Donald Trump presidency discussion thread V

PopePalpatine

B0jangles wrote: »

He started young.

Apparently he was infuriated by how his highschool had announcements in english and spanish, had days celebrating other cultures and apparently that led him to where he is today.

https://www.latimes.com/politics/la-na-pol-trump-speechwriter-santamonica-20170117-story.html

He would've done less damage had he become a school shooter like so many other far-/alt-right oxygen thieves.

Itssoeasy

Just because the mueller report is out doesn’t mean mueller is finished. It looks like new court fillings have dropped. General Michael Flynn has provided good evidence about discussions within the campaign about the Wikileaks leaks and apparently these are discussions that only some were privy to. Also, he has voicemails of people within the administration and Congress before and after his guilty plea. I mean ffs how is this okay.

aloyisious

There may be an ongoing White House staff attempt to rattle Don on the activities of John Bolton, CNN is running a story [allegedly from W/H insiders] to the effect that Don is irritated with John's activities in the belief John is too hawklike and may be trying to steer the ship that way. Also that Don has sent a direct message to Iran "call me". Then again some-one may be running a dezinformatsiya operation against the media hoping to throw them into disarray again, its hard to say what's true and what's false now with some much up for grabs on Don suddenly.

So far there has been no mention of the public to-ing and fro-ing worldwide by Secretary Pompeo [possibly in attempts to pull the irons from the fire] irritating Don in a similar way. Hopefully that may be a good sign but I can't forget he is one of Don's appointees and easily disposable.

TomOnBoard

aloyisious wrote: »

There may be an ongoing White House staff attempt to rattle Don on the activities of John Bolton, CNN is running a story [allegedly from W/H insiders] to the effect that Don is irritated with John's activities in the belief John is too hawklike and may be trying to steer the ship that way. Also that Don has sent a direct message to Iran "call me". Then again some-one may be running a dezinformatsiya operation against the media hoping to throw them into disarray again, its hard to say what's true and what's false now with some much up for grabs on Don suddenly.

So far there has been no mention of the public to-ing and fro-ing worldwide by Secretary Pompeo [possibly in attempts to pull the irons from the fire] irritating Don in a similar way. Hopefully that may be a good sign but I can't forget he is one of Don's appointees and easily disposable.

Despite how depressed I would be about the Man and his many faults as Mr President,I do actually believe that when Donnie says on TV to "Call Me" and does the dialling mime, he is actually trying to get the Islamic protagonist to ACTUALLY call him.

That's what he knows... I actually believe that Iran could make huge strides if they did actually call him and do the whole lik-o-rice-r-ego routine.... If they can reel him in as a 'bro', he'll ignore all that has gone before.

Sorry abt all the "actually" usage...

mcmoustache

Itssoeasy wrote: »

Just because the mueller report is out doesn’t mean mueller is finished. It looks like new court fillings have dropped. General Michael Flynn has provided good evidence about discussions within the campaign about the Wikileaks leaks and apparently these are discussions that only some were privy to. Also, he has voicemails of people within the administration and Congress before and after his guilty plea. I mean ffs how is this okay.

everlast75

mcmoustache wrote: »

Oh lordy, there are tapes.

That obstruction pile is getting mighty high. Add to this the letter from WH stating that they will not comply with Congress subpoenas (an article of impeachment against Nixon)

everlast75

https://twitter.com/nycsouthpaw/status/1129152397388013569?s=19

Mark that date in the diary and wait for the "Mike Flynn was only a covfefe boy" line of defense..

Rjd2

Manic Moran wrote: »

I don’t recall it getting linked here, but there was an interesting article in The Atlantic about Bolton and his motivations. It’s long, but the good stuff is rarely short.

https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2019/04/john-bolton-trump-national-security-adviser/583246/

.

Bolton is the worst of the worst. A wretched warmonger who looks at Venezuela and Iran and hopes for some final nation building before he retires.

Trump has done very little right since appointed, but his work with the neocon ghouls really does stick out. Trash like Kristol and Boot etc who have shown no remorse for Iraq and in Kristols case yearn for regime change in China are now resistance heroes because they drop non stop sassy tweets on Trump.:rolleyes:

Trump has stacked his cabinet with horrors like Bolton, Pompeo and somehow made Nikki Hailey an Israeli bloodthirsty neocon stooge a front runner for 2024.

I'd like to see the Republican party move towards a more Libertarian type party once Trump ****s off. Ideally people like Amash, Massie and even Paul who are far from perfect fronting it, rather than Nativists like Trump or war mongers like Hailey, but alas that seems unlikely.

Tom Cotton seems favored to challenge Hailey in 2024, a man who the gruesome twosome Bill Kristol and Anne Coulter like. Dismal.


