain was Trump at the Ritz-Carlton on those days. I feel very certain they can and have ascertained he was.

So what we ultimately have here is enough to show at least parts of the report are of credible nature. Enough to be presented to President Obama.

At the time it was presented to Obama, everyone assumed Hillary would win a landslide. So they probably thought "who cares if this is even true and the Russians have Trump sex tapes".

Now, he's the incoming President.

Again, this might be totally false. It may be true. It may have elements that are true and elements that are false.

That's what raw intel is.

This is not fake news. It's raw intel.

If you're asking do I believe it's possible Trump got hookers in a hotel room, then yes of course. He's been a cheating, womanising misogynist his entire adult life. Of course that makes sense. Whether it happened on THIS instance, who knows. And normally, it'd be who cares - if he got golden showers from high class call girls in America, nobody would care.

People actually do care if Russia are actually blackmailing him. The fact Rex Tillerson is up for SOS would make a whole lot more sense if you viewed it through a blackmail prism.

Jesus Christ. As if checking where Trump was matters. If I'm gonna write a hit piece, I'm going to match it to his schedule and what he was doing.

wonderfullife

Deleted User wrote: »

Jesus Christ. As if checking where Trump was matters. If I'm gonna write a hit piece, I'm going to match it to his schedule and what he was doing.

What on earth are you waffling on about?

A "hit piece"?

This raw intel was presented to Obama by the CIA and FBI months before the election.

They didn't bat an eyelid because they assumed Hillary would win easily.

How is it a "hit piece" if it's written before the election?

You're attempting to tell me Christopher Steele, who factually worked for MI6 in Moscow, who factually worked with Alexander Litvinienko, you mean to tell me he wrote a 35-page "hit piece" on Trump IN CASE?

For the craic? For money?

What wild conspiracy theory are you going to present to me now. Why did Steele write it?

wonderfullife

The Daily Mail alleges the "hit piece" you speak of was financed by Republican opponents of Trump in the primaries who paid Steele to find out "dirt" on Trump. Usable dirt.

They allege Steele found all this out. They also allege a former British Ambassador to Russia independently found the information out. Steele went to the FBI with it. The Ambassador went to McCain directly.

Either way, if you're alleging it's a hit piece then it's a Republican financed hit piece.

I find it troubling that you're willing to disbelieve Trump would nail some hookers though.

MightyMandarin

There was a massive pile of folders on a table next to Trump at the press conference yesterday. They were so important the press were not allowed view them or know the contents of them, despite them being there.

Well, anyway, some absolute legend decided to sneak a peek inside of them and.....

https://mlkshk-ada.kxcdn.com/r/1ASO0

Yep they're blank. Could he actually be more of a 'fake' president?

('Fake' is my new favourite adjective now, thanks Mr.Trump)

MightyMandarin

[Deleted User] wrote: »

I just woke up so maybe things have changed. Is there clear evidence now apart from that report released in full by buzzfeed?

Given that the report is known to have been written by an MI6 spy who worked in Russia, I'm willing to say there's credibility to the story, although its truth is unknown.

It's not the story that's what inerests me the most though, it's the childish reactions of a narcissist is what amazes me and how brazen he is in his authoritarian stance.

The stupid things he does aswell.are hilarious, such as the blank papers, like how sad do you have to be to go to those lengths just to 'fool reporters' in his eyes. What a weak, weak individual he is.

PopePalpatine

MightyMandarin wrote: »

There was a massive pile of folders on a table next to Trump at the press conference yesterday. They were so important the press were not allowed view them or know the contents of them, despite them being there.

Well, anyway, some absolute legend decided to sneak a peek inside of them and.....

https://mlkshk-ada.kxcdn.com/r/1ASO0

Yep they're blank. Could he actually be more of a 'fake' president?

('Fake' is my new favourite adjective now, thanks Mr.Trump)

He was elected to lead, not to read!

Mr.Micro

I just get the feeling the Americans may have bitten off more than they can chew, in the election of Trump. He wants his cake and eat it at the same time. It's going to be a rollercoaster with consequences.

Amerika

BabyCheeses wrote: »

Don't see how causing a recession is winning. Unless somehow this time is different but so far it doesn't look like it.

The Great Recession was mostly influenced by the subprime mortgage crisis, and particularly the Community Reinvestment Act, which forced banks to participate in risky lending, which was a Democrat boondoggle. So we can easily argue the Great Recession was caused by Democrats.

Amerika

Overheal wrote: »

Sports section is over there -->

It makes great theater between 11/8 and 1/20 but I'm left to sit back and begin musing how it will all fall apart in the first 100 days. The narrative shift so far has already been surreal:

we went from building a great big wall coast to coast that Mexico will write us a cheque for, to we're going to build more fences in some more places and Mexico will maybe pay us back in some non monetary way;

Went from "Lock her up!" to "Yeah that sounded great during the campaign folks but come on";

Went from "Drain the Swamp" to - well, that speaks for itself.

