Donald Trump Presidency discussion thread III

Patser

He was said to be very critical of all the proposed tariffs

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-43311581

Itssoeasy

It's funny he's gone because an MSNBC journalist tweeted a picture of an empty chair and said the absence of Gary Cohn was very noticeable. So he was critical of trumps mad stance of tariffs and had to go.

Hande hoche!

The current white house must have a record for turnover at this rate. Wonder who will be next?
Sessions and McMaster have lasted longer than expected.

relax carry on

Has any other US presidency had so many key staff changes/resignations as Trump's given he's only in his second year?

Headshot

Hopefully javanka next

david75

relax carry on wrote: »

Has any other US presidency had so many key staff changes/resignations as Trump's given he's only is his second year.

Not even close.

david75

Has any President been this mired in scandal and set to fall this early into his term?

pixelburp

More accurately : has there been a president this mired in scandal and controversy, and NOT paid the political price because of them? Let's face it, Trump's totally bulletproof thus far, and even personal repercussions from the Mueller investigation will be attacked by his zealots, and thanks to the cult like following he has fostered...

Hurrache

relax carry on wrote: »

Has any other US presidency had so many key staff changes/resignations as Trump's given he's only in his second year?

Outside of the awful TV show Designated Survivor there hasn't been a large a cull in a Whitehouse.
https://twitter.com/mkraju/status/971153985058037760?s=19

But don't mind that list because
https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/971006379375972354?s=19

everlast75

So i wake up to the news Cohn is resigning but of course, that's not the only story that broke overnight.... we are talking about DJT after all.

Apparently Ms Daniels is suing him because he didn't sign the NDA his brilliant solicitor drafted which in it, refers to photographs taken (shudder) and doesn't use an alias for him either!

jooksavage

Gary Cohn's red line was tariffs. Not the President siding with Nazis last year. Nope. Tariffs.

aloyisious

CNN were running a story last night that a US businessman was pulled aside by the FBI for interview on his return from a meeting on an island some months ago about the meeting. The report said the Special Counsel was now interested and had interviewed the man, previously unknown to the Russian investigation, as most of the others at the meeting were of interest to the investigation. The report mentioed that there were a Russian gent and a person rom the Middle East also at the meeting.

spacecoyote

jooksavage wrote: »

Gary Cohn's red line was tariffs. Not the President siding with Nazis last year. Nope. Tariffs.

To be honest, I think that Cohn, once he got a tasty tax cut for big business through, has probably been waiting for any opportunity to escape.

Job done, run for the door

jooksavage

Just quickly back to Nunbergs insane media appearances the other day. Slates Jacob Weisberg has an interesting theory that Roger Stone himself may have had some involvement. He has suggested that, in addition to making a holy show of himself, Nunberg essentially destroyed his own credibility as a witness, thus limiting his future usefulness to Mueller. Might sound like a bit of a stretch but an interesting theory and gives you an idea of what people who know Stone think he's capable of.

demfad

aloyisious wrote: »

CNN were running a story last night that a US businessman was pulled aside by the FBI for interview on his return from a meeting on an island some months ago about the meeting. The report said the Special Counsel was now interested and had interviewed the man, previously unknown to the Russian investigation, as most of the others at the meeting were of interest to the investigation. The report mentioed that there were a Russian gent and a person rom the Middle East also at the meeting.

Holy Baloney! https://www.nytimes.com/2018/03/06/us/politics/george-nader-special-counsel-mueller-cooperating-seychelles.html#click=https://t.co/3Dqq44Suz0

"WASHINGTON — An adviser to the United Arab Emirates with ties to current and former aides to President Trump is cooperating with the special counsel, Robert S. Mueller III, and gave testimony last week to a grand jury, according to two people familiar with the matter."

Amongst other things Mueller is investigating if Nader (who advises Crown Prince Mohammed bin Zayed Al-Nahyan, the effective ruler of the Emirates) funnelled money into the Trump campaign which is illegal for Nader and the campaign as it's form a foreign entity.

Mueller is also looking at a meeting between Nader, Eric Prince and a Russian called Dmitriev in the Seychelles. This was believed by Emirati officials to be a 3 way meeting between reps of Putin, Crown Prince and Trump.
(Eric Prince is the owner of the mercenary company Blackwater who got into trouble in Iraq. He is the brother of Betsy deVos).

