Donald Trump is the President Mark IV (Read Mod Warning in OP)

Manic Moran

Things that happen in Donald Trump's America.
And, in this case, what the difference is between very Democrat San Francisco, and moderately Republican San Antonio. Young folk trying to seek their fortunes are coming to the Bay Area. Older folks trying to raise a family are leaving it. Currently, the 'leavers' outnumber the 'comers'. Considering just how damned nice the Bay Area is, that's saying something.

The topic came up once or twice, most recently yesterday.

Christy42

Manic Moran wrote: »

Things that happen in Donald Trump's America.
And, in this case, what the difference is between very Democrat San Francisco, and moderately Republican San Antonio. Young folk trying to seek their fortunes are coming to the Bay Area. Older folks trying to raise a family are leaving it. Currently, the 'leavers' outnumber the 'comers'. Considering just how damned nice the Bay Area is, that's saying something.

The topic came up once or twice, most recently yesterday.

Picking data a bit. San Fransisco having issues does not suggest democrats would have issues elsewhere given the issues there are not democrat policies.

May as well go fpr why Republican states have lower life expectancy https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_U.S._states_and_territories_by_life_expectancy. I don't think it is a good argument but like yours is getting around serious detail.

A large proportion of the country is democrat. Including places like Boston or even major cities in Texas. They do not all have San Fransisco issues and if you want to ask if more are going to democrat or republican areas, which you are doing - I reckon you will find people moving to the cities (democrat regions).

Certainly if you want to argue that lower taxes on silicon valley giants would solve the homeless or severe mental health issues the city is suffering from. The main reason San Fransisco suffers is that they seem to be more interested in health warnings than actual action.

Christy42

Aside from that I can also see how some feel it difficult to not oppose those who have villanised immigrants, put lgbt through what much of the world sees as torture via Pence, insulted female reporters based in their gender and locked up children in over crowded cells that are starting to look like they will be overcrowded again soon.

And all those republicans will sign on the dotted line and say their golf buddies lower taxes for the next yacht is worth that.

Manic Moran

Christy, true, and my former neighbours in the house opposite mine went to Boston. But its not as extreme as SF.

In the meantime, in the 'proof that there are complete idiots on both sides' stakes...

https://www.reviewjournal.com/crime/shootings/report-las-vegas-professor-shot-himself-in-arm-to-protest-trump/

A Sociology professor and emeritus faculty member from the College of Southern Nevada has been charged with discharging a gun within a prohibited structure, carrying a concealed weapon without a permit, and possessing a dangerous weapon on school property.

Mark J. Bird, 69, faces felony gun charges after he shot himself on school property in protest of President Donald Trump. Around 8:15 a.m. on Aug. 28, Bird was found outside of a bathroom in the Charleston campus K building with a self-inflicted gunshot wound to his arm

RIGOLO

Water John wrote: »

Just for those who were suggesting that there were limits on Manafort's cooperation.
The plea agreement set out how Manafort must turn over documents and brief officials about “his participation in and knowledge of all criminal activities”.

Normally your small contributions have nothing in them, they are nbiether eloquent nor insightful, but for once you raised a valid point.
'knowledge of all criminal activities'

Monday morning, I hope the anti-Trump'ers took some of the weekend to read the full court filing.
https://apps.npr.org/documents/document.html?id=4883167-Manafort-D-C-Superseding-Criminal-Information

cos CNN did and they made the connections I already outlined last week. Theres more people in the Obama administration, Obama, HRC and John Kerry who come out badly from the Manafort filings than anyone in the Trump Administration.


Federal prosecutors weigh charges against Democratic powerbroker in Manafort-linked probe

https://edition.cnn.com/2018/09/14/politics/greg-craig-foreign-agent-registration-investigation/index.html


Folks were too busy chasing their bias to follow the real story.
What if Mueller has Greg Craig (former Obmama counsel) and Tony Podesta (brother of John Podesta, ex White House Chief of Staff and DNC head honcho)
in his sights. How will that look come the mid-terms if the same forensic microscope is put on those parties, maybe Mueller (Republican that he is) is goign to turn the ship around and go after you know who..

