Donald Trump presidency discussion thread V

RIGOLO

Igotadose wrote: »

Interesting site here: http://www.doingbusiness.org/en/rankings

World bank on doing business based on various metrics. US is 8th in 'ease of doing business' (Ireland 23rd.) New Zealand leads in most categories except for getting electricity, which isn't surprising. US is *53rd* in starting a business, Ireland 10th.

My conclusions? Ireland's easier to start a business, because in my view, you don't have to worry about providing health care to yourself or your employees, unlike in the US. US is easier to do business, because of less regulation that's been true (versus Ireland) since forever. The regs Trump's removing are either give backs to his wall street or energy industry buddies, or anti-woman (title IX stuff still being debated.)

Its a free country , your entitled and allowed to express your view...

but the Office Of Information and Regulatory Affairs under the Office of Management and Budget f the United States of America would disagree with you ...

Eliminated $23 billion in overall regulatory costs across the government.
12-to-1: Agencies issued 176 deregulatory actions and 14 significant regulatory actions.
57 deregulatory actions were significant. Comparing significant deregulatory to significant regulatory actions yields a ratio of 4 to 1.
In fiscal year 2019, agencies anticipate saving a total of $18 billion in regulatory costs from final rulemakings. This does not include one of the most significant deregulatory rules anticipated in fiscal year 2019, "The Safer Affordable Fuel-Efficient (SAFE) Vehicles Rule for Model Years 2021-2026 Passenger Cars and Light Trucks," which the proposed rule estimates will save between $120 and $340 billion in regulatory costs.

And FORBES would disagree with your assertion that doing business in America has been easier 'forever' .

OBAMA administration left the US with a RECORD BREAKING LIST OF REGULATIONS .
Thankfully for US small and medium business the TRump Administration has met the challenging regulatory mess left by Obama admin and given the US economy a much needed shot of steroids (anabolic or corticoidal tbd)

Obama's Legacy: 2016 Ends With A Record-Shattering Regulatory Rulebook

It's true that the Federal Register is not a great gauge, since it's full of notices and such. But the sheer magnitude of it signals a new era in the Administrative State as opposed to a representative one, and a challenge to new president Donald Trump to do something about a runaway federal government.


We noted here last week that until Obama, ninety-thousand pages was unheard of. Up until this year, the 80,000 page mark shocked, having been passed just three times (in 2010, 2011 and 2015, all by Obama). In fact of the 10 highest-ever counts, Obama holds seven.

https://www.forbes.com/sites/waynecrews/2016/12/30/obamas-legacy-2016-ends-with-a-record-shattering-regulatory-rulebook/#32f7b1b41398

Igotadose

RIGOLO wrote: »

And FORBES would disagree with your assertion that doing business in America has been easier 'forever' .

The OP credited Trump for it being easier to business in the US versus Ireland due to Trump's deregulation. Do you agree?

I assert it's been easier to do business in the US versus Ireland for longer than Trump's been around.

And, my link to the world bank site may put paid to the notion that it's easier to do business in the US than Ireland in many categories, like starting a business is easier in Ireland, probably due to the free healthcare and the social safety net, that is, you can risk failure more readily here, than in the US.

Chips Lovell

Mod Note

Off topic posts deleted. If you've an issue with someone's posts report them and we'll take a look. Discussing other posters on thread is back seat moderation.

Thank you

VicMackey1

Penn wrote: »

A video proven to be fake. Acknowledged, by pretty much everyone at this stage, to be fake. Literally, fake news.

Do you think a President sharing fake and edited videos of a political rival is a good thing? Do you think a President spreading misinformation to the public is a good thing?

I was under the impression that the video Trump posted was not fake? It was just a compilation of stumbles and stutters by Pelosi during a press conference. Was it edited in other ways. pitch changed, slowed down etc. I know the video that Rudy Giuliani shared was edited and slowed down.

Penn

VicMackey1 wrote: »

I was under the impression that the video Trump posted was not fake? It was just a compilation of stumbles and stutters by Pelosi during a press conference. Was it edited in other ways. pitch changed, slowed down etc. I know the video that Rudy Giuliani shared was edited and slowed down.

