Donald Trump presidency discussion thread V

duploelabs

everlast75 wrote: »

My problem with Barr...

1) wrote memo on executive power to get the job
2) found out 3 weeks before report no charges recommended
3) made the finding that there was no obstruction
4) that he briefed the White house
5) enabling the WH to steal the March on the report release and prep their "rebuttal"
6) has not briefed Congress
7) he refused to deny the claim that the Mueller report was a witch hunt
8) used the term spying in reference to the US intelligence services investigation into Russian interference
9) refuses to go to Court to obtain release of grand jury material
10) wrote summary providing DJT with claim of vindication
11) didn't release summaries which were written by the SC team which were ready for public consumption
12) refuses to give all materials to the intelligence committee in a timely fashion
13) times release of redacted report on Thursday before Congress breaks.

Have i missed any?

A history of pardons and 'nothing to see here' in previous appointments?

Midlife

RIGOLO wrote: »

House Democrats Punt on Budget Resolution, Turning Instead to Spending Increases
https://www.nytimes.com/2019/04/02/us/politics/democrats-budget-spending-caps.html



So the Trump administration released their budget blueprint last month, and the House Democrats under Nancy Pelosi (Nancy who on Monday jokingly remarked at the London School of Economics that a glass of water with a D on it could win her district) have failed to agree on even a budget blueprint outline .

Democrats are so disorganised and ripped apart by oppossing fractions that they cant even agree on a budget proposal .



And to claim an Executive Order means didly squat... well that just exposes a lack of understanding of the power invested in the triple branches of US Government, Executive, Legislative and Judicial



That was her job back in 2010 , and she blew it then.


Pelosi took over the House in 2007 after the Dems gained 30 seats , but she lost it in 2010 midterm losing 63 seats.
So not only did she lose the 30 seats they gained , she also lost an additional 33 seats ... thats some achievement.

Its a free country your welcome to put your faith in a 81 year old to keep the house in 2020 .

This isn't WWF Rigolo.

It's not Pelosi vrs Trump on an ongoing basis. You don't need to create enemies to rail against.

Someone basically said that the government shutdown went Pelosi's way and it did. Mainly because Trumop said on TV that he owned the shutdown, it ended up being his shutdown and eventually when he realised he couldn't win, he caved.

Now that's just a statement of fact.

Even on r:/thedonald, they said it was only temporary and on the 15th of Feb Trump would hammer it home unless his demands were met.

That came and went without any fuss.

So perhaps you can explain how Trump won the shutdown. Nothing got done, his ratings bombed, former allies in the right wing media turned against him.

Surely you can recognise that by believing in Unicorns, it's hard to take you seriously the rest of the time.

Brian?

RIGOLO wrote: »

House Democrats Punt on Budget Resolution, Turning Instead to Spending Increases
https://www.nytimes.com/2019/04/02/us/politics/democrats-budget-spending-caps.html



So the Trump administration released their budget blueprint last month, and the House Democrats under Nancy Pelosi (Nancy who on Monday jokingly remarked at the London School of Economics that a glass of water with a D on it could win her district) have failed to agree on even a budget blueprint outline .

Democrats are so disorganised and ripped apart by oppossing fractions that they cant even agree on a budget proposal .



And to claim an Executive Order means didly squat... well that just exposes a lack of understanding of the power invested in the triple branches of US Government, Executive, Legislative and Judicial



That was her job back in 2010 , and she blew it then.


Pelosi took over the House in 2007 after the Dems gained 30 seats , but she lost it in 2010 midterm losing 63 seats.
So not only did she lose the 30 seats they gained , she also lost an additional 33 seats ... thats some achievement.

Its a free country your welcome to put your faith in a 81 year old to keep the house in 2020 .

The Dems rejected the he blueprint because it was a joke. Trump knew it would be rejected and sent it anyway to score points.

hill16bhoy

Trump has vetoed a bill to withdraw US participation in Saudi Arabia's barbaric war in Yemen.

So much for so called "non-interventionism" - this is a neo-con regime.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/trump-vetoes-resolution-to-end-us-participation-in-yemens-civil-war/2019/04/16/0fabc312-60a1-11e9-bfad-36a7eb36cb60_story.html?utm_term=.55f3d376e815

hill16bhoy

everlast75 wrote: »

My problem with Barr...