Oh and before we have the customary 'whatabouttery' comments, I know the plot is complex and thats all some can respond with but its not 'whatabouttery' when
Mueller has refered the case to the Southern District of NY, lets see if they pursue FARB violations with the same vigour as they did for a Republican lobbyist. I doubt it after all that wont lead to Trump and we all know none of you are really interested in the actual criminality of any of this, you just want Trump out and dont care what means .


Lets face it if most of the posters on here were really interested in stopping Russian collusion and influence you would be outside the Swedish embassy asking questions about their major banks Russian money laundering scandal. Its not made the news much, mostly because the anti-Trump click-baiters dont pay attention to anything thats not a stick to attack Trump with these days.
And if you have to go off and google the above and werent already aware of this scandal in Sweden then I know Im right.


play the long game folks, 604 days and counting ....

Thepoet85

RIGOLO wrote:

Normally your small contributions have nothing in them, they are nbiether eloquent nor insightful, but for once you raised a valid point. 'knowledge of all criminal activities'

Ironic that you try and belittle another poster for not being articulate, yet can't take the time to spell check some of your own posts.

*Nbeither

johnnyskeleton

RIGOLO wrote: »

Normally your small contributions have nothing in them, they are nbiether eloquent nor insightful, but for once you raised a valid point.
'knowledge of all criminal activities' .

Mod note:

Please be civil to other posters. Thepoet85, please dont escalate uncivil comments by responding like this.

everlast75

Manic Moran wrote: »

Everlast, you asked why Trump might still have 40% support. I answered. That is not to say I am one of the 40%, but the various charges and convictions surrounding Trump don’t have any practical effect on the running of the country. Gorsuch on the Supreme Court is going to affect US citizens for the next couple of decades. Person “X” getting convicted on a misuse of campaign finances charge or what have you, frankly, doesn’t, and if they go to jail, that’s their problem. They presumably deserve it. If you are more worried about the actual direction that policies and legislation runs than the appearance of the folks doing the running, you can see how there is still support.

Yes - yes they do.

There is a credible investigation discovering underway that he, along with others, conspired against the United States, allowing a foreign (and adversarial) power to interfere with the general election and deprive US citizens of their constitutional right to vote. How has that not sunk in? Why doesn't that matter to you, or them?

You say you are not part of the 40% - fair enough. So tell me, how can you talk about him in anything but disrespectful tones considering how he has treated the past military (McCain on 3 notable occasions, the family of Khan who died in battle) and present military, while dodging the draft himself?

everlast75

I have to say that I did think the initial furore surrounding the allegations against Kavanaugh were suspect, but as time goes on, there is more credible evidence coming to light.

There are serious charges here to be answered and if the Reps try and cram this nomination through (even more than they have done before the allegation), there will be hell to pay in the midterms.

Also, I am a firm firm believer that one is innocent until proven guilty, but the conduct of some of the reps are truly shocking and a flashback to the Clarence Thomas era.

Penn

everlast75 wrote: »

I have to say that I did think the initial furore surrounding the allegations against Kavanaugh were suspect, but as time goes on, there is more credible evidence coming to light.

There are serious charges here to be answered and if the Reps try and cram this nomination through (even more than they have done before the allegation), there will be hell to pay in the midterms.

Also, I am a firm firm believer that one is innocent until proven guilty, but the conduct of some of the reps are truly shocking and a flashback to the Clarence Thomas era.

The fact that top Republicans had letters from 65 women who were in school with Kavanaugh saying he was never inappropriate with them ready to go shows they knew about the accusations against him and had that ready to go to try and dismiss it if it came out. It's utterly, utterly disgusting and shameful.

Leroy42

Manic, the Russia investigation is having real and substantial impact on the running of the country.

Trump is consumed by it, by all accounts, and certainly he has devoted a huge amount of time on Twitter and in the media to it, so just from an administrative POV this is taking him away from more important (to the country, not him) issues that he should be dealing with.