I thought it was the same video (edited, slowed down etc) posted by both? Open to correction on that though.

everlast75

I heard the comment

"Mueller brought a book to a Twitter fight"

and thought how accurate that is. Its hard to fight propaganda which delights in soundbites.

It boils down to this.

Mueller had the power to investigate the President.
That investigation was impeded.
The result was he could not exonerate the President.
He did not have the power to charge the President.
He listed 10 plus examples of conduct which could be chargeable as Obstruction.
Nearly 1000 prosecutors of both parties and none say Obstruction charges would succeed on anyone but a sitting President.

They are facts.

Time for congress to act.

amandstu

everlast75 wrote: »

I heard the comment

"Mueller brought a book to a Twitter fight"

and thought how accurate that is. Its hard to fight propaganda which delights in soundbites.

It boils down to this.

Mueller had the power to investigate the President.
That investigation was impeded.
The result was he could not exonerate the President.
He did not have the power to charge the President.
He listed 10 plus examples of conduct which could be chargeable as Obstruction.
Nearly 1000 prosecutors of both parties and none say Obstruction charges would succeed on anyone but a sitting President.

They are facts.

Time for congress to act.

So the Dems should initiate impeachment proceedings in the fairly sure knowledge they would fail on account of the Reps in the Senate ?

Historically I agree a failure to (attempt to) impeach would be terrible for US "democracy" but is it better and more realistic to prepare the ground as well as possible for the 2020 elections?

RIGOLO

everlast75 wrote: »

I heard the comment

"Mueller brought a book to a Twitter fight"

and thought how accurate that is. Its hard to fight propaganda which delights in soundbites.

It boils down to this.

Mueller had the power to investigate the President.
That investigation was impeded.
The result was he could not exonerate the President.
He did not have the power to charge the President.
He listed 10 plus examples of conduct which could be chargeable as Obstruction.
Nearly 1000 prosecutors of both parties and none say Obstruction charges would succeed on anyone but a sitting President.

They are facts.

Time for congress to act.

You seem to lack an understanding of the premise of the American judicial system.

INNOCENT UNTIL PROVEN GUILTY.

Prosecutors are not in the business of exonerating. They don't exonerate because the presumption is that you are innocent until proven guilty, and if you cannot be proven guilty, you are presumed to be innocent.

Mueller has betrayed his profession and he knows it, hence the slinking off into the corner , hoping he will be left alone . Some of his comments yesterday were a betrayal of the AMerican judicial system, his legacy is ruined.

In a system where innocence is assumed until guilt is proven, saying you have no confidence that the person you're investigating is innocent is to basically say you're doing things backwards; presuming guilt until you can prove innocence

Congress House of Reps does its job (your words not mine) , and then the Senate gets to do its job, no way theres 60 votes for an impeachment conviction.

everlast75 wrote:

Buckle up. It only gets worse from here.

Trumps never been in a better position.

Supreme Court secured .
Mueller witchhunt - done and dusted
Dem infighting for 2020 has begun
Economy on the up
TRade deals negotiations continue
AG Barr draining the swamp
and numerous small and medium scale programs of the TRump Administration starting to gain traction ..

the only buckling up required is on the left, buckle up for 4 more years ...

Igotadose

amandstu wrote: »

So the Dems should initiate impeachment proceedings in the fairly sure knowledge they would fail on account of the Reps in the Senate ?

Historically I agree a failure to (attempt to) impeach would be terrible for US "democracy" but is it better and more realistic to prepare the ground as well as possible for the 2020 elections?

Personally can't decide - Trump's constant attention grabbing through any means possible is wearing. No sewer too deep for him to jump into, no lie too baldfaced to tell. But, given the legal weight that seems to be behind an obstruction charge, I'm starting to think impeachment is warranted. Not because it won't succeed - but because it will bring Trump's behavior into the spotlight. It might also bring his family's behavior into the light as well. And I think it'll strongly negatively impact Trump's election chances, should he choose to contest the impeachment, which he probably will, being such a tough guy and all.

everlast75

RIGOLO wrote: »

You seem to lack an understanding of the premise of the American judicial system.

INNOCENT UNTIL PROVEN GUILTY.