1) wrote memo on executive power to get the job
2) found out 3 weeks before report no charges recommended
3) made the finding that there was no obstruction
4) that he briefed the White house
5) enabling the WH to steal the March on the report release and prep their "rebuttal"
6) has not briefed Congress
7) he refused to deny the claim that the Mueller report was a witch hunt
8) used the term spying in reference to the US intelligence services investigation into Russian interference
9) refuses to go to Court to obtain release of grand jury material
10) wrote summary providing DJT with claim of vindication
11) didn't release summaries which were written by the SC team which were ready for public consumption
12) refuses to give all materials to the intelligence committee in a timely fashion
13) times release of redacted report on Thursday before Congress breaks.

Have i missed any?

Barr has a proven history of misleading Congress and gross misrepresentation in legal summaries.

https://www.justsecurity.org/63635/barrs-playbook-he-misled-congress-when-omitting-parts-of-justice-dept-memo-in-1989/

And as Attorney General he was involved in the cover up over Iran-Contra.

https://www.npr.org/2019/01/14/684553791/william-barr-supported-pardons-in-an-earlier-d-c-witch-hunt-iran-contra

He has proven form going back decades of being a partisan whitewasher. That's exactly why he was hired.

derb12

Just watching Bernie Sanders on a Fox News town hall yesterday evening. I’m only half way through but it is a joy to watch!
Not sure if Bernie is really my number 1 choice for the dems nomination but he is doing phenomenally well and is getting a great reception.
No wonder trump is doing his nut!!

RIGOLO

Midlife wrote: »

This isn't WWF Rigolo.

It's not Pelosi vrs Trump on an ongoing basis. You don't need to create enemies to rail against.

Someone basically said that the government shutdown went Pelosi's way and it did. Mainly because Trumop said on TV that he owned the shutdown, it ended up being his shutdown and eventually when he realised he couldn't win, he caved.

Now that's just a statement of fact.

Even on r:/thedonald, they said it was only temporary and on the 15th of Feb Trump would hammer it home unless his demands were met.

That came and went without any fuss.

So perhaps you can explain how Trump won the shutdown. Nothing got done, his ratings bombed, former allies in the right wing media turned against him.

Surely you can recognise that by believing in Unicorns, it's hard to take you seriously the rest of the time.

Hardly a loss .
Trump pushed the shutdown to get funding for the wall.

When that didnt work he went with an EO.

The objective was to get funding for the wall... EO 13767 would indicate that that objective is now in progress and moving thru the process.

The Dems, anti-Trumpers and the left are celebrating the shutdown as a win for Nancy .

The right, Trump administration supporters , and Republicans are celebrating getting an EO in place for the wall, a fantastic State Of The Union address delivered in the House and the memory of Adam Schiffs face as he got off the bus.
Whats not to celebrate ?

Gbear

hill16bhoy wrote: »

Trump has vetoed a bill to withdraw US participation in Saudi Arabia's barbaric war in Yemen.

So much for so called "non-interventionism" - this is a neo-con regime.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/trump-vetoes-resolution-to-end-us-participation-in-yemens-civil-war/2019/04/16/0fabc312-60a1-11e9-bfad-36a7eb36cb60_story.html?utm_term=.55f3d376e815

I'm not sure about neo con but as with Khashoggi, Trump's interest in this isn't ideological but financial, both in his and his family's ties to the Saudis.

Leroy42

Even your own lines show it was a loss

Trump pushed the shutdown to get funding for the wall. When that didn't work....

So effectively Trump shut down the government, put massive financial strain on many US workers, caused the shutdown of many US parks so that people couldn't enjoy them and all for what?

So that he could ultimately have to crawl back to Congress with his tail between his legs and produce on EO to try to paint himself as not the loser he was. It seems that for posters such as Rigolo it has worked.

The Shutdown was a win for nobody, Pelosi just understood Trump and made sure that he couldn't bully Congress, or the American people, into giving billions on US$ to him since his won party had failed to agree to it. It was a win for the system of governance is the US.