In addition, he has clearly gone out of his way to belittle the FBI, CIA, DOJ, Sessions, the media, the opposition and others to try to paint this all as a witch hunt. That is going to have long term implications in terms of the running of the US, as what is to now stop others from openly attacking these institutions when they don't like something being investigated on them.

Whether Trump did anything is almost mute at this point, (althouth not in terms of the seriousness of what he may have done or even if he did anything)the damage he has done to the credibility and standing of all those agencies and the people that work in them is the real cost. Not sure how the FBI can be seen as anything other can completely disgraced when the POTUS openly sides with the Russians over them.

We have the NRA caught up with Russian money, the GOP openly attacking the agencies of the state. The POTUS disregarding any intel he doesn't like. As a military man, not sure how you can support a man that basically called the entire US military machine as useless since he thinks he can do a far better job than the generals. He has provided support for the far right, increasing racial tensions.

Captain Obvious

Ted Cruz is mailing out donation requests disguised as court summons.

https://www.newsweek.com/ted-cruz-beto-orourke-texas-election-midterms-letters-1123146

Is there a single redeemable feature of the GOP at this stage?

Igotadose

Captain Obvious wrote: »

Ted Cruz is mailing out donation requests disguised as court summons.

https://www.newsweek.com/ted-cruz-beto-orourke-texas-election-midterms-letters-1123146

Is there a single redeemable feature of the GOP at this stage?

Texas. At least the children of Texas won't have to learn about Hilary Clinton:

Hillary Clinton and Helen Keller could soon be out of Texas classrooms. Moses gets to stay in.

Not sure why the hate for Helen Keller. She was impressive and ... wait.. I know... female. That's it. Can't be teaching about hard working successful powerful women in Texas. Might give the girls ideas, yinno.

No... wait a minute, they are mentioning Barbara Jordan. I don't get it.
Hmm... dropped Hobbes for Moses as the fictional character Moses was more influential on the Founding Fathers. Probably didn't know who Hobbes was (The kid that played with that tiger?)

B0jangles

Igotadose wrote: »

Texas. At least the children of Texas won't have to learn about Hilary Clinton:

Hillary Clinton and Helen Keller could soon be out of Texas classrooms. Moses gets to stay in.

Not sure why the hate for Helen Keller. She was impressive and ... wait.. I know... female. That's it. Can't be teaching about hard working successful powerful women in Texas. Might give the girls ideas, yinno.

No... wait a minute, they are mentioning Barbara Jordan. I don't get it.
Hmm... dropped Hobbes for Moses as the fictional character Moses was more influential on the Founding Fathers. Probably didn't know who Hobbes was (The kid that played with that tiger?)

From the original article:


'A work group tasked with the curriculum streamlining also recommended removing evangelist and Baptist pastor Billy Graham, but the state board kept him.'


Billy Graham - the televangelist who made a $25 million fortune telling other people to live as Jesus would is apparently a more important historical figure than Hilary Clinton or Helen Keller.

jooksavage

Igotadose wrote: »

Texas. At least the children of Texas won't have to learn about Hilary Clinton:

Hillary Clinton and Helen Keller could soon be out of Texas classrooms. Moses gets to stay in.

Not sure why the hate for Helen Keller. She was impressive and ... wait.. I know... female. That's it. Can't be teaching about hard working successful powerful women in Texas. Might give the girls ideas, yinno.

No... wait a minute, they are mentioning Barbara Jordan. I don't get it.
Hmm... dropped Hobbes for Moses as the fictional character Moses was more influential on the Founding Fathers. Probably didn't know who Hobbes was (The kid that played with that tiger?)

Helen was a big-time socialist. Among Texan conservatives that's roughly the equivalent of being a cannibalistic Satan-worshipping Mexican.

Pelvis

everlast75 wrote: »

I have to say that I did think the initial furore surrounding the allegations against Kavanaugh were suspect, but as time goes on, there is more credible evidence coming to light.

There are serious charges here to be answered and if the Reps try and cram this nomination through (even more than they have done before the allegation), there will be hell to pay in the midterms.

