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

Christy42

Hank Scorpio wrote: »

He should set up a non profit foundation to get around those minor annoyances.

He is way ahead of you here.

https://www.google.ie/amp/s/www.washingtonpost.com/amphtml/politics/trump-foundation-apparently-admits-to-violating-ban-on-self-dealing-new-filing-to-irs-shows/2016/11/22/893f6508-b0a9-11e6-8616-52b15787add0_story.html

Nody

Hank Scorpio wrote: »

He should set up a non profit foundation to get around those minor annoyances.

Fully agree and that was what suggested but Trump as always knows best...

Hank Scorpio

Nody wrote: »

Fully agree and that was what suggested but Trump as always knows best...

To make it clear I don't agree with foreign money being received by anyone in an active government, just trying to point out the hypocrisy as I was always attacked and labeled a nut for bringing it up about Clinton.

Water John

Nixon said that, but the Supreme Court ruled against him.
The President is not above the law.

rossie1977

JRant wrote: »

A massive issue for the Dems is the gerrymandering of constituencies.

Just reading the replies to this tweet suggests they have more problems than that,
you have a large percentage of the electorate who still thinks Obama is a Muslim/created is and that rising global temperatures are a hoax because they saw a video on youtube https://twitter.com/TEN_GOP/status/873730103334842368

JRant

rossie1977 wrote: »

Just reading the replies to this tweet suggests they have more problems than that,
you have a large percentage of the electorate who still thinks Obama is a Muslim/created is and that rising global temperatures are a hoax because they saw a video on youtube https://twitter.com/TEN_GOP/status/873730103334842368

Indeed, the Dems struggle to win the white vote in the presidential elections and have done for a number of years now. This may stem from large swathes of oeople feeling disenfranchised with them. It's easy to blame anti-muslim/anti-immigration sentiment for a lot of these issues but the route cause lies much deeper IMO.

Itssoeasy

AG Jeff sessions will testify in public on Tuesday. I'm going to assume the dems ask him to confirm or deny up what James comey said. He'll be under oath which will be interesting given his previous issues speaking under oath.

Water John

Thought Sessions was a very religious man?

That point on the Dems needing to widen their appeal. Sanders has been banging that all along. Not sure that any one in there, is listening.

JRant

Water John wrote: »

Thought Sessions was a very religious man?

That point on the Dems needing to widen their appeal. Sanders has been banging that all along. Not sure that any one in there, is listening.

Unfortunately it's the Dem leadership that aren't listening.

Water John

GOP now turning on Bob Mueller. Attack, it seems, is the best form of defence.

ThisRegard

His travel ban rejected by the court of appeal, they said it exceeds his authority.

Overheal

Of course they did. Not because they're the 9th Circuit, or Clinton appointees either; the White House has platformed on some terrible urgency to have entry from these countries shut, but in the 5 months since taking office the administration has done little else to vet or screen people coming from those countries. Instead, Trump's team has been fixated on winning a symbolic fight in the courts, rather than getting results aside from.

The Supreme Court won't make a decision on this, at the earliest, until the end of this year. Why? The DOJ didn't seek an expedited hearing from the Supreme Court, they seem happy to wait until winter.

Which means, that the whole purpose of a travel ban is pointless in its entirety: the original premise that we needed 90-120 days to retool our vetting processes before returning to normal travel is entirely out the window. We are already close to 5 months past the original ban date, 137 days ago. Compounded with how long it will take to get to the SCOTUS (October/November/December) makes it totally worthless.

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/06/11/us/politics/as-trump-sounds-urgent-note-on-travel-ban-a-vetting-revamp-grinds-on.html

aloyisious

rossie1977 wrote: »

Just reading the replies to this tweet suggests they have more problems than that,
you have a large percentage of the electorate who still thinks Obama is a Muslim/created is and that rising global temperatures are a hoax because they saw a video on youtube https://twitter.com/TEN_GOP/status/873730103334842368

Lol at the interviewer biting his tongue......

SeamusFX

BabyCheeses wrote: »

.Maybe the investigations aren't real either and are just something the Soros run MSM has made up to make Trump look bad?

Do you really believe that?? There is proof that Russian interference was a real thing and there is also proof that some of Trump's people were in contact with the Russians and probably involved. The only thing Comey said was Trump wasn't being directly investigated while he was in the FBI. Comey never said Trump wasn't involved with the Russians and when probed further instead of saying it wasn't real he said he couldn't discuss it in an open forum, which translates to yes, it's true! The only people saying it isn't true, is Trump and his supporters. These are the same people who'd support him if he shot someone in Time Square.

Billy86

SeamusFX wrote: »

Do you really believe that?? There is proof that Russian interference was a real thing and there is also proof that some of Trump's people were in contact with the Russians and probably involved. The only thing Comey said was Trump wasn't being directly investigated while he was in the FBI. Comey never said Trump wasn't involved with the Russians and when probed further instead of saying it wasn't real he said he couldn't discuss it in an open forum, which translates to yes, it's true! The only people saying it isn't true, is Trump and his supporters. These are the same people who'd support him if he shot someone in Time Square.

