Donald Trump presidency discussion thread V

Igotadose

Really? Ivanka Trump was under discussion to lead the world bank? What, Willie Sutton not available?

This is just another dimension in the wrongness of TrumpCo in the WH. Various bits of it get into influential positions due to nothing more than proximity to the criminal-in-chief. They're all guaranteed goodies forever now even if Trump ends up in prison.

everlast75

Igotadose wrote: »

Really? Ivanka Trump was under discussion to lead the world bank? What, Willie Sutton not available?

This is just another dimension in the wrongness of TrumpCo in the WH. Various bits of it get into influential positions due to nothing more than proximity to the criminal-in-chief. They're all guaranteed goodies forever now even if Trump ends up in prison.

Or perhaps it is just another distraction... like the burgers last night.

I'm beginning to think that Trump has hired a 4chan troll to assault the media with BS, so as to make them talk about what he wants them to talk about, which in turn fuels the "Trump Derangement Syndrome" talk and take attention away from the real issues.

Pelvis

William Barr now in front of the senate now for his comfirmation hearing, presumably streaming live on YouTube.

Duck Soup

Pelvis wrote: »

William Barr now in front of the senate now for his comfirmation hearing, presumably streaming live on YouTube.

http://www.livenewschat.eu/politics/

duploelabs

everlast75 wrote: »

Or perhaps it is just another distraction... like the burgers last night.

I'm beginning to think that Trump has hired a 4chan troll to assault the media with BS, so as to make them talk about what he wants them to talk about, which in turn fuels the "Trump Derangement Syndrome" talk and take attention away from the real issues.

'what an idiot trump is' gains just as much, if not more, column inches as 'what a crook trump is'

Duck Soup

Barr looks bored off his tits and we're only halfway through Feinstein's opening statement.

demfad

Igotadose wrote: »

Really? Ivanka Trump was under discussion to lead the world bank? What, Willie Sutton not available?

This is just another dimension in the wrongness of TrumpCo in the WH. Various bits of it get into influential positions due to nothing more than proximity to the criminal-in-chief. They're all guaranteed goodies forever now even if Trump ends up in prison.

We have to look at this in the light of the International Kleptocracy taking over countries. To expand it also makes sense to take over powerful institutions like the World Bank or Interpol. The World Bank leader resigned suddenly , his successor to be either Trump family criminal Ivanka or else chosen by her. With Interpol the head was dissappeared in China and the replacement set up to be a Russian. This was narrowly averted.

everlast75

duploelabs wrote: »

'what an idiot trump is' gains just as much, if not more, column inches as 'what a crook trump is'

over a year ago, I floated the idea that the mundane events of Trump's days, along with his tweets, should be demoted to the end of any news cycle. A kind of

"And finally today, President Trump ordered 300 plus burgers for an athletic team, lied that he paid for them out of his own pocket, then told another reporter he ordered 1000 burgers, and in his tweet referring to it, misspelled the word "hamburger".

That's all folks, have a good evening

All of the other time should be spent focusing in on his parties actions.

looksee

Just reminded me of over 40 years ago listening to the news in Zambia. Regardless of what was happening in the rest of the world, or Africa, or even Zambia, the headline would be along the lines of 'Today President Kaunda visited a chicken farm in Kasempa'.

A Dub in Glasgo

everlast75 wrote: »

over a year ago, I floated the idea that the mundane events of Trump's days, along with his tweets, should be demoted to the end of any news cycle. A kind of

"And finally today, President Trump ordered 300 plus burgers for an athletic team, lied that he paid for them out of his own pocket, then told another reporter he ordered 1000 burgers, and in his tweet referring to it, misspelled the word "hamburger".

That's all folks, have a good evening

and finish off with this slightly amended pic

Akrasia

everlast75 wrote: »

over a year ago, I floated the idea that the mundane events of Trump's days, along with his tweets, should be demoted to the end of any news cycle. A kind of

"And finally today, President Trump ordered 300 plus burgers for an athletic team, lied that he paid for them out of his own pocket, then told another reporter he ordered 1000 burgers, and in his tweet referring to it, misspelled the word "hamburger".