EDIT

Good article on how Trump somehow has made the neocons like Bolton so relevant in 2019.


https://www.nybooks.com/daily/2019/01/02/return-of-the-neocons/

TomOnBoard

So, Chelsea Manning has been sent back to prison for failing to honour a Grand Jury subpoena in relation to our friend Julian Assange's activities. After 30 days a $500 per day fine will be levied, followed by a $1,000 a day escalation in the event of continued non-compliance.

Notwithstanding the apparently punitive elements of these imprisonment(s) / fines when contempt actions are supposed to be solely coercive rather than punitive, why would someone in this situation not simply turn up and plead the fifth every time a question is asked? Surely that would resolve the matter while protecting oneself from legal peril?

Or is it the case that someone wants to be a victim and flaunt their victimhood?

In any event, without Manning's incriminating testimony, it's hard to see Assange being convicted of the currently indicted charges. And, of course if he is extradited, the US authorities must agree that no additional charges beyond those presented to a UK extradition hearing can be brought. So, they 're clearly going 'All-In' on Manning's testimony.

It sounds like a major embarrassment for US government efforts to make Assange pay for his sins may be in the offing. I can see Pompeo dropping into the Swedish Prosecutors office on his way to/from the Kremlin to try and get the old sexual assault charges re-invigorated so that Julian will have another legal.hurdle to deal with to prevent his freedom once his UK incarceration is over. That'll buy them some time to deal with Manning's 'intransigence'..

How long could they actually hold someone on that contempt charge?

everlast75

TomOnBoard wrote: »

How long could they actually hold someone on that contempt charge?

Presuming that's not a rhetorical question, the answer is indefinitely. They can stay in prison until they "purge" their contempt (do what their told) or else serve enough time do that the Court believes they were punished enough for disobeying the Court.

aloyisious

TomOnBoard wrote: »

So, Chelsea Manning has been sent back to prison for failing to honour a Grand Jury subpoena in relation to our friend Julian Assange's activities. After 30 days a $500 per day fine will be levied, followed by a $1,000 a day escalation in the event of continued non-compliance.

Notwithstanding the apparently punitive elements of these imprisonment(s) / fines when contempt actions are supposed to be solely coercive rather than punitive, why would someone in this situation not simply turn up and plead the fifth every time a question is asked? Surely that would resolve the matter while protecting oneself from legal peril?

Or is it the case that someone wants to be a victim and flaunt their victimhood?

In any event, without Manning's incriminating testimony, it's hard to see Assange being convicted of the currently indicted charges. And, of course if he is extradited, the US authorities must agree that no additional charges beyond those presented to a UK extradition hearing can be brought. So, they 're clearly going 'All-In' on Manning's testimony.

It sounds like a major embarrassment for US government efforts to make Assange pay for his sins may be in the offing. I can see Pompeo dropping into the Swedish Prosecutors office on his way to/from the Kremlin to try and get the old sexual assault charges re-invigorated so that Julian will have another legal.hurdle to deal with to prevent his freedom once his UK incarceration is over. That'll buy them some time to deal with Manning's 'intransigence'..

How long could they actually hold someone on that contempt charge?

There was a radio news report [I think RTE] 3 days ago that the Swedes had re-opened the rape allegations investigation. https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2019/05/13/sweden-reopens-rape-case-against-julian-assange/

everlast75

"The boiling frog is a fable describing a frog being slowly boiled alive. The premise is that if a frog is put suddenly into boiling water, it will jump out, but if the frog is put in tepid water which is then brought to a boil slowly, it will not perceive the danger and will be cooked to death."

It appears that taking this as a metaphor, it is true.

Over the last two or so years, we (or certainly I) have to remind ourselves of how crazy 45 is acting, and how outrageous he has become, otherwise you become numbed to it all.

We have heard him over time go from slating a war veteran, to another war hero family to past presidents, denegrate women, repeatedly fail to properly condemn white nationalists, go from insulting some of the media to insulting all of the media, despite bombs being sent to some outlets, insult judges who didn't rule in his favour, accuse them of bias, suggest that some judges were not necessary to certain legal processes, go from calling some of those at the FBI "scum", accuse them of spying, to plotting a coup, to then accuse them of treason!

When you look back at the arc, it truly is unbelievable in the literal sense.

The rhetoric is now so patently dangerous yet, to date, nothing tangible has been done about it.

I've used a different analogy before. Trump is like a kid, edging a glass slowly off the edge of a table. Every time it moves, the Republicans say "well, he hasn't pushed it off the table, so what's the problem?" Everyone can see what's going to happen, where that glass is going to end up and the fact that it can't be put back together once it's smashed, but the Republicans are not doing anything to stop him.

listermint

Manic Moran wrote: »

Problem is i’m not sure that Yemeni militants are capable of a limpet mine attack. When the technique first came into prominence in WW2, it was considered to be a special forces operation, and the folks who took on the jobs were very highly trained and equipped with specialist gear. These days, any professional navy can likely do it, so that includes Iran, but I don’t think Yemen would be on that list.