Don't worry, going by BabyCheese's usual posts, they were was being sarcastic.

(it is hard to tell in general these days though with the nonsense from actual Trump fans!)

aloyisious

The Chicago Dems are moving in on Don with the The ‘Communications Over Various Feeds Electronically for Engagement’ Act, or COVFEFE for short,

http://www.independent.ie/world-news/north-america/president-trump/us-congressman-introduces-covfefe-act-aimed-at-donald-trumps-tweets-35818010.html

SeamusFX

Hank Scorpio wrote: »

I've only followed the media in the US since early summer of last year, and I can say without hesitating it was incredibly biased towards one candidate. You might find it hard to believe I had never heard of Trump before then, and had zero knowledge about Hillary Clinton. I seen with my own eyes what they were doing, even without the Wikileaks dumps confirming what was going on behind the scenes.

Being someone who is both an Irish and an American citizen who has lived in America and more recently in Ireland for many years, I can understand, but not agree, with Americans who support Trump, but I can't understand how anyone outside of America could support him. Below is my list of why someone might support Trump:

1. Lifelong Republicans and they will vote and support the Republican candidate even if it's Mickey Mouse.

2. Pure Self-Interest and they are rich and want the tax breaks or they are delusional and think they will be rich some day.

3. Pro NRA gun nuts as Trump has promised pro-NRA SCOTUS appointments.

4. Strong anti-abortion beliefs, as Trump has promised to appoint anti-abortion SCOTUS appointments.

5. They hated Bill Clinton because of Monica Lewinsky, so they wouldn't support his wife who was actually the victim. Meanwhile the man who has 3 wives and numerous mistresses is OK. Ironically, most of these people are part of the Christian & Catholics who are also anti-abortion Group 4 and also usually part of Group 1.

6. They perceive Trump as an outsider. Trump never was an outsider, he's been doing deals with politicians and other insiders for years, he wasn't a politician, but certainly not an outsider. After all his chants of draining the swamp, al he has done is hire even bigger swamp monster. Plus in many cases, this is usually just an excuse for people in groups 1, 2, 4 and/or 5.

7. They think he isn't politically correct and he tells it like it is. Too much political correctness isn't good, but being political incorrect isn't a good thing either. Being an idiot is never a good thing. This is pretty much the same as group 6.

8. He's a reality star. It's sad, but some people are easily influenced by celebrity status, look at Ronald Reagan, Arnold Schwarzenegger and even the Kennedys.

9. They think he's a genius billionaire businessman, who will run the country like a fine tuned successful business. This is sad for two reasons, one a country isn't a business and Trump is proving that, along with his political inexperience. Plus he inherited his wealth from his father, most of his money today comes by way of his celebrity, not his business acumen, he has filed bankruptcy 4 times with losses in excess of $4.7 Billion, which means he has made horrible decisions more than once and at the expense of the taxpayers and many of his creditors and contractors.

10. Poor uneducated white people who are unemployed or financially strapped and they blamed Obama for the economy, because things aren't as good as the good old days. What they forget is, things weren't so good during the Bush days either and Obama actually improved things, considering the mess he inherited. Also many of these people worked in jobs that have been eliminated or marginalised due to technology and they haven't been able to keep up with the times, so they have to blame someone. Needless to say, despite his lies, Trump has no intention of actually trying to help these people.

11. American Protectionism

12. Anti-Immigration racists.

13. Homophobic

14. A contrarian.

15. Finally, people who feed on a steady and exclusive diet of Right Wing media, such as Fox News and Breitbart and believe it! Usually this ties in with some of the above, but not necessarily.

Most of the above don't really apply if you're Irish, except maybe numbers 4, 12, 13,14 & 15 and even a reasonable anti-abortionist should be able to see supporting Trump is literally throwing out the baby with the bathwater, so that leaves only 12, 13, 14 and 15. Number 12 is pretty ironic considering all of the Irish who have immigrated to America and 13 is pretty ironic considering we are about to have a gay Taoiseach. So I guess that leaves number 14 or 15. Can you explain why you seem to love the man everyone else hates?

Hank Scorpio

SeamusFX wrote: »

Can you explain why you seem to love the man everyone else hates?

I don't have to love Trump if I refuse to go along with what I believe is a false narrative propagated by Democrats and the media. The rest of your spiel is just opinion based nonsense.

SeamusFX wrote: »

Do you really believe that?? There is proof that Russian interference was a real thing and there is also proof that some of Trump's people were in contact with the Russians and probably involved.

You may have missed what was said in the hearings. The New York times article that started the above accusation about Trump associates being in contact with Russian intelligence officials was false according to Comey. There is no tangible evidence of any collusion.

InTheTrees

Hank Scorpio wrote: »

There is no tangible evidence of any collusion.

Well there's an investigation to find evidence. That's really the purpose of an investigation.

The question is whether there was probable cause to actually start all these investigations right?

You say there isnt? The authorities seem to think there is. Why is that?