Trump had already lost to the GOP, but felt he could bully Pelosi in a way that he hadn't been able to do with the GOP. So he stamped his feet and had a tantrum which simply made him look foolish, naive and uncaring. You always seem to airbrush the fact that Trump couldn't get the funding for the wall even with the GOP had full control and that the DNC are the sole people blocking it.

RIGOLO

Brian? wrote: »

The Dems rejected the he blueprint because it was a joke. Trump knew it would be rejected and sent it anyway to score points.

That doesnt sound like a very informed and comprehensive analysis on the macro and micro socio economic impact of the Trump Administration Budget blueprint proposal that was released in March.

Can to expand any further than 'it was a joke ' , its been freely available for over a month. Maybe flesh out some details or issues with it, or did ' it was a joke ' cover it for you.

Midlife

RIGOLO wrote: »

Hardly a loss .
Trump pushed the shutdown to get funding for the wall.

When that didnt work he went with an EO.

The objective was to get funding for the wall... EO 13767 would indicate that that objective is now in progress and moving thru the process.

The Dems, anti-Trumpers and the left are celebrating the shutdown as a win for Nancy .

The right, Trump administration supporters , and Republicans are celebrating getting an EO in place for the wall, a fantastic State Of The Union address delivered in the House and the memory of Adam Schiffs face as he got off the bus.
Whats not to celebrate ?

Can you maybe explain why he didn't just build the wall with an EO in the first place? Why did he shut the government down over funds for a wall which you claim he just had to sign a piece of paper to achieve

I mean in the state of the Union address you're talking about Trump said this

"Now, Republicans and Democrats must join forces again to confront an urgent national crisis. Congress has 10 days left to pass a bill that will fund our government, protect our homeland, and secure our Southern Border."

But none of that matters because?

I mean as far as I can see the EO simply says...

'It is the policy of the executive branch to secure the southern border of the United States through the immediate construction of a physical wall on the southern border'

Where's the 20 odd billion coming from Rigolo?

Midlife

Leroy42 wrote: »

Trump had already lost to the GOP, but felt he could bully Pelosi in a way that he hadn't been able to do with the GOP. So he stamped his feet and had a tantrum which simply made him look foolish, naive and uncaring. You always seem to airbrush the fact that Trump couldn't get the funding for the wall even with the GOP had full control and that the DNC are the sole people blocking it.

That's the comical thing.

For some it's all about Pelosi and 'the look on Schiff's face'.

Trump couldn't even get the wall through his own party.

RIGOLO

Midlife wrote: »

Can you maybe explain why he didn't just build the wall with an EO in the first place? Why did he shut the government down over funds for a wall which you claim he just had to sign a piece of paper to achieve

I mean in the state of the Union address you're talking about Trump said this

"Now, Republicans and Democrats must join forces again to confront an urgent national crisis. Congress has 10 days left to pass a bill that will fund our government, protect our homeland, and secure our Southern Border."

But none of that matters because?

I mean as far as I can see the EO simply says...

'It is the policy of the executive branch to secure the southern border of the United States through the immediate construction of a physical wall on the southern border'

Where's the 20 odd billion coming from Rigolo?

Ive probably already said it 10 times on here, but lets go again .

The Democrats have already paid for the wall.


That huge budget increase for the Military that the Democrats approved in the budget last year,

House And Senate Democrats Vote Overwhelmingly For $716 Billion Military Budget

https://www.forbes.com/sites/eriksherman/2018/06/20/house-and-senate-democrats-vote-68-percent-and-85-percent-for-massive-military-spending/#43f2e7445101

well they have already shifted some of it to build the wall.

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2019/03/26/pentagon-authorises-1bn-transfer-wall-funding-first-national/

Acting Pentagon chief Patrick Shanahan has authorised $1 billion (£757 million) to build part of the wall sought by Donald Trump along the US-Mexico border, the first funds designated for the project under the president's emergency declaration.

It was a long term strategy , a great piece of deal making , play the long game, working thru obstacles and setbacks but constantly moving forward in achieving your objectives, pretty much the MO of Trump and the Trump Administration since he announced his Presidential run in 2015

Your wondering where 20 billion will come from, Pentagon has 700 billion plus from last year to play with, plus another 750+ billion coming their way this year.