The problem with a narrative is that people fall for it. Even smart people.

The US has it out for Iran under the remit of a single individuals instructions . Bolton

The fact you fall for the narrative manic is really a reflection on you.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/USS_Cole_bombing


There isn't a hole leap between Yemenis blowing a hole in the side of a warships to attaching a bomb magnetically to the side. That you think there is , is perplexing. This bomb was twenty years ago ... Did you forget ? It's kinda a big deal in American forces.

4068ac1elhodqr

Since the demise of Cheney, is it fair to say that Bolton is now currently the most dangerous person on the planet.

He looks like a harmless charachter from the boardgame 'Guess Who', but is posturing towards endtimes phrophecy (another subject altogether),
That likely involves a great Western coalition, against another coalition featuring Iran at the helm.

Throw in the the (already happened) destruction of Damascus, the new embassy over in Isr and so on.

Manic Moran

everlast75 wrote: »

Presuming that's not a rhetorical question, the answer is indefinitely. They can stay in prison until they "purge" their contempt (do what their told) or else serve enough time do that the Court believes they were punished enough for disobeying the Court.

in this case, it's until the end of the investigation, at which point there is no need to continue to co-erce anything.

listermint wrote: »

There isn't a hole leap between Yemenis blowing a hole in the side of a warships to attaching a bomb magnetically to the side. That you think there is , is perplexing. This bomb was twenty years ago ... Did you forget ? It's kinda a big deal in American forces.

There is quite a significant leap between someone sailing a skiff up to the side of a boat, visible and unchallenged, and a possible frogman attack, or at least, not spotted..

everlast75

https://twitter.com/justinamash/status/1129831615952236546?s=19

This is a link to a thread of tweets from a Republican member of Congress. He is the first to call for trump's impeachment and he sets out the findings of the report over the course of those tweets. He also accuses other Republicans of not reading the report (which is the kindest interpretation for the reasons behind their silence).

It could be a blip. It could also be the start of other Republicans stating facts about what the report contains and what the appropriate actions are.

listermint

Manic Moran wrote: »

in this case, it's until the end of the investigation, at which point there is no need to continue to co-erce anything.



There is quite a significant leap between someone sailing a skiff up to the side of a boat, visible and unchallenged, and a possible frogman attack, or at least, not spotted..

No their really isn't.

The first one was a warship

The second is unguarded vessels


If you choose not to see what's in front of you fine. But I've long since know you've been more than willing to turn a blind eye to this sort of posturing from trump .

The US is an absurd mess an incredibly divided nation and it will struggle to come back from this vast separation that your party had created .

By party I mean the republicans because let's not split hairs

Itssoeasy

So I see Trump is just rewriting history with regards to Michael Flynn. He tweeted out that he couldn't have posssibly known there were issues with Flynn and he wasn't told. This is despite the fact that then president Obama, Chris Christie, and acting AG sally Yates all told him or his campaign about the issues around Flynn between the election win in November and just after inauguration. So in a period of just over three months three people made him or his campaign aware of the issues and he still made him his national security advisor. Joke shop Ted.

nice_guy80

Trump is already bumping up his conservative vote in terms of his approval of banning abortion.

He's already got the federal courts and supreme court stocked with GOP judges

PropJoe10

Itssoeasy wrote: »

So I see Trump is just rewriting history with regards to Michael Flynn. He tweeted out that he couldn't have posssibly known there were issues with Flynn and he wasn't told. This is despite the fact that then president Obama, Chris Christie, and acting AG sally Yates all told him or his campaign about the issues around Flynn between the election win in November and just after inauguration. So in a period of just over three months three people made him or his campaign aware of the issues and he still made him his national security advisor. Joke shop Ted.

Flynn himself actually warned Trump about hiring Flynn for that role. Don't forget that detail!

aloyisious

nice_guy80 wrote: »

Trump is already bumping up his conservative vote in terms of his approval of banning abortion.

He's already got the federal courts and supreme court stocked with GOP judges

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2019/05/19/donald-trump-says-favour-abortion-laws-exceptions-rape-incest/

Also this - https://www.thejournal.ie/donald-trump-abortion-irish-groups-2691568-Mar2016/ in Journal.ie

followed by his tweet below in same journal.

Donald J. Trump
✔
@realDonaldTrump


As most people know, and for those who would like to know, I am strongly Pro-Life, with the three exceptions - Rape, Incest and protecting the Life of the mother - the same position taken by Ronald Reagan. We have come very far in the last two years with 105 wonderful new.....