Also Dmitriev set up a state-run investment fund (Russian Direct Investment Fund). After the Crown Prince met with Putin in Moscow 2013 he agreed to invest $6 billion in it.

The fact that Nader present at the 3 way meeting, and knee deep in funding to Russia and potentially to Trump, the fact that this guy is now a cooperating witness is huge.

More in the article.

demfad

jooksavage wrote: »

Just quickly back to Nunbergs insane media appearances the other day. Slates Jacob Weisberg has an interesting theory that Roger Stone himself may have had some involvement. He has suggested that, in addition to making a holy show of himself, Nunberg essentially destroyed his own credibility as a witness, thus limiting his future usefulness to Mueller. Might sound like a bit of a stretch but an interesting theory and gives you an idea of what people who know Stone think he's capable of.

That was Carter Page's game too.

everlast75

Jesus - this is hard to keep up with all the stories breaking

Trouble for KAK - violation of federal laws

http://thehill.com/homenews/administration/376945-watchdog-kellyanne-conway-violated-hatch-act-twice-in-tv-appearances

Ms. Daniels' lawyer appears on TV to disclose more information about the NDA and why he believes it doesn't apply

https://www.today.com/video/stormy-daniels-attorney-trump-knew-about-payment-to-her-at-the-time-1178897475904

here is an article which mentions some key points to the whole affair (no pun intended)

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-fix/wp/2018/03/07/the-7-most-interesting-parts-of-stormy-danielss-lawsuit-against-trump/?utm_term=.cd0c29a1d17f

humberklog

There's a very good interview by Terry Gross (NPR) talking to journalist Jane Mayer. They're talking about an article Mayer wrote for New Yorker regarding the origins of The Steele Dossier. It spells out the story from beginning up to today very well.
Should be easily googable for podcast.

I haven't read the actual NY article.

dr.fuzzenstein

everlast75 wrote: »

So i wake up to the news Cohn is resigning but of course, that's not the only story that broke overnight.... we are talking about DJT after all.

Apparently Ms Daniels is suing him because he didn't sign the NDA his brilliant solicitor drafted which in it, refers to photographs taken (shudder) and doesn't use an alias for him either!

Those pictures must never see the light of day!
The sight of DT's cumface would blind half the population of earth and drive the other half mad.

everlast75

I read online a comment about the genius of the lawsuit.

Does Trump argue the contract is legally enforceable, thus admitting something happened or

Deny that there is no contract, thus allowing her to talk freely

Headshot

I finally finished fire and fury today. It was a fascinated book and you know there's a high chance some of it's not real or overly dramatised but as the weeks go bye you read what the likes of Nunberg say and just hits you that was in the book as well. Trump is just insane.

"Love your shoes. Boy, those shoes. Man" lol

Anyone who is fascinated by USA politics and the Trump reality show, get this book

Jamiekelly

Anyone here remember when Paddy Power had a novelty market bet on Trump's penis size? Well it looks like they might actually have to pay out on them with this whole stormy daniels scandal heating up. Her having "still images" can only really mean one thing, some poor intern in Paddy Power's office is going to have a rough morning measuring Trump's "Trump" through a PC monitor.

What a time to be alive.

robinph

So Trump now has a restraining order to prevent her speaking publicly about the alleged affair.

Therefore it is no longer an alleged affair surely, that makes the affair a fact because of the court order?

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-43327856

But then you have the lawyer claiming that Trump was nothing to do with the NDA, but then Trump is the one who gets the restraining order to attempt to enforce the NDA. Again that surely confirms that he was party to the initial NDA and must have stumped up the cash for it.

Christy42

robinph wrote: »

So Trump now has a restraining order to prevent her speaking publicly about the alleged affair.

Therefore it is no longer an alleged affair surely, that makes the affair a fact because of the court order?

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-43327856

But then you have the lawyer claiming that Trump was nothing to do with the NDA, but then Trump is the one who gets the restraining order to attempt to enforce the NDA. Again that surely confirms that he was party to the initial NDA and must have stumped up the cash for it.