I mean, I hardly see how it's winning when you don't really understand what you've "won" yet. National debt up to $30 Trillion? New international conflicts? Declarations of war? A new missile crisis? From what I can see he's building a great, big, beautiful bubble to make people feel good now, that will totally screw us all later. Taking a sledgehammer to healthcare without fixing it, and ignoring education, are going to erode anything else he tries to do. What good is a factory without healthy and able people to work it.

Semantics section is over there - - >

If an effective barrier is built which greatly curtails illegal immigration, and Trump finds some way or form to have Mexico pay for it, I think people will be content he is doing what he said he would.

Trump, as president, shouldn’t go after Hillary Clinton. The next DOJ could decide to prosecute her for gross negligence, though. Anyway, there is a lot of chatter that Obama will be providing Clinton with a pardon on his last day in office, which would make any prosecution of her a moot point.

A lot of his cabinet picks do seem to have the ability to drain the swamp over time.

And the ‘winner’ comment was merely a kind mannered response to a posters abusive ‘loser’ comment thrown at me. I understand the desire to twist everything I say, but it is a bit disingenuous.

And regarding your points...

It was Obama who added $20 Trillion to our debt. Don't forget that!
Obama is increasing and positioning our military in Europe to respond to Russia, so if there is any declarations of war or a new missile crisis, you can blame him for setting the groundwork for conflict.
What scares democrats most is because republicans DO have a plan to repeal and replace the myth that Obamacare is working for most Americans. But I don’t think it will happen until March as some details need to be ironed out.

ECO_Mental

Amerika wrote: »

Semantics section is over there - - >

If an effective barrier is built which greatly curtails illegal immigration, and Trump finds some way or form to have Mexico pay for it, I think people will be content he is doing what he said he would.

Interesting, have you any ideas how he will get Mexico to pay for it? just give us one or two ideas

Because I don't think Trumpski has any idea how he is going to do it....

ECO_Mental

Amerika wrote: »

Semantics section is over there - - >


It was Obama who added $20 Trillion to our debt. Don't forget that!

Dont you forget it was the hospital pass of two wars across the other side of the world that accounts for the majority of this. Oh and the greatest financial crisis in the world since the 1920s which also was handed to him on a silver platter by who? oh yeah Dubya :rolleyes:

Amerika

ECO_Mental wrote: »

Interesting, have you any ideas how he will get Mexico to pay for it? just give us one or two ideas

Because I don't think Trumpski has any idea how he is going to do it....

He can increase visa fees, which is a decision made by the State Department. He could increase the toll on bridges through the U.S. Customs and Border Protection agency. But most effective would be through taxing remittances. There is already a bill presented... the Remittance Status Verification Act of 2015. The Act would require providers of cash remittances, like Western Union and MoneyGram, to request proof of legal residence from senders of wire transfers destined abroad. He could push to make it law. I believe I read somewhere Mexico get more revenue from people sending money from individuals in the US to Mexico, than it gets in oil revenues.

Harika

Amerika wrote: »

He can increase visa fees, which is a decision made by the State Department. He could increase the toll on bridges through the U.S. Customs and Border Protection agency. But most effective would be through taxing remittances. There is already a bill presented... the Remittance Status Verification Act of 2015. The Act would require providers of cash remittances, like Western Union and MoneyGram, to request proof of legal residence from senders of wire transfers destined abroad. He could push to make it law. I believe I read somewhere Mexico get more revenue from people sending money from individuals in the US to Mexico, than it gets in oil revenues.

VISA fees and tolls will just be a drop in the water, as like 30 billion dollar will be needed for that wall to build. Proof of legal residence is easily circumvented and that the outgoing money is taxed will see heavy resistance from Wall Street and the Banking Sector where Trumps buddies in the office are originating. Even if it goes through, there will just be diversions in place by either going across the globe or by manual transport what will make it only more risky and play into the hands of organised crime.
American taxpayers will have to face it, they will pay the wall. Even if those plans would work, someone still has to finance the wall first and this definitive won't be Mexico.
My bet goes towards to no wall at all and in 2020 he will blame democrats for it.

MightyMandarin

Amerika wrote: »

He can increase visa fees, which is a decision made by the State Department. He could increase the toll on bridges through the U.S. Customs and Border Protection agency. But most effective would be through taxing remittances. There is already a bill presented... the Remittance Status Verification Act of 2015. The Act would require providers of cash remittances, like Western Union and MoneyGram, to request proof of legal residence from senders of wire transfers destined abroad. He could push to make it law. I believe I read somewhere Mexico get more revenue from people sending money from individuals in the US to Mexico, than it gets in oil revenues.