That's all folks, have a good evening

All of the other time should be spent focusing in on his parties actions.

Fake news.

They've been spelt Hamberders in the dictionary since the beginning of time. I called the dictionary guy who told me that, true story.

Igotadose

Judge blocks TrumpCo's attempt to add a citizenship question to the 2020 Census.
https://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/trump-census-citizenship-question_us_5c1c1a19e4b05c88b6f68c25

The best line in this, imo, is the one from the Trump Admin who, when confronted with evidence that this would suppress the responses, said that
"Even if fewer people initially chose to respond to the survey voluntarily, the Census Bureau had robust plans to follow up with people, officials said."

I can just imagine... "<ding dong> Sir, you failed to respond to the 2020 Census. I'm here to take your census. How many live here? How long? Are you a citizen?" and then off to ICE with new non-citizen information gathered in person. Uhuh.

FreudianSlippers

He'd probably cut out the middle-man and just get ICE to manually take the census.

mcmoustache

Duck Soup wrote: »

Barr looks bored off his tits and we're only halfway through Feinstein's opening statement.

He seems very sane. Graham's opening nonsense, on the other hand, was presumably for an audience of one (Individual 1). I'll watch later but it appears that Barr is competent and has provided decent reassurances.

Professor Moriarty

mcmoustache wrote: »

He seems very sane. Graham's opening nonsense, on the other hand, was presumably for an audience of one (Individual 1). I'll watch later but it appears that Barr is competent and has provided decent reassurances.

If that's the case, I'll give him six months before The Donald fires him with a tweet.

Manic Moran

seamus wrote: »

I too would dispute this idea that corruption in the US is low. Legal corruption in the US is enormous, kickbacks at the executive level in top companies, campaign funding methods that skirt around the law, exclusivity deals between all sorts of parties where it should never exist - like between pharma companies and hospitals.

I didn't say there was no corruption, I said that's what the processes were for. That's different from saying that it works well.

The military equipment procurement process is the most infamous, usually because it has the biggest dollar values attached combined with the most jobs in the home state of whatever legislator wins. Nearly three years ago, the head of the Army said with reference to the new military pistol selection process...

"We're not figuring out the next lunar landing. This is a pistol. Two years to test? At $17 million?" Milley said to an audience at a Washington, D.C., think tank on March 10. "You give me $17 million on a credit card, and I'll call Cabela's (Sporting goods store)tonight, and I'll outfit every soldier, sailor, airman and Marine with a pistol for $17 million. And I'll get a discount on a bulk buy."

At the time, it was considered somewhat hyperbolic, as $17m to test and select a pistol would only actually get some 34,000 of them if he just made a judgement call. But his point was well taken, the system is highly inefficient.

The irony is that last year a new report came out, after the complete process was finished and the pistol contract awarded.... Saying that it actually might have been cheaper to just send someone to the local sporting goods store with a credit card.
https://www.armytimes.com/news/your-army/2018/06/28/cabelas-might-have-been-a-cheaper-option-for-the-militarys-newest-handgun-after-all-report-shows/

everlast75

A Dub in Glasgo wrote: »

and finish off with this slightly amended pic

Explicit proof that you cannot buy class...

Leroy42

Manic Moran wrote: »

Our processes to ensure complete fairness, lack of corruption and best value from the final bid are so ridiculous that we're better off accepting some limited corruption or best effort decision making to make things cheaper.

Manic Moran wrote: »

I didn't say there was no corruption, I said that's what the processes were for. That's different from saying that it works well.

So hold on, your argument is that there should simply be more efficient corruption!

Well, I guess then Trump is exactly what the US is looking for after all.

everlast75

mcmoustache wrote: »

He seems very sane. Graham's opening nonsense, on the other hand, was presumably for an audience of one (Individual 1). I'll watch later but it appears that Barr is competent and has provided decent reassurances.

