Donald Trump presidency discussion thread V

Harry Palmr

Don't dump videos here please.

aloyisious

I was wondering when the workers and their unions started taking action to ensure their rights were protected from Don's decision to shut down the Govt [public services sections]. Two federal employee unions are taking cases against the Govt over it. One is the National Treasury Employees Union and the plaintiff is Albert Vieira, a US Customs & Border Protection agent. https://www.bustle.com/p/another-union-sues-trump-over-the-government-shutdown-workers-are-clearly-fed-up-15730479. The TSA union is the other union taking a case against the Govt. https://www.theverge.com/2019/1/8/18174184/tsa-union-government-shut-down-airport-security-trump

The contrast between those media links and this one - https://www.vox.com/2019/1/3/18167401/shutdown-border-wall-trump-patrol-agents - is surprising given the two apparently similar duties they do. Don is visiting the border today and meeting with members of the latter union, following on from the approval show it's members gave Don in the White House a few days ago.

Another side of the coin probably explains why the unions don't take a more direct action against Don Trump as he initiated the shutdown in an attempt to blackmail the Dems into handing over the billions Don wants using the Fed employees and their families as collateral [damage] . The link below might not work directly needing people to google for the info on union members striking rights restrictions. https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2019/01/shutdown-federal-workers-cant-strike/579793/

The kicker about Don's national broadcast was how he spoke passionately about the humanitarian angle, how the people were suffering on the border due to the shutdown. I thought "Jesus wept". However, there is a possible good side to the story where it comes to the federal workers left wageless by Donal J Trump: https://edition.cnn.com/2019/01/02/politics/banks-workers-help-shutdown/index.html

Igotadose

aloyisious wrote: »

The kicker about Don's national broadcast was how he spoke passionately about the humanitarian angle, how the people were suffering on the border due to the shutdown. I thought "Jesus wept". However, there is a possible good side to the story where it comes to the federal workers left wageless by Donal J Trump: https://edition.cnn.com/2019/01/02/politics/banks-workers-help-shutdown/index.html

*Shudder* Banks and CU's don't do anything out of altruism. More debt, interest-low or interest-free, is a bad thing. But, I'm sure Trump's bank-industry advisers (Steve Mnuchin anyone?) love the idea.

Pelvis

Seaking of Mnuchin, he's up infront of congress today apparently to explain the decision to drop economic sanctions against a Russian oligarch with ties to Russian intelligence.

everlast75

Igotadose wrote: »

*Shudder* Banks and CU's don't do anything out of altruism. More debt, interest-low or interest-free, is a bad thing. But, I'm sure Trump's bank-industry advisers (Steve Mnuchin anyone?) love the idea.

On that note, a couple of minor dates to be aware of in January.

Mr. Mnuchin was written to by dozens of senators asking for an explanation as to why sanctions against a russian oligarch were being eased. I think he is to appear today.

Also, Mr. Whitaker is to appear before the house this month in relation to his role as acting AG.

Barr's appointment as AG is to be confirmed or otherwise later this month too.

Summer Zervos' case was scheduled for depositions this month - but I cannot find any link as to the latest in that case.

FreudianSlippers

Brian? wrote: »

The biggest issue to me is the acceptance that illegal immigrants are needed to keep costs low in certain industries. How many Californian fruit farmers are prosecuted for hiring illegals? I'm guessing zero, but i am open to correction. How many meat packing companies or restaurant chains are prosecuted? That's before we even get to the gardeners and hospitality staff.

Just to add to this - many illegal residents in the US are there as a result of expired H-2B guest worker visas (loss of job, expiry, etc.) - the Trump Organisation hired only 1 US worker for 144 jobs between 2016-17, the remainder being H-2B visa foreigners.

https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2018/7/9/17548776/trump-h-2b-guest-workers

duploelabs

Pelvis wrote: »

Seaking of Mnuchin, he's up infront of congress today apparently to explain the decision to drop economic sanctions against a Russian oligarch with ties to Russian intelligence.

I'd be very interested to see the results of this as the sanctions were also to be lifted on the bank that was to fund the trump Tower Moscow

everlast75

duploelabs wrote: »

I'd be very interested to see the results of this as the sanctions were also to be lifted on the bank that was to fund the trump Tower Moscow

VTB - who also made news last week when the SC delivered its ruling - which refused the appeal brought by them seeking to resist a subpoena issued by the Special Counsel's office. It'll cost them 50k a day until they comply (peanuts I know) with that subpoena

Christy42

FreudianSlippers wrote: »

Brian? wrote: »

The biggest issue to me is the acceptance that illegal immigrants are needed to keep costs low in certain industries. How many Californian fruit farmers are prosecuted for hiring illegals? I'm guessing zero, but i am open to correction. How many meat packing companies or restaurant chains are prosecuted? That's before we even get to the gardeners and hospitality staff.