Also, I am a firm firm believer that one is innocent until proven guilty, but the conduct of some of the reps are truly shocking and a flashback to the Clarence Thomas era.

Indeed. Apparently the accuser first brought up the assault in a therapy session with her husband in 2012, has provided the therapist's notes of the incident confirming some of the details, though not Kavanaugh's name, and also passed a lie detector test.

He'll probably still be confirmed, but it should be delayed and would assume the accuser will testify.

Quin_Dub

Pelvis wrote: »

Indeed. Apparently the accuser first brought up the assault in a therapy session with her husband in 2012, has provided the therapist's notes of the incident confirming some of the details, though not Kavanaugh's name, and also passed a lie detector test.

He'll probably still be confirmed, but it should be delayed and would assume the accuser will testify.

The next few days will be interesting..

Bob Corker and Jeff Flake have both said they won't support his approval until the allegations are investigated further. Murkowski has hedged a bit saying that the committee need to "discuss the issue" before the vote.

Flake is the more interesting one as he sits on the Senate Judicial committee so if he doesn't support the committee vote , then things get really interesting..

A lot depends on what their definition of "investigate further" means but still..

Articles I've read seem to suggest that the feeling is that if the GOP force this through without any real investigation of this allegation it will hurt them in a big way in November.

So - Which way will they go , grab the long term SCOTUS tilt and take the hit or try to protect the House/Senate majorities for now?

everlast75

Quin_Dub wrote: »

The next few days will be interesting..

Bob Corker and Jeff Flake have both said they won't support his approval until the allegations are investigated further. Murkowski has hedged a bit saying that the committee need to "discuss the issue" before the vote.

Flake is the more interesting one as he sits on the Senate Judicial committee so if he doesn't support the committee vote , then things get really interesting..

A lot depends on what their definition of "investigate further" means but still..

Articles I've read seem to suggest that the feeling is that if the GOP force this through without any real investigation of this allegation it will hurt them in a big way in November.

So - Which way will they go , grab the long term SCOTUS tilt and take the hit or try to protect the House/Senate majorities for now?

Unfortunately, Flake by name, flake by nature.

If I had a euro for every time he said he disapproved of Trump's actions and didn't do anything about it, I would be one rich man.

Fingers crossed that he has finally grown a spine though...

Penn

everlast75 wrote: »

Unfortunately, Flake by name, flake by nature.

If I had a euro for every time he said he disapproved of Trump's actions and didn't do anything about it, I would be one rich man.

Fingers crossed that he has finally grown a spine though...

The only real possibility for him growing a spine is the fact that he's not seeking re-election. He's out the door in a few weeks regardless. If ever there was a time for him to actually do something significant like this and have his actions match his words, it's now.

Water John

Oh the embarrassment at being belittled by Rigolo.

This accuser of Kavanaugh is very credible. The group that organised the pro Kavanaugh letter have spent $4.5M backing him. This is from donations they don't have to disclose.

Pelvis

His accuser has said they she'd be willing to testify, publicly.

jooksavage

I think this Kavanaugh thing has gone too big for them to push on with the vote now. I'd never put too much stock in Flake but there aren't too many negative consequences for him here if he puts the brakes on this: Kavanaugh is a remarkably unpopular nominee. Flake's not running again anyway and it will be his last chance to exact a bit of McCain-style revenge on Trump.

Even if it Flake lives up to his name and Kavanaghs nomination makes it's way to a vote, Collins and Murkowski (already under tremendous pressure from Native Alaskans to reject Kavanaugh) would do irrevocable damage to their unique-selling-points as "moderate" Rs by voting for him. These two insisted on Al Franken's resignation. They have no cover here. This is one of those career defining votes. If one of them votes against Kavanaugh, the other would have to follow suit. If two Rs voted against him, that should give cover for every D to vote against him.

dr.fuzzenstein

Leroy42 wrote: »

We have the NRA caught up with Russian money, the GOP openly attacking the agencies of the state. The POTUS disregarding any intel he doesn't like. As a military man, not sure how you can support a man that basically called the entire US military machine as useless since he thinks he can do a far better job than the generals. He has provided support for the far right, increasing racial tensions.