My reading is that he is not a bad nomination at all.

The only real fly in the ointment is his comment about Mueller's investigation. Given that criticism is most likely the only reason Trump picked him, there are legitimate concerns that he would try to interfere.

If the Dems do as good a job at this nomination hearing as they did of William Saxbe (Maddow did a great programme on it last night), Nixon's his 4th AG, then there will be no real issue.

listermint

Leroy42 wrote: »

So hold on, your argument is that there should simply be more efficient corruption!

Well, I guess then Trump is exactly what the US is looking for after all.

its the libertarian market where anything goes and kickbacks are the king of the day that is the problem.

Libertarians fail to raise that as a problem as a anything goes system

Manic Moran

Leroy42 wrote: »

So hold on, your argument is that there should simply be more efficient corruption!

Although that would be an improvement, given I think we've gone well beyond the point of diminishing returns, that's not what I said. Our process is inefficient, byzantine, and needlessly long and expensive. When the Irish military selected a new pistol a few years back, did the process as mandated by law and regulation take two years and cost fifteen million Euro just to decide that H&K would win, on top of the actual cost of buying them? Do you believe that the Irish selection process was fair regardless?

Quin_Dub

everlast75 wrote: »

My reading is that he is not a bad nomination at all.

The only real fly in the ointment is his comment about Mueller's investigation. Given that criticism is most likely the only reason Trump picked him, there are legitimate concerns that he would try to interfere.

If the Dems do as good a job at this nomination hearing as they did of William Saxbe (Maddow did a great programme on it last night), Nixon's his 4th AG, then there will be no real issue.

What impact do the comments made during these hearings have later on?

Barr appears to be saying the right things with respect to the Mueller investigation , but so what?

If he (or indeed any nominee) promises not to interfere with the investigation (or whatever thing a nominee is asked about) and then goes ahead and interferes with it. What happens then?

Is there any come-back , legally or otherwise??

Leroy42

Manic Moran wrote: »

Although that would be an improvement, given I think we've gone well beyond the point of diminishing returns, that's not what I said. Our process is inefficient, byzantine, and needlessly long and expensive. When the Irish military selected a new pistol a few years back, did the process as mandated by law and regulation take two years and cost fifteen million Euro just to decide that H&K would win, on top of the actual cost of buying them? Do you believe that the Irish selection process was fair regardless?

It is needlessly long and inefficient because of corruption, not because of a lack of it.

The process takes so long because military contractors have the politicians in their pockets, and ensure that the gravy train keeps going. Trump, giving an additional $57bn to the military with little or no changes to the systems, is simply adding to the problem.

The reason the wall will not be built is because Trump doesn't have a plan. He doesn't know what he wants, how to solve the problem, how he is going to pay for it and how long it will take.

It is now going to be a fence, so what was the point of the wall prototypes? Another waste of time and money.

Igotadose

Leroy42 wrote: »

It is needlessly long and inefficient because of corruption, not because of a lack of it.

The process takes so long because military contractors have the politicians in their pockets, and ensure that the gravy train keeps going. Trump, giving an additional $57bn to the military with little or no changes to the systems, is simply adding to the problem.

The reason the wall will not be built is because Trump doesn't have a plan. He doesn't know what he wants, how to solve the problem, how he is going to pay for it and how long it will take.

It is now going to be a fence, so what was the point of the wall prototypes? Another waste of time and money.

And the amount to spend will be an *enormous* attraction to the bottom-feeders that submit bids. If indeed a $25bn wall is somehow approved, I'd expect it to take 10 years and cost $250bn if not more. This *is* the US Government after all and it's really not interested in reducing costs other than as a political tool.

Manic Moran

Leroy42 wrote: »

The process takes so long because military contractors have the politicians in their pockets, and ensure that the gravy train keeps going.

With respect, no.