Lol - the judicial system doesn't apply to a sitting president. How can you not grasp that simple concept?

It follows therefore, if you cannot charge someone, how can you say they innocent until proven guilty?

Your soundbites don't work here.

everlast75

amandstu wrote: »

So the Dems should initiate impeachment proceedings in the fairly sure knowledge they would fail on account of the Reps in the Senate ?

Historically I agree a failure to (attempt to) impeach would be terrible for US "democracy" but is it better and more realistic to prepare the ground as well as possible for the 2020 elections?

1) by not starting an enquiry, its a tacit acceptance of his behaviour
2) some attendees at Amash's rallys DID NOT KNOW that there was any negative about Trump in the report. People need to be educated. Televised hearings will bring people around, which will bring their reps around.
3) knoweldge and facts are trumps enemies.

Stallingrad

RIGOLO wrote: »

AG Barr draining the swamp
...

Lol! Come on, you can do better than that. His boss is King of the Swamp Creatures. I'll just leave this here:

Trump Golf trips as of May this year:

AF1 flights to Mar-a-Lago: $47,288,000
AF1 flights to Bedminster: $14,392,000
Costs to Bedminster, Palm Beach*: $14,995,985
Cost to guard coast off Mar-a-Lago: $21,476,000
Luxury car rental in Turnberry, Scotland: $1,260,139
Cost of stay at Trump Turnberry, Scotland: $68,800
Total Cost: $99,480,924

Penn

RIGOLO wrote: »

You seem to lack an understanding of the premise of the American judicial system.

INNOCENT UNTIL PROVEN GUILTY.

Prosecutors are not in the business of exonerating. They don't exonerate because the presumption is that you are innocent until proven guilty, and if you cannot be proven guilty, you are presumed to be innocent.

Agreed. In the eyes of the law, Trump is presumed innocent until proven guilty.

That neither means he actually is innocent nor that he wouldn't be found guilty if it went to a trial. They can't go to trial because the Justice Department is of the position that a sitting president can't be indicted, and the Democrats won't bring impeachment proceedings because they know the GOP Senate will block it.

So Trump is in the position that judicially he's presumed innocent, but the Mueller investigation found enough evidence that if he weren't the President he would have been indicted, therefore proving there is enough reason and evidence to believe he's guilty.

"Innocent until proven guilty" is the basis that from the start of a trial, the defendant must be assumed innocent, and the prosecutors must prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the defendant is guilty. It is not proof of innocence.

RIGOLO

everlast75 wrote: »

Lol - the judicial system doesn't apply to a sitting president. How can you not grasp that simple concept?

It follows therefore, if you cannot charge someone, how can you say they innocent until proven guilty?

Your soundbites don't work here.

No collusion found, so how can you charge someone with obstruction if there was no crime.

So now the left are presuming guilt before innocence thereby undercutting a pillar of the AMerican judicial system, and then they want to impeach for potential obstruction when there was no crime.
Thats a lot of straws to be grasping at....

Muller regurgitated more or less what he said in his report but somehow him saying it now is grounds for impeachment.
Impechment is a fantasy , always was , always will be.
Its doing TRump 2020 a great service though, its lining his path to Trump II .

Even Nancy knows impeachment is dead in the water before its even launched, time for the left and the anti-TRumpers to wake up to that.

I think the left and the anti-TRumpers should just go out and try and do it the old fashioned way , try to win an election with some policy and a candidate.
Buckle up for 2020. Hoping the opponent gets impeached and you can win the election that way is an admission that they dont have a policy nor a viable candidate.

Brian?

RIGOLO wrote: »

If it was doing so well why did Obama and the Democrats lose over 1100 legislative seats during his 8 years, and why did a person who had never run for public office win an election over the ex-Secretary of State for an adminstration that you claim had an economy doing extremely well.

I dont buy the economy was doing well under Obama, and neither did over 60 million AMericans who voted Donald TRump as the 45th POTUS.
The best part about the democatic procss in the S is everyone is given another chance in 2020 to decide if Trump is doing a good job on the economy.
All indicatiosn are they will endorse him and give him a second term in office in whihc case does this mean in 2022 you will still be claiming the economy is Obamas legacy...