Its the power of an EO, some anti-Trumpers say they dont mean

Originally Posted by rossie1977
EO means diddly squat.'d

1 billion dollars in redirected funding to build the wall says they make a whole lot of difference..

Leroy42

So the shutdown was why exactly? According to Rigolo, Trump had the budget all the time, the long game, and so the question needs to be asked why even get into the fight?

A fight he lost and even had Fox News complaining about him and previous backers like Anne Coulter openly mocking him.

For something he already had?

RIGOLO

Leroy42 wrote: »

So the shutdown was why exactly? According to Rigolo, Trump had the budget all the time, the long game, and so the question needs to be asked why even get into the fight?

A fight he lost and even had Fox News complaining about him and previous backers like Anne Coulter openly mocking him.

For something he already had?

Trump administration was following due process on getting he wall funding.

Request funding, request funding again, requesting funding again, threaten a shutdown, request funding again, instigate the shutdown , request funding again, prolong the shutdown, request funding .. ok times up .

Execute the EO, Pentagon shifts 1 billion (less than 0.2% of the huge Defense budget the Dems approved) to start the program.. move on job down .

Can you imagine the meltdown on the left if he went direct to the EO, but after exhausting all other channels and demonstrating a real intent to go the House route , he was left with no option but the EO.

So the history has already been written on this, Trump administration followed all other channels, and was left with no option and among other wins , all those who voted NO to the funding will have to face their electorate on it.

You seem more concerned about Ann Coulters comments than me. Her comments dont bother me.

The anti-Trumpers keep touting this as a loss.


SOTU Address delivered in the house
EO issued on wall
Pentagon Funding already being re-directed to build the wall
Many Trump voters and supporters appreciate the efforts and inroads made on another campaign policy
Some modrates may come round to the idea
Adam Schiff face after dismounting the bus
Democrats take over the House and spend the first 6 weeks twiddling their thumbs whilst the shutdown is in place

I hope Trump has a few more losses like this ... they are 'pure gold'

Timberrrrrrrr

RIGOLO wrote: »

Trump administration was following due process on getting he wall funding.

Request funding, request funding again, requesting funding again, threaten a shutdown, request funding again, instigate the shutdown , request funding again, prolong the shutdown, request funding .. ok times up .

Execute the EO, Pentagon shifts 1 billion (less than 0.2% of the huge Defense budget the Dems approved) to start the program.. move on job down .

Can you imagine the meltdown on the left if he went direct to the EO, but after exhausting all other channels and demonstrating a real intent to go the House route , he was left with no option but the EO.

So the history has already been written on this, Trump administration followed all other channels, and was left with no option and among other wins , all those who voted NO to the funding will have to face their electorate on it.

You seem more concerned about Ann Coulters comments than me. Her comments dont bother me.

The anti-Trumpers keep touting this as a loss.


SOTU Address delivered in the house
EO issued on wall
Pentagon Funding already being re-directed to build the wall
Many Trump voters and supporters appreciate the efforts and inroads made on another campaign policy
Some modrates may come round to the idea
Adam Schiff face after dismounting the bus
Democrats take over the House and spend the first 6 weeks twiddling their thumbs whilst the shutdown is in place

I hope Trump has a few more losses like this ... they are 'pure gold'

I thought Mexico was going to pay for it?

Mitch Connor

RIGOLO wrote: »

Trump administration was following due process on getting he wall funding.

Request funding, request funding again, requesting funding again, threaten a shutdown, request funding again, instigate the shutdown , request funding again, prolong the shutdown, request funding .. ok times up .

Execute the EO, Pentagon shifts 1 billion (less than 0.2% of the huge Defense budget the Dems approved) to start the program.. move on job down .

Can you imagine the meltdown on the left if he went direct to the EO, but after exhausting all other channels and demonstrating a real intent to go the House route , he was left with no option but the EO.

So the history has already been written on this, Trump administration followed all other channels, and was left with no option and among other wins , all those who voted NO to the funding will have to face their electorate on it.

You seem more concerned about Ann Coulters comments than me. Her comments dont bother me.

The anti-Trumpers keep touting this as a loss.