Assuming the wall is 35ft high, and roughly 1000miles long, it would cost around 15-16bn just for materials and labour, that's not factoring in design and engineering costs, plus costs involved in reaching areas without roads. Maintenance costs are also estimated by the congressional budget office to be more expensive than construction costs within 7 years.

Do you really think those measures can match the costs of this wall?

Amerika

ECO_Mental wrote: »

Dont you forget it was the hospital pass of two wars across the other side of the world that accounts for the majority of this.

Says who?

Oh and the greatest financial crisis in the world since the 1920s which also was handed to him on a silver platter by who? oh yeah Dubya :rolleyes:

No, it was caused mostly by the democrats. I already explained this.

InTheTrees

MightyMandarin wrote: »

Assuming the wall is 35ft high, and roughly 1000miles long, it would cost around 15-16bn just for materials and labour, that's not factoring in design and engineering costs, plus costs involved in reaching areas without roads. Maintenance costs are also estimated by the congressional budget office to be more expensive than construction costs within 7 years.

Do you really think those measures can match the costs of this wall?

You can probably double those estimates just because it will be a government project. Then add another 50% because the government is run by a corrupt businessman known for his shady practices.

Inquitus

InTheTrees wrote: »

You can probably double those estimates just because it will be a government project. Then add another 50% because the government is run by a corrupt businessman known for his shady practices.

Can we not then take 50% off as we know he won't pay the subcontractors in full?

CMOTDibbler

Amerika wrote: »

But most effective would be through taxing remittances. There is already a bill presented... the Remittance Status Verification Act of 2015. The Act would require providers of cash remittances, like Western Union and MoneyGram, to request proof of legal residence from senders of wire transfers destined abroad. He could push to make it law. I believe I read somewhere Mexico get more revenue from people sending money from individuals in the US to Mexico, than it gets in oil revenues.

I can think of three easy ways to circumvent that if it were introduced.

I'm sure there are more.

Amerika

MightyMandarin wrote: »

Assuming the wall is 35ft high, and roughly 1000miles long, it would cost around 15-16bn just for materials and labour, that's not factoring in design and engineering costs, plus costs involved in reaching areas without roads. Maintenance costs are also estimated by the congressional budget office to be more expensive than construction costs within 7 years.

Do you really think those measures can match the costs of this wall?

Just last November alone Mexicans abroad sent home nearly $2.4 billion in transfers after the Trump win. In 2016 the amount of remittances was $27 billion. I have a feeling if Mexico suddenly is faced with losing a good amount of these funds, they would ask Trump high would the wall will be that they’ll pay for.

Yeah, there would be up-front money needed, but would be paid for over time. Perhaps we could start with using the money the government wastes on unrealistic green energy failures.

Amerika

InTheTrees wrote: »

You can probably double those estimates just because it will be a government project. Then add another 50% because the government is run by a corrupt businessman known for his shady practices.

No, Trump is know for getting projects accomplished on time, and under budget. Something our government can't begin to fathom.

baaba maal

Amerika wrote: »

Semantics section is over there - - >

If an effective barrier is built which greatly curtails illegal immigration, and Trump finds some way or form to have Mexico pay for it, I think people will be content he is doing what he said he would.

Trump, as president, shouldn’t go after Hillary Clinton. The next DOJ could decide to prosecute her for gross negligence, though. Anyway, there is a lot of chatter that Obama will be providing Clinton with a pardon on his last day in office, which would make any prosecution of her a moot point.

A lot of his cabinet picks do seem to have the ability to drain the swamp over time.

And the ‘winner’ comment was merely a kind mannered response to a posters abusive ‘loser’ comment thrown at me. I understand the desire to twist everything I say, but it is a bit disingenuous.

And regarding your points...

It was Obama who added $20 Trillion to our debt. Don't forget that!
Obama is increasing and positioning our military in Europe to respond to Russia, so if there is any declarations of war or a new missile crisis, you can blame him for setting the groundwork for conflict.
What scares democrats most is because republicans DO have a plan to repeal and replace the myth that Obamacare is working for most Americans. But I don’t think it will happen until March as some details need to be ironed out.

Would you care to explain how ex Goldman Sachs directors are going to drain the swamp?
Genuine question- the perception most people would have is that they are the swamp.
PS - good deflection on the wall costs by talking about green energy failures!

Amerika

CMOTDibbler wrote: »

I can think of three easy ways to circumvent that if it were introduced.

I'm sure there are more.

Perhaps but it would be at democrats peril, as John Q Public (the average American as opposed to Jane Q Lefty) wouldn't like it.

johnp001

ECO_Mental wrote: »

Interesting, have you any ideas how he will get Mexico to pay for it? just give us one or two ideas

Because I don't think Trumpski has any idea how he is going to do it....

The ideas for how Mexico would pay for the proposed wall are available on Trump's website in a document called "Pay For The Wall"
https://assets.donaldjtrump.com/Pay_for_the_Wall.pdf