You never actually address the points I make. It's like you have scripted talking points you regurgitate at will.

rossie1977

RIGOLO wrote: »

If it was doing so well why did Obama and the Democrats lose over 1100 legislative seats during his 8 years, and why did a person who had never run for public office win an election over the ex-Secretary of State for an adminstration that you claim had an economy doing extremely well.

Republicans lost 350 legislative seats in Trump's first major election not to mention dozens of house seats and state governors.

Based on that people obviously think economy is doing poorly?

I dont buy the economy was doing well under Obama, and neither did over 60 million AMericans who voted Donald TRump as the 45th POTUS.

60 million voted McCain in 2008 when us economy was losing 800,000 jobs a month and Dow was spiralling down from 14k to 6k.

In fact a higher % of the electorate voted McCain than they did Trump.

The best part about the democatic procss in the S is everyone is given another chance in 2020 to decide if Trump is doing a good job on the economy.
All indicatiosn are they will endorse him and give him a second term in office in whihc case does this mean in 2022 you will still be claiming the economy is Obamas legacy...

Your logic is all over the place. Obama comfortably won a second term so based on that he was doing good job on economy..

everlast75

RIGOLO wrote: »

No collusion found, so how can you charge someone with obstruction if there was no crime.

So now the left are presuming guilt before innocence thereby undercutting a pillar of the AMerican judicial system, and then they want to impeach for potential obstruction when there was no crime.
Thats a lot of straws to be grasping at....

Muller regurgitated more or less what he said in his report but somehow him saying it now is grounds for impeachment.
Impechment is a fantasy , always was , always will be.
Its doing TRump 2020 a great service though, its lining his path to Trump II .

Even Nancy knows impeachment is dead in the water before its even launched, time for the left and the anti-TRumpers to wake up to that.

I think the left and the anti-TRumpers should just go out and try and do it the old fashioned way , try to win an election with some policy and a candidate.
Buckle up for 2020. Hoping the opponent gets impeached and you can win the election that way is an admission that they dont have a policy nor a viable candidate.

The idea that you cannot be charged if there is no underlying crime is a view only Trump sycophants subscribe to.

And why did 1000 prosecutors says there are crimes here, if it is fantasy?

And then you go on to proclaim that people are innocent until proven guilty, when moments ago you said that Barr would reveal the deep state nonsense?

You're even arguing with yourself at this stage.

mcmoustache

Brian? wrote: »

You never actually address the points I make. It's like you have scripted talking points you regurgitate at will.

And those scripted talking points don't stand up to any scrutiny. It's tiresome.

Brian?

RIGOLO wrote: »

No collusion found, so how can you charge someone with obstruction if there was no crime.

Because there doesn't need to be proof of an underlying crime. Why post if you don't actually understand the law.

So now the left are presuming guilt before innocence thereby undercutting a pillar of the AMerican judicial system, and then they want to impeach for potential obstruction when there was no crime.
Thats a lot of straws to be grasping at....

Muller regurgitated more or less what he said in his report but somehow him saying it now is grounds for impeachment.
Impechment is a fantasy , always was , always will be.
Its doing TRump 2020 a great service though, its lining his path to Trump II .

Even Nancy knows impeachment is dead in the water before its even launched, time for the left and the anti-TRumpers to wake up to that.

I think the left and the anti-TRumpers should just go out and try and do it the old fashioned way , try to win an election with some policy and a candidate.
Buckle up for 2020. Hoping the opponent gets impeached and you can win the election that way is an admission that they dont have a policy nor a viable candidate.

You understand nothing beyond what you read on pro Trump websites it seems. Trump won't be impeached because the GOP senators are amoral. He can't be indicted. This does not make him innocent. It's pretty simple.

Penn

At least Trump is now accepting Russia helped him get elected

https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/1134066371510378501

RIGOLO

Brian? wrote: »

Because there doesn't need to be proof of an underlying crime. Why post if you don't actually understand the law.



You understand nothing beyond what you read on pro Trump websites it seems. Trump won't be impeached because the GOP senators are amoral. He can't be indicted. This does not make him innocent. It's pretty simple.

Actually it does ..

INNOCENT UNTIL PROVEN GUILTY.

Thats how the system works.