SOTU Address delivered in the house
EO issued on wall
Pentagon Funding already being re-directed to build the wall
Many Trump voters and supporters appreciate the efforts and inroads made on another campaign policy
Some modrates may come round to the idea
Adam Schiff face after dismounting the bus
Democrats take over the House and spend the first 6 weeks twiddling their thumbs whilst the shutdown is in place

I hope Trump has a few more losses like this ... they are 'pure gold'

So the funding requests were denied. Is that how you live your life? If you are denied something, keep asking for it, whinging about it, demanding it, lying about it then effectively steal it.

That is your 'due process'?

That is how democracy works, that is how checks and balances work? If you don't get the votes you keep whinging about it and then lie about a national emergency?

Leroy42

So they either had the funding or they didn't.

Your wondering where 20 billion will come from, Pentagon has 700 billion plus from last year to play with, plus another 750+ billion coming their way this year.

So there was no need for the shutdown, Trump could have simply directed that the money already budgeted be spent on the wall. So again, I ask you, why did he order the shutdown? A shutdown that achieved nothing except to cost hundreds of thousands of hard working Americans hardship and stress.

Leroy42

RIGOLO wrote: »

Can to expand any further than 'it was a joke ' , its been freely available for over a month. Maybe flesh out some details or issues with it, or did ' it was a joke ' cover it for you.

RIGOLO wrote: »

I hope Trump has a few more losses like this ... they are 'pure gold'

At least to pretend to be consistent. At the very least let the page turn over before doing exactly what you complain about.

Penn

RIGOLO wrote: »

SOTU Address delivered in the house Only because Pelosi stopped him from being able to do so, forcing Trump to temporarily end the shutdown with an extension of funding in order to be allowed to make the SOTU in the House
EO issued on wall Because the Dems wouldn't give him the 5.7bn he wanted
Pentagon Funding already being re-directed to build the wall Thereby reducing the Pentagon's budget
Many Trump voters and supporters appreciate the efforts and inroads made on another campaign policy Of course they do. They're his supporters.
Some modrates may come round to the idea Many may not. Many might be turned away from him given how disastrous the shutdown was
Adam Schiff face after dismounting the bus Yes, surely a moment that will be written into the history books as one of Trump's greatest achievements. If this is what you consider a win when it comes to politics, you need to re-evaluate what politics is about and how far the level of political discourse has fallen
Democrats take over the House and spend the first 6 weeks twiddling their thumbs whilst the shutdown is in place By not backing down and not giving into Trump's demands, making him look worse as he claimed from the start he'd take responsibility for the shutdown, and showing that they won't be kowtowed by his demands

I hope Trump has a few more losses like this ... they are 'pure gold'

The shutdown was a disaster. Even hardcore Trump supporters don't back Trump on it. Even the GOP didn't want him using EO powers to get some funding because it opens the doors to the Dems doing the same when they're next in power. The shutdown was a total failure on Trump's part and he came out of it looking terribly. Even worse than Adam Schiff getting off a bus (whatever the hell that means, I don't have any idea what you're even referencing there, such was the little impact it made).

mcmoustache

Timberrrrrrrr wrote: »

I thought Mexico was going to pay for it?

If I'm not mistaken, Trump himself said so multiple times at multiple rallies. It was a major part of his platform. This was only a few years ago. I'm amazed that people have forgotten.

Penn

mcmoustache wrote: »

If I'm not mistaken, Trump himself said so multiple times at multiple rallies. It was a major part of his platform. This was only a few years ago. I'm amazed that people have forgotten.

He claims he never said they were going to pay directly for it, but rather that they'd pay through tariffs/

Except he totally said numerous times they'd pay directly for it.

Midlife

RIGOLO wrote: »

Ive probably already said it 10 times on here, but lets go again .

The Democrats have already paid for the wall.


That huge budget increase for the Military that the Democrats approved in the budget last year,

House And Senate Democrats Vote Overwhelmingly For $716 Billion Military Budget

https://www.forbes.com/sites/eriksherman/2018/06/20/house-and-senate-democrats-vote-68-percent-and-85-percent-for-massive-military-spending/#43f2e7445101

well they have already shifted some of it to build the wall.