67.1K
4:37 AM - May 19, 2019
Twitter Ads info and privacy

25.3K people are talking about this

He does have a way to go yet with some republicans though. I'd say Missouri Republican State Representative Barry Hovis probably asked himself did I really say "date rapes were consensual rapes". https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2019/05/17/gop-lawmaker-used-phrase-consensual-rape-during-abortion-debate-he-says-he-misspoke/

Manic Moran

listermint wrote: »

No their really isn't.

The first one was a warship

The second is unguarded vessels

Yes, it was a warship. At anchor, in what was considered to be a friendly port, with specific rules to not shoot unless shot at first. To the point that after the first explosion, a sentry was instructed not to shoot at a second boat which seemed to be a threat.

There is a difference between an audacious attack such as that on Cole, which required as near to zero technical skill as makes no difference, but a lot of balls, and a technically difficult covert attack on a moving vessel, armed or not.

listermint

Manic Moran wrote: »

Yes, it was a warship. At anchor, in what was considered to be a friendly port, with specific rules to not shoot unless shot at first. To the point that after the first explosion, a sentry was instructed not to shoot at a second boat which seemed to be a threat.

There is a difference between an audacious attack such as that on Cole, which required as near to zero technical skill as makes no difference, but a lot of balls, and a technically difficult covert attack on a moving vessel, armed or not.

No there isn't. Enough of this guff.

Placing a mine in the side of a big metal vessel can be done by anyone with rudimentary tools

Your trying to make it more sophisticated so it suits the narrative .

The increased aggression trope that had been rolled out by the White House has been called out as false by the british within the same day it was announced.

Stop embarrassing yourself as an Irish man falling for this crap. Happily frog march yourself into another false war like Iraq. Ridiculous

rossie1977

nice_guy80 wrote: »

Trump is already bumping up his conservative vote in terms of his approval of banning abortion.

He's already got the federal courts and supreme court stocked with GOP judges

Regardless removing something written into law is extremely difficult. ACA exists despite Trump's best efforts to destroy it (something more popular than ever btw)

Funny to hear Trump now saying he is pro life when 15-20 years ago he was pro choice. As someone said the other day on here he was voted in claiming to be an outsider and became a run of the mill republican in office.. albeit one with a big mouth who can't stop saying stupid stuff on twitter

Timberrrrrrrr

So he's now rattling the sabre more at Iran

https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/1130207891049332737?s=19

This is the same man who was saying Obama would start a war with Iran to get re-elected.

He is so transparent at this stage.

Leroy42

I love the fact that the GOP and those pushing for war are using the intelligence services as a basis for why it is so important.

Trump, and these people, have been slating the very same services for the last 2+ years. Trump even sided with the lying Putin over them in a public press conference.

How can they, and the US people, possibly have any faith in these very same services when Trump is still banging the drum that they tried to spy on him.

I recently watched a documentary series on Vietnam, a war I had only passing knowledge in and most of it driven by films. Anyhoo, the closing part said that the only good thing that could come out of the war, from a US perspective, was that they would never make the same mistakes again. That they already did in relation to Afghanistan and Iraq is bad enough, that they are pushing so hard to do it another time is simply crazy.

That you will know how so many rationale US citizens jumping on board the crazy train is even more of a worry.

As the earlier poster said, it is so transparent at this stage is is incredible that anyone takes it seriously.

Stallingrad

Timberrrrrrrr wrote: »

So he's now rattling the sabre more at Iran

https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/1130207891049332737?s=19

This is the same man who was saying Obama would start a war with Iran to get re-elected.

He is so transparent at this stage.

The NK playbook, make a lot of noise, make some threats, then set up talks, get some snaps, stroke the ego, do nothing.

pixelburp

Thing is, and I do not speak as an expert on the Middle East, Iran is not some wobbly or unstable tinpot country needing a push. They're a canny, mature democracy with a solid army and infrastructure, and I believe a "rugged" geography that'd make the logistics of an invasion difficult.

So to me, Iran, if they play things right diplomatically can come out of this the rational peacemaker.

Plus , this scenario is presumably where Trump's chickens come home to roost: the antagonism and ostracizing of former allies surely ensures the EU et al won't be running to support the admin. in this kerfuffle.

dinorebel

pixelburp wrote: »

Thing is, and I do not speak as an expert on the Middle East, Iran is not some wobbly or unstable tinpot country needing a push. They're a canny, mature democracy with a solid army and infrastructure, and I believe a "rugged" geography that'd make the logistics of an invasion difficult.

So to me, Iran, if they play things right diplomatically can come out of this the rational peacemaker.

Plus , this scenario is presumably where Trump's chickens come home to roost: the antagonism and ostracizing of former allies surely ensures the EU et al won't be running to support the admin. in this kerfuffle.

Bit of a stretch more of a Theocracy.

Leroy42

dinorebel wrote: »

Bit of a stretch more of a Theocracy.

I think he was talking about Iran rather than the US!