Donalds tweet this morning sums it up ..

The Greatest Presidential Harassment in history. After spending $40,000,000 over two dark years, with unlimited access, people, resources and cooperation, highly conflicted Robert Mueller would have brought charges, if he had ANYTHING, but there were no charges to bring!

NO COLLUSION
NO CHARGES BROUGHT
NO OBSTRUCTION .

see you in court ...

everlast75

RIGOLO wrote: »

see you in court ...

Careful what you wish for...

RIGOLO

rossie1977 wrote: »

Republicans lost 350 legislative seats in Trump's first major election not to mention dozens of house seats and state governors.

1 President
2 Supreme Court picks
A Senate majority
Of the 7383 state legislative seats, Republicans hold 3863 or 53 %
and Republicans have 22 trifectas compared to a meagre 14 on the Dems side

Im happy with dem apples (Good Will Hunting reference)

Someone said earlier to buckle up things are going to get worse ... not from where Im seated.

mcmoustache

Penn wrote: »

At least Trump is now accepting Russia helped him get elected

https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/1134066371510378501

He denied it soon after when asked by reporters. Poor donnie. His mind must be all mushy or something.

everlast75

Penn wrote: »

At least Trump is now accepting Russia helped him get elected

https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/1134066371510378501

A very valid follow on point....

https://twitter.com/DavidCornDC/status/1134071683621556224?s=20

amandstu

mcmoustache wrote: »

He denied it soon after when asked by reporters. Poor donnie. His mind must be all mushy or something.

It's a rat trap and he got cornered🙂

Christy42

RIGOLO wrote: »

Actually it does ..

INNOCENT UNTIL PROVEN GUILTY.

Thats how the system works.

Donalds tweet this morning sums it up ..



NO COLLUSION
NO CHARGES BROUGHT
NO OBSTRUCTION .

see you in court ...

Indeed. We would love it to go to court. It isn't allowed to go to court because he is president. That is the only reason it is not there.

It is ridiculous. Dems have to prove he did it in a court but are also not allowed bring the case to a court.

Catch 22 eat your heart out.

I presume Don and yourself will campaign to allow charges to be brought against a sitting president so we can actually put this through a proper court?

Penn

Christy42 wrote: »

Indeed. We would love it to go to court. It isn't allowed to go to court because he is president. That is the only reason it is not there.

It is ridiculous. Dems have to prove he did it in a court but are also not allowed bring the case to a court.

Catch 22 eat your heart out.

I presume Don and yourself will campaign to allow charges to be brought against a sitting president so we can actually put this through a proper court?

What will be very interesting to see is what happens when Don is no longer President. Whether it's 2020 or beyond, the next time the Dems have either the Senate or Presidency, will they proceed with indicting him once he becomes a private citizen, as I believe the same reasoning the Justice Department use to say you can't indict a sitting President also says that no statute of limitations apply and the President can be indicted once their presidency is over.

Leroy42

Rigolo, do you honestly have no issue with a POTUS being exempt from the laws of the US?

In effect, the POTUS has been placed above an beyond the law

And still, despite The Mueller Report and now Mueller himself, along with all the security services stating that Russia interfered with American democracy, Trump has done nothing to protect the county. IT is also a fact that he has still to address the quite shameful episode where he sided with Putin over his own agencies. He has not apologised, he has not demanded answers from Putin, he has not demanded.

He clearly cares only for himself and that he is seen as winning rather than looking after the US. A CiC that has let a foreign country carry out a direct attack on the US and done sweet FA about it.

eagle eye

All these demands for impeachment are ridiculous. It's like you all live in the black and white world of Twitter where everything has to be done and done now.
People on here calling him the most corrupt President in history and the worst president too. Well I'll agree that he is the worst since social media became the voice of the stupid which is not long ago. He is the most corrupt in that timespan too but the only other president was Obama.
A lot of you need to get a grip, calm down and realise that you can't believe everything on Twitter or other social media sites. You need to have patience, something that seems to have gone missing in the social media age.
I want to see a Democrat in office in 2020, I'm no fan of Trump but all the hate here is ludicrous.
I hear there will be protests when he visits Ireland, I just don't get it, what has he done to us?