JRant

Hank Scorpio wrote: »

I don't have to love Trump if I refuse to go along with what I believe is a false narrative propagated by Democrats and the media. The rest of your spiel is just opinion based nonsense.



You may have missed what was said in the hearings. The New York times article that started the above accusation about Trump associates being in contact with Russian intelligence officials was false according to Comey. There is no tangible evidence of any collusion.

There was definitely contact between a couple of Trumps associates and some Russians, that much is clear. However, stretching it to imply they were involved in Russian interference with the election is without foundation and is part of the problem with the current narrative being spread. There's enough to be giving out about Trump without making stuff up.

SeamusFX

Hank Scorpio wrote: »

I don't have to love Trump if I refuse to go along with what I believe is a false narrative propagated by Democrats and the media. The rest of your spiel is just opinion based nonsense.



You may have missed what was said in the hearings. The New York times article that started the above accusation about Trump associates being in contact with Russian intelligence officials was false according to Comey. There is no tangible evidence of any collusion.

Hank,

First off you didn't answer my question, no one defends a pos like Trump so much without loving him. You mean to tell me you are just defending him because you feel sorry for him as the big bad mainstream media is picking on him? There must be some weird reason why you are compelled to defend him??

Second, there was Russian interference in the election this is a fact! Whether or not it was just a big news or more than that we don't yet know, but there was interference. We also know that people from Trump's campaign were in contact with the Russians and are being investigated. When asked about the Russian investigation on several occasions, Comey replied she couldn't discuss it in an open forum. So we know there is more, it may not be what many Democrats hope, but there is more! The only one that is saying Trump is vindicated is himself and his followers!

InTheTrees

JRant wrote: »

However, stretching it to imply they were involved in Russian interference with the election is without foundation and is part of the problem with the current narrative being spread.

I dont see how you can be so absolutely certain.

Do you not agree there are reasons to investigate?

Hank Scorpio

InTheTrees wrote: »

Well there's an investigation to find evidence. That's really the purpose of an investigation.

The question is whether there was probable cause to actually start all these investigations right?

You say there isnt? The authorities seem to think there is. Why is that?

I would question why Trump and associates were unmasked, why Intel spread around Government in the run up to an election at low levels, and why in some cases that Intel got released to the press, yes. I'm very curious.

BabyCheeses

SeamusFX wrote: »

Do you really believe that?? There is proof that Russian interference was a real thing and there is also proof that some of Trump's people were in contact with the Russians and probably involved. The only thing Comey said was Trump wasn't being directly investigated while he was in the FBI. Comey never said Trump wasn't involved with the Russians and when probed further instead of saying it wasn't real he said he couldn't discuss it in an open forum, which translates to yes, it's true! The only people saying it isn't true, is Trump and his supporters. These are the same people who'd support him if he shot someone in Time Square.

It was sarcasm. I should have probably been clearer seeing as we have people like Hank above making up stuff that most would have thought was a joke before.

SeamusFX

Hank Scorpio wrote: »

I would question why Trump and associates were unmasked, why Intel spread around Government in the run up to an election at low levels, and why in some cases that Intel got released to the press, yes. I'm very curious.

That's where you're wrong, the Russian connection story didn't come out until after the election.

SeamusFX

BabyCheeses wrote: »

It was sarcasm. I should have probably been clearer seeing as we have people like Hank above making up stuff that most would have thought was a joke before.

I wasn't sure, the sad thing is, people like Hank come out with things more bizarre than sarcasm.

Hank Scorpio

SeamusFX wrote: »

That's where you're wrong, the Russian connection story didn't come out until after the election.

Bull.

https://twitter.com/johnpodesta/status/793237359508721669?lang=en

JRant

InTheTrees wrote: »

I dont see how you can be so absolutely certain.

Do you not agree there are reasons to investigate?

I'm certain because nothing to suggest/prove this has come to light yet. If/when it does then we can say one way or the other but until then they really are just unfounded allegations.

There are certainly reasons to investigate. Flynn not disclosing his meeting and the back channels set up are two of the main reasons for this investigation IMO but it would really help if people weren't jumping the gun on this.

I get the dislike for Trump, the man seems like an oaf but I also really dislike this current situation which almost reminds me of McCarthyism if I'm being honest. If you believed everything in the MSM you be forgiven thinking that the "Reds were under the bed"

JRant

SeamusFX wrote: »

That's where you're wrong, the Russian connection story didn't come out until after the election.

I'm not sure that's right seamus. There was a lot of chattering leading up to the election about Trump and the Russians. Even his tax releases, which he hasn't provided, were claimed to show he was in bed them.

InTheTrees

JRant wrote: »

There are certainly reasons to investigate. Flynn not disclosing his meeting and the back channels set up are two of the main reasons for this investigation IMO but it would really help if people weren't jumping the gun on this.

And Kushner, there's reason to investigate why he was so eager to set up secret communications with the russians isnt there? And Paul Manafort as well. There's also nigel farage's odd appearance with julian assange right before the wikileaks anti-clinton info dump.