Donald Trump Presidency discussion Thread VI

peddlelies

Leroy42 wrote: »

Peddlelies, what a load of whataboutery.

It really is staggering simple. Do you accept that these conditions are justified?

Would you accept if other countries treated US citizens that had committed a crime that a certain segment of the population didn't like be treated in the same way?

No, the facilities are overrun. My argument isn't with that, it's improving the overall problem, border protection and laws.

Second bit, I don't know? Try enter some of the central or south American countries illegally and tell me how you get on.

Manic Moran

On another matter entirely, since the case came up on the previous version of this thread when talking about pardons, the court martial today found Gallagher not guilty of the charge of murdering a captured ISIS fighter, not least because someone else testified that he killed the fighter, who was wounded with a breathing tube, as an act of mercy.

It seems that Gallagher's juniors didn't like him, and may have cobbled up all the various accusations which had piled on to the case. Gallagher was convicted of posing for a photo with the body, and reportedly did actually stab the fighter without obvious cause, though he was also acquitted of such a crime. Possibly because the prosecution's case had basically collapsed on itself.

Midlife

peddlelies wrote: »

Criticize Cortez for her Amazon stance, but Trump.

Call out a Cortez lie, but Trump.

The Amazon investment in NYC would have brought 25000 jobs to NYC and $27 billion in tax revenue. 70% of New Yorkers wanted it. It's fair to criticize someone lambasting that deal, is it not?

So there was no downside?

What was the problem with the other 30%?

Brian?

peddlelies wrote: »

Criticize Cortez for her Amazon stance, but Trump.

Call out a Cortez lie, but Trump.

The Amazon investment in NYC would have brought 25000 jobs to NYC and $27 billion in tax revenue. 70% of New Yorkers wanted it. It's fair to criticize someone lambasting that deal, is it not?

Criticism is fine. But implying she scuppered the deal is not. I’m still waiting on evidence she did.

Itssoeasy

Trump is holding a rally the Same day as mueller will be testifying before congress.

everlast75

peddlelies wrote: »

No, the facilities are overrun. My argument isn't with that, it's improving the overall problem, border protection and laws.

Second bit, I don't know? Try enter some of the central or south American countries illegally and tell me how you get on.

Perhaps the facilites are overrun because Trump insisted on charging everyone as opposed to using a system that worked?

It's like Iran. Trump ****s with something that was working and then blames Obama.

everlast75

Itssoeasy wrote: »

Trump is holding a rally the Same day as mueller will be testifying before congress.

Of course he is. He needs a pity party to stroke his ego while anyone might be criticising him.

duploelabs

everlast75 wrote: »

Of course he is. He needs a pity party to stroke his ego while anyone might be criticising him.

I think it's more to control the narrative of what Mueller testifies, aided by the fact that most news channels broadcast these rallies as news which plays in to the lack of critical thinking that the majority of viewers have.

spacecoyote

duploelabs wrote: »

I think it's more to control the narrative of what Mueller testifies, aided by the fact that most news channels broadcast these rallies as news which plays in to the lack of critical thinking that the majority of viewers have.

Is the Mueller testimony public or closed-doors?

Itssoeasy

spacecoyote wrote: »

duploelabs wrote: »

I think it's more to control the narrative of what Mueller testifies, aided by the fact that most news channels broadcast these rallies as news which plays in to the lack of critical thinking that the majority of viewers have.

Is the Mueller testimony public or closed-doors?

Public.

everlast75

duploelabs wrote: »

I think it's more to control the narrative of what Mueller testifies, aided by the fact that most news channels broadcast these rallies as news which plays in to the lack of critical thinking that the majority of viewers have.

If that is the case, he is failing to see the writing on the wall.

Viewing figures for his rallies are dropping, even on Fox.

MSNBC AND CNN don't cover them.

His tweets aren't even getting as much traction as they used to.

A rally isn't going to control *any* narrative, especially that day. Even on a slow news day its "more of the same old catchphrases" with not much heed being paid.

I think he needs to be liked. His ego is incredibly sensative. He would much rather be in a room with 20000 people shouting "lock her up" than watch cable news and see actual facts being set out on TV as to his conduct.

That's why his ego is such a danger to the US. You can see how leaders who fawn over him get special praise in return.

This 4th of July stuff is absolutely incredible. Plenty on here say that calls of facism are hyperbolic. Put each of the component parts together.

1) a refusal to accept a democratic vote if he lost the 2016 election
2) talking about locking up his political opponents if he won (and kept doing it too)
3) contact and coordinating with a hostile country to assist in his election
4) attacking the press
5) lining his own pockets via his position
6) cutting ties with democratic countries
7) obstructing the investigation into foreign assistance in his campaign
8) aligning with dictators to an alarming degree
9) mass detention of immigrants
10) parade with displays of military might
11) talk of keeping power past any norm prescribed by the Constitution
12) attacking the Courts for not ruling matters in his favour

One or two of these incidents on their may not necessarily indicate a leaning towards facism. But these (and I am sure there are others, feel free to add) show that this is a dangerous slope.

spacecoyote

everlast75 wrote: »

If that is the case, he is failing to see the writing on the wall.

Viewing figures for his rallies are dropping, even on Fox.

MSNBC AND CNN don't cover them.

His tweets aren't even getting as much traction as they used to.

A rally isn't going to control *any* narrative, especially that day. Even on a slow news day its "more of the same old catchphrases" with not much heed being paid.

I think he needs to be liked. His ego is incredibly sensative. He would much rather be in a room with 20000 people shouting "lock her up" than watch cable news and see actual facts being set out on TV as to his conduct.

That's why his ego is such a danger to the US. You can see how leaders who fawn over him get special praise in return.

This 4th of July stuff is absolutely incredible. Plenty on here say that calls of facism are hyperbolic. Put each of the component parts together.

1) a refusal to accept a democratic vote if he lost the 2016 election
2) talking about locking up his political opponents if he won (and kept doing it too)
3) contact and coordinating with a hostile country to assist in his election
4) attacking the press
5) lining his own pockets via his position
6) cutting ties with democratic countries
7) obstructing the investigation into foreign assistance in his campaign
8) aligning with dictators to an alarming degree
9) mass detention of immigrants
10) parade with displays of military might
11) talk of keeping power past any norm prescribed by the Constitution
12) attacking the Courts for not ruling matters in his favour

One or two of these incidents on their may not necessarily indicate a leaning towards facism. But these (and I am sure there are others, feel free to add) show that this is a dangerous slope.

You can add to this the fact he is now looking to appoint a member of his presidential election team to the Board of the Federal Reserve...one who is an outspoken critic of the Fed & who believes that the Fed shouldn't have control over rates

https://www.ft.com/content/d92145ec-9d18-11e9-b8ce-8b459ed04726

Paywalled so a couple of quotes:

Ms Shelton...has previously made headlines for her outspoken views on what she called the “Soviet power” of the Fed

if appointed to the Fed board she would ask “tough questions” about whether it should maintain its rate-setting powers

...she wanted a new Bretton Woods-style conference to reset the international monetary system, replacing the current regime, mostly based on floating currencies. “If it takes place at Mar-a-Lago that would be great,” she added, referring to the president’s golf club in Florida

Last month she told the Washington Post she thought interest rates should be cut “as fast as possible”.

We know that Trump is desperate to cut rates, so what she's saying must be music to his ears.

By the sound of things, if he had his way, he'd have the independence of the Fed gone too, and hand over the control of rates to himself

dr.fuzzenstein

everlast75 wrote: »

I think he needs to be liked. His ego is incredibly sensative. He would much rather be in a room with 20000 people shouting "lock her up" than watch cable news and see actual facts being set out on TV as to his conduct.

This will ultimately be his downfall.
He won't care about any "fake news" about his popularity or ratings. He won't care what his advisors say.
He will do what he knows works. Go out there and hold rally after rally. This hermetically sealed