Lets be fair sitting his lawyer with the bill and not paying him back is an incredibly Donald Trump move. I could see the lawyer putting up the cash to keep Donald's name off the NDA and Trump stiffing him on the bill!

Leroy42

The lawyer did not pay with his own money, give me a break!

SHS pretty much admitted the affair yesterday when she stated that they had won an arbitration. Arbitration for what? You don't arbitrate on liable.

I find it so odd that Republicans seemed to have so much issue with Obama and his wife, when, from all that we know, they are a loving couple, good parents, no scandals and yet they love this man who has affairs on his recently pregnant wife. Edit - actually no, its not at all, they are all total hypocrites and are prepared to change whatever their think their morals are to whatever suits them.

Now personally I have no issue with him having an affair, that is their personal business and if Melania is prepared to stay shacked up with him then that her own problem, but what I do have is an issue with people who profess to be driven by god prepared to turn a blind eye to behaviour they would denounce in anybody that doesn't represent them.

SLIPPERY FROG

Let's make America great again...
Tell me when the f###$% was America ever great??

everlast75

robinph wrote: »

So Trump now has a restraining order to prevent her speaking publicly about the alleged affair.

Therefore it is no longer an alleged affair surely, that makes the affair a fact because of the court order?

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-43327856

But then you have the lawyer claiming that Trump was nothing to do with the NDA, but then Trump is the one who gets the restraining order to attempt to enforce the NDA. Again that surely confirms that he was party to the initial NDA and must have stumped up the cash for it.

So, they "won" an arbitration where the other party were not present, and despite "winning", Mr. Cohen paid out $120,000 to Ms. Daniels?

This has to be complete BS.

On a tangential point, I was listening to a discussion about a possible Subpoena to testify on DT. Now, he has always said he would be happy to do it, because if he doesn't he can be accused of having something to hide. So the theory goes, that he will say he will attend, but his Counsel will say that he has advised him against it. That way, he gets to save face and say that the call was his Counsel.

That being so, if DT did stiff Cohen, isn't it another example of how shortsighted he is, in backstabbing someone he would really need to keep onside?

everlast75

everlast75 wrote: »

That being so, if DT did stiff Cohen, isn't it another example of how shortsighted he is, in backstabbing someone he would really need to keep onside?

He'll see it as being a smart business man, in line with his statement that as a smart business man he avoid paying taxes in full.

The whole Trump rodeo shows the desperation to hold onto power that Republicans have. Not that the democrats would be any less desperate to hold onto power, but the republicans would be baying for blood if the roles were reversed given their impeachment of Bill Clinton for lesser charges.

Given the democrats level of control of the houses, I'd say it'll be impossible to implement impeachment against Trump, unless a good few republicans side with the democrats. I don't see them doing so as the backlash against them from Trumps supporters might result in something that they want to see occurring such as a stronger tea party etc.

everlast75

DubInMeath wrote: »

He'll see it as being a smart business man, in line with his statement that as a smart business man he avoid paying taxes in full.

The whole Trump rodeo shows the desperation to hold onto power that Republicans have. Not that the democrats would be any less desperate to hold onto power, but the republicans would be baying for blood if the roles were reversed given their impeachment of Bill Clinton for lesser charges.

Given the democrats level of control of the houses, I'd say it'll be impossible to implement impeachment against Trump, unless a good few republicans side with the democrats. I don't see them doing so as the backlash against them from Trumps supporters might result in something that they want to see occurring such as a stronger tea party etc.

Trump supporters are 30-40%. That leaves 70-60% of right minded people. If enough people stiff the Rep party in the midterms then they will pay attention. They are prepared to cosy up to him until then.

If the report is after the midterms, combined with the (hopeful) hammering they get may give them the kick up the hole they need to do something.

Gbear

everlast75 wrote: »

Trump supporters are 30-40%. That leaves 70-60% of right minded people. If enough people stiff the Rep party in the midterms then they will pay attention. They are prepared to cosy up to him until then.

If the report is after the midterms, combined with the (hopeful) hammering they get may give them the kick up the hole they need to do something.

Is there any data so far on bye-elections and other small scale appointments that show whether or not there has been an effect?

In other words, is there any evidence that this supposed "Blue Midterm" is actually going to materialise?