I have (unfortunately) had to learn the military procurement system as part of my professional education, and a more boring and god-awful course in the Army I doubt I will ever have to suffer through, unless I take the fiscal policy course of which I've had a sample. All the processes present are genuine attempts to maintain transparency and oversight (Unfortunately, the same with fiscal policy and processes, which is why they are so convoluted). If you look at them, they make sense on an individual basis and you can see why they are incorporated, the problem is the cumulative effect once implemented.

There is no wiggle room. It takes as long to receive approval to buy new boots as it does to buy a new jet aircraft. The result is that we obtain equipment which is overpriced and often obsolescent. Only once, by special dispensation, have we had an efficient procurement program in the last few years, the Rapid Fielding Initiative, which basically looked at what soldiers were spending their own money on, and just buying that.

Christy42

Igotadose wrote: »

Leroy42 wrote: »

It is needlessly long and inefficient because of corruption, not because of a lack of it.

The process takes so long because military contractors have the politicians in their pockets, and ensure that the gravy train keeps going. Trump, giving an additional $57bn to the military with little or no changes to the systems, is simply adding to the problem.

The reason the wall will not be built is because Trump doesn't have a plan. He doesn't know what he wants, how to solve the problem, how he is going to pay for it and how long it will take.

It is now going to be a fence, so what was the point of the wall prototypes? Another waste of time and money.

And the amount to spend will be an *enormous* attraction to the bottom-feeders that submit bids. If indeed a $25bn wall is somehow approved, I'd expect it to take 10 years and cost $250bn if not more. This *is* the US Government after all and it's really not interested in reducing costs other than as a political tool.

Oh I am sure some donations will pay back their dividends if the wall gets built.

Having said that there does not seem to be a decent cost analysis or a serious plan of what to do about private land. We don't have a design yet, will the design vary based off of terrain etc. so I would expect massive overruns regardless.

Given the cost should this not be done before deciding to start building or allocating (this much) funding?

everlast75

Quin_Dub wrote: »

What impact do the comments made during these hearings have later on?

Barr appears to be saying the right things with respect to the Mueller investigation , but so what?

If he (or indeed any nominee) promises not to interfere with the investigation (or whatever thing a nominee is asked about) and then goes ahead and interferes with it. What happens then?

Is there any come-back , legally or otherwise??

I don't think there can be a come back, but to give an assurance, with the credibility of an officer of the Court, with a reputation to protect, in front of millions of people, there has to be some weight to that.

I take your point though. Perhaps they could get him to take an oath.

Penn

everlast75 wrote: »

I don't think there can be a come back, but to give an assurance, with the credibility of an officer of the Court, with a reputation to protect, in front of millions of people, there has to be some weight to that.

I take your point though. Perhaps they could get him to take an oath.

Is this type of hearing not the same as where Sessions recused himself from the Russia investigation and therefore couldn't interfere with it? I would have thought there was some legal weight behind it to the point where you couldn't knowingly lie or if you said you would do X, you are then bound by that.

everlast75

Penn wrote: »

Is this type of hearing not the same as where Sessions recused himself from the Russia investigation and therefore couldn't interfere with it? I would have thought there was some legal weight behind it to the point where you couldn't knowingly lie or if you said you would do X, you are then bound by that.

You may be right.

On the whole, he is more appropriate that Kavanaugh and therefore I cannot see him being turned down.

My view on the Dem questioning is they are not good enough. There are plenty of legal experts out there with excellent points that should but aren't being made.

Cheerful Spring

ECO_Mental wrote: »

Th depressing part I find is that although Trump will go down and a lot of his cronies Manafort, Junior, Stone etc and I will be happy. Its the likes of Lindsey Graham, McConnell Nunes and all the GOP worms that enabled him and turned a blind eye over the past 3 years will get with hardly any repercussions. The minute the Mueller report comes out it will be like they had an epiphany and they NEVER know he was that bad. The sad part is the public will believe them :mad::mad::mad:

I expecting a tame report and there no evidence of collusion, saying for the last year or more. We will find out soon. If I am wrong I take the pie in the face.