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2019/03/26/pentagon-authorises-1bn-transfer-wall-funding-first-national/



It was a long term strategy , a great piece of deal making , play the long game, working thru obstacles and setbacks but constantly moving forward in achieving your objectives, pretty much the MO of Trump and the Trump Administration since he announced his Presidential run in 2015

Your wondering where 20 billion will come from, Pentagon has 700 billion plus from last year to play with, plus another 750+ billion coming their way this year.

Its the power of an EO, some anti-Trumpers say they dont mean

1 billion dollars in redirected funding to build the wall says they make a whole lot of difference..

Would that be the billion dollars that congress approved in Feb? For 55 miles of fencing?

reg114

Trump stating explicitly Mexico were going to pay for the wall.

https://youtu.be/-yfIxBjOw3o

This article on the CNN website shows the massive increase in cocaine entering the US via planes from Latin America, shows the pointlessness of building a physical monument to Trump's hollow election promises.

https://edition.cnn.com/2019/04/17/americas/venezuela-drug-cocaine-trafficking-intl/index.html

jochenstacker

Midlife wrote: »

Would that be the billion dollars that congress approved in Feb? For 55 miles of fencing?

Isn't it funny how the funding went from 20 bn to 6bn and now it's at 1bn and Trump supporters (well, A Trump supporter) trumpet this as a massive win? Whilst ignoring "Mexico Will Pay For It!" so hard, they could pop a vein any second.
It must be nice living in cloud coocoo land.

TomOnBoard

So, now before the Mueller (redacted in technicolor) is presented to Congress and made public, Rudi Giuliani says Trump's teams of lawyers have prepared a counter-report, currently at some 140 pages that they are whittling down to 35 pages.

Now, if Barr is to be taken at his word, and he hasn't shown the report to the White House, how can a counter-report be written before they see the actual report? Mmmmmm! Makes ya think, doesn't it?

Aaand, if the report shows "no collusion" and " no obstruction", why do the lads need to produce a 'counter- report'? Like, are they going to counter their previous narrative, and show that there's been collusion and/or obstruction, despite Barr's initial so-called summary? Mmmmmm! Makes ya think, doesn't it?

serfboard

TomOnBoard wrote: »

Now, if Barr is to be taken at his word, and he hasn't shown the report to the White House, how can a counter-report be written before they see the actual report? Mmmmmm! Makes ya think, doesn't it?

Barr has a track record that suggests that he should not be taken at his word:

Wikipedia wrote:

Barr was known as a strong defender of presidential power and wrote ... a controversial opinion that the FBI could enter onto foreign soil without the consent of the host government to apprehend fugitives wanted by the United States government for terrorism or drug-trafficking.

Barr declined a congressional request for the full opinion, but instead provided a document that “summarizes the principal conclusions.” Congress subpoenaed the opinion, and its public release after Barr’s departure from the Justice Department showed he had omitted significant findings in the opinion from his summary document.

jobbridge4life

Trump: I will build a beautiful, concrete, tall, solid wall from sea to shining sea and Mexico are going to pay for it.

Trump Supporters: YAY

Trump: I will build a wall/fence/solar panel/see through barrier/plastic/lego/interpretive dance from this small stretch of the border to that small stretch of the border. The American people will pay for this, as well as the unnecessary government shutdown debacle that it took to get me to issue an EO that I could have issued on day one of my presidency.

Trump Supporters: YAY. F them Democrats.

jobbridge4life

reg114 wrote: »

Trump stating explicitly Mexico were going to pay for the wall.

https://youtu.be/-yfIxBjOw3o

This article on the CNN website shows the massive increase in cocaine entering the US via planes from Latin America, shows the pointlessness of building a physical monument to Trump's hollow election promises.

https://edition.cnn.com/2019/04/17/americas/venezuela-drug-cocaine-trafficking-intl/index.html

Never has a man sacrificed more (from others) for the sake of something so pathetic.

And I know it is redundant at this stage, but to reflect on the fact that this wasn't even the produce of his own tiny mind, but an insidious data mining amoral collective provided to him for a price is just violently sick making.

Itssoeasy

Maybe this has been answered earlier today but why did donald Trump have a conversation with pope Francis about the damage to notre dame cathedral ? Does he think it's St. Peter's and in the Vatican and not Paris ? Or is it a question that can be answered by just saying "it's Donald Trump"