Remember last time that happened? Kinda didn't end well...

Quin_Dub

everlast75 wrote: »

Unfortunately, Flake by name, flake by nature.

If I had a euro for every time he said he disapproved of Trump's actions and didn't do anything about it, I would be one rich man.

Fingers crossed that he has finally grown a spine though...

Penn wrote: »

The only real possibility for him growing a spine is the fact that he's not seeking re-election. He's out the door in a few weeks regardless. If ever there was a time for him to actually do something significant like this and have his actions match his words, it's now.

The rumours are that Flake is considering a 2020 run against Trump..

If that's true then which is going to play better for him?

Be the guy that stood up to Trump or be the guy that maybe costs the GOP their ability to pick a truly Right wing Scotus seat.

Rjd2

jooksavage wrote: »

I think this Kavanaugh thing has gone too big for them to push on with the vote now. I'd never put too much stock in Flake but there aren't too many negative consequences for him here if he puts the brakes on this: Kavanaugh is a remarkably unpopular nominee. Flake's not running again anyway and it will be his last chance to exact a bit of McCain-style revenge on Trump.

Even if it Flake lives up to his name and Kavanaghs nomination makes it's way to a vote, Collins and Murkowski (already under tremendous pressure from Native Alaskans to reject Kavanaugh) would do irrevocable damage to their unique-selling-points as "moderate" Rs by voting for him. These two insisted on Al Franken's resignation. They have no cover here. This is one of those career defining votes. If one of them votes against Kavanaugh, the other would have to follow suit. If two Rs voted against him, that should give cover for every D to vote against him.

Agreed. The expression "this isn't a hill worth dying on" is really spot on here. Gorsuch was a really popular nomination across all conservative areas, Kavanaugh I never seen much enthusiasm from any area of conservatism. He was respected but that was it. The votes simply are not there and in the unlikely event they are, if he was to be found guilty of this assault, then imagine the fall out....

I assume Mc Connell will be telling him to drop out in the next few days and he might try to ram through kethledge or hardiman who he wanted in the first place as he felt they were easier to get through. He has said before the votes are not there for Barrett so conservatives hoping for the culture war that would ensure need to slow down.


I'd also assume Mitch is begging Trump to not talk about this, again we don't know if he is innocent or guilty, but the last thing the accuser, Kavanaugh or anyone needs is that oaf tweeting bollocks about such a complicated case.

Rjd2

Quin_Dub wrote: »

The rumours are that Flake is considering a 2020 run against Trump..

If that's true then which is going to play better for him?

Be the guy that stood up to Trump or be the guy that maybe costs the GOP their ability to pick a truly Right wing Scotus seat.

Whoever told Flake he has a chance of becoming president must be doing a banter. Where on earth is his base? The man is loathed by the right and left for constantly flipping on issues. He pretty much always votes for Trump while still grifting about how he stands up to him:pac:

That might be up there in stupidity as Bill Kristol supposedly considering a run in 2020:P

Leroy42

Or indeed Trump running in 2016!

everlast75

Leroy42 wrote: »

Or indeed Trump running in 2016!

To be fair, there is no indication the Russians will support Flake..

everlast75

You know the sh1t gets real when this is what KAH has to say about it..


Kellyanne Conway on Fox: Kavanugh accuser Christine Blasey Ford "should not be ignored and should not be insulted. She should be heard."


Granted - that is what a normal, human response should be. But this is KAH and so I for one, am stunned..

Rjd2

Leroy42 wrote: »

Or indeed Trump running in 2016!

Trump you can see the appeal even if you find his politics loathsome. Bill Kristol or Jeff Flake are just awful and they don't get a pass because they say mean things about Trump.

I do think Trump been challenged in a primary is the way to go for the republicans, but they need to find someone who actually might connect with people. Those two would probably do more harm than good tbh.