Just to add to this - many illegal residents in the US are there as a result of expired H-2B guest worker visas (loss of job, expiry, etc.) - the Trump Organisation hired only 1 US worker for 144 jobs between 2016-17, the remainder being H-2B visa foreigners.

https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2018/7/9/17548776/trump-h-2b-guest-workers

Yes but given any campaign around fixing that would involve more than 3 words it was fairly obviously a non runner.

This is insanity at this point. Why is policy being decided based on something designed to be simple enough for Trump to remember the phrase?

duploelabs

everlast75 wrote: »

VTB - who also made news last week when the SC delivered its ruling - which refused the appeal brought by them seeking to resist a subpoena issued by the Special Counsel's office. It'll cost them 50k a day until they comply (peanuts I know) with that subpoena

Didn't realise they're identified as the resistors of that subpoena that cleared the courthouse the other week

everlast75

duploelabs wrote: »

Didn't realise they're identified as the resistors of that subpoena that cleared the courthouse the other week

Widely reported as, rather than identified - the name is under seal, but it is the only real contender for the description given

Igotadose

Trump's latest legal beagle leader has hired 17 lawyers in the last few weeks. Theories abound - most seem to be that Mueller's report is coming out soon and Trumpy will be all over 'executive privilege' in trying to prevent its publication. Hence the need for all the new lawyers.


Hopefully Trump's paying for this out of his own oversized pockets. The US government's closed, after all.

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/us-politics/trump-lawyers-shutdown-mueller-investigation-special-counsel-report-cipollone-executive-privilege-a8720381.html

everlast75

Igotadose wrote: »

Trump's latest legal beagle leader has hired 17 lawyers in the last few weeks. Theories abound - most seem to be that Mueller's report is coming out soon and Trumpy will be all over 'executive privilege' in trying to prevent its publication. Hence the need for all the new lawyers.


Hopefully Trump's paying for this out of his own oversized pockets. The US government's closed, after all.

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/us-politics/trump-lawyers-shutdown-mueller-investigation-special-counsel-report-cipollone-executive-privilege-a8720381.html

Maybe that security border "fund" is actually his legal fund!

17 lawyers won't help you when you wouldn't know the truth if it came up and smacked you in the face.

He is now denying that he knew anything about Manafort giving info to the Russians. Why one of the reporters didn't put this question to him, I don't know....

"Mr. President. You said on Air Force One that you knew nothing about the hush money payments. Michael Cohen then produced a tape which proved that you did and that you were lying.

Do you think Paul Manafort's 2 years of calls caught under FISA warrants will similarly have your voice on them, proving you are lying again?"

26000 Elephants

Trump today:

"When I said Mexico would pay for the wall in front of thousands and thousands of people .... obviously I never meant Mexico would write a check."

source

Trump 2016:

BabyCheeses

https://assets.donaldjtrump.com/Pay_for_the_Wall.pdf

It's an easy decision for Mexico: make a one-time payment of $5-
10 billion to ensure that $24 billion continues to flow into their country year
after year.

He claimed that there would be a payment made. Maybe not by cheque but it was pretty much put pressure on Mexico until they give the US the money.

Leroy42

His denial of knowing about Manafort passing the data is telling.

Note that he didn't say he was shocked to learn of it, that he has lost all faith in Manafort, that it shows that Russia were clearly operating to try to influence the US. He didnt say that he will bring this up directly with Putin to demand answers as to why he had lied about it to him in the past. He never mentioned the idea of sanctions to ensure this never happens again. He never praised the hard working men and women involved in the investigation for getting to the truth.

No. He simply said he didn't know about it. In almost every true crime doc this is the tell that drives investigators to look deeper into the husband/wife etc.

everlast75

Leroy42 wrote: »

His denial of knowing about Manafort passing the data is telling.

Note that he didn't say he was shocked to learn of it, that he has lost all faith in Manafort, that it shows that Russia were clearly operating to try to influence the US. He didnt say that he will bring this up directly with Putin to demand answers as to why he had lied about it to him in the past. He never mentioned the idea of sanctions to ensure this never happens again. He never praised the hard working men and women involved in the investigation for getting to the truth.

No. He simply said he didn't know about it. In almost every true crime doc this is the tell that drives investigators to look deeper into the husband/wife etc.

Firstly it didn't happen. (NO COLLISION)
Then when it happened, it wasn't a crime. (NO SUCH CRIME)
Then when it was a crime, he didn't know about it. (NOTHING TO DO WITH TRUMP)

Its the same pattern as the hush money payments.

Pelvis

Michael Cohen is going to testify PUBLICLY before Congress next month. :eek:

jobbridge4life

Pelvis wrote: »

Michael Cohen is going to testify PUBLICLY before Congress next month. :eek:

I'd guess it will be a let down. Basing that on the commentary from the SDNY submission re his sentencing. He seems to be willing to discuss issues already in the public sphere, but anything beyond that he seems to think he can keep to himself.

Itssoeasy

Pelvis wrote: »

Michael Cohen is going to testify PUBLICLY before Congress next month. :eek:

Tweet storm incoming.

everlast75

jobbridge4life wrote: »

I'd guess it will be a let down. Basing that on the commentary from the SDNY submission re his sentencing. He seems to be willing to discuss issues already in the public sphere, but anything beyond that he seems to think he can keep to himself.

Closed session with congress would liberate him to say more.

The idea of it happening will drive Trump mental

pixelburp

Yeah, I'd gird myself for an underwhelming meeting; these public testimonies are just theatre, and I'd doubt there's some verbal silver bullet waiting to be shared for the cameras. The manner of the Republican questions will be informative. Not that'll stop Trump ranting and freaking out on twitter mind you.

everlast75

https://twitter.com/LindseyGrahamSC/status/1083483064519544837?s=19

Looks like an emergency declaration, which will be followed by immediate injunctions, followed by Trump re-opening and blaming the Courts and or Dems...

pixelburp

I hope his feed is being hammered with folk pointing out they had 2 years of full control of government. GOP attempts to rebrand this as Democrat intransigence is nauseating. Hopefully the polls are not rewarding this tactic, as it's nakedly cynical hand washing .

26000 Elephants

jobbridge4life wrote: »

I'd guess it will be a let down. Basing that on the commentary from the SDNY submission re his sentencing. He seems to be willing to discuss issues already in the public sphere, but anything beyond that he seems to think he can keep to himself.

I think he has one more card to play: if only to further reduce his sentence in March. Muellers papers submitted at the sentencing hinted that the help Cohen provided might be "coming up again in the not too distant future". Preet Bharara was speaking about that, and how the Senate has the power to alter a previous sentence handed down. Its an outside chance, but the prospect of 3 years inside can focus the mind.

prawnsambo

everlast75 wrote: »

https://twitter.com/LindseyGrahamSC/status/1083483064519544837?s=19

Looks like an emergency declaration, which will be followed by immediate injunctions, followed by Trump re-opening and blaming the Courts and or Dems...

I love that it's now officially downgraded to wall/barrier. How long will it take to get to barrier/fence and eventually fence/ditch and ultimately prickly hedge/cacti?

aloyisious

everlast75 wrote: »

https://twitter.com/LindseyGrahamSC/status/1083483064519544837?s=19

Looks like an emergency declaration, which will be followed by immediate injunctions, followed by Trump re-opening and blaming the Courts and or Dems...

Is this another example of Lindsey acting as his masters voice, or did I miss Don actually offer to re-open the Govt, even if Chuck & Nancy continued to refuse funding the wall?

everlast75

aloyisious wrote: »

Is this another example of Lindsey acting as his masters voice, or did I miss Don actually offer to re-open the Govt, even if Chuck & Nancy continued to refuse funding the wall?

Trump apparently asked if he could have the 5.1 billion if he reopened the government. Pelosi said no.

Trump then asked if he opened the government, in 30 days could he have the 5.1 billion. Pelosi said no.

He then apparently slammed the table and then said goodbye.

Quin_Dub

This has been the plan for a while now..

Declare the faux "National Emergency" , Mitch then allows the bills to run through the Senate , Government gets funded. Then the courts shoot down the obviously ridiculous emergency crap and Trump get to wriggle out of the corner he painted himself into by being able to blame the courts..

If he's lucky it'll be the 9th circuit that blocks him which will enrage his base and he gets to walk away a winner (in his head anyway)

HalloweenJack

Quin_Dub wrote: »

This has been the plan for a while now..

Declare the faux "National Emergency" , Mitch then allows the bills to run through the Senate , Government gets funded. Then the courts shoot down the obviously ridiculous emergency crap and Trump get to wriggle out of the corner he painted himself into by being able to blame the courts..

...all before he gets dragged into the Mueller investigation which he can then blame on the courts going after him because they don't like him, that being the reason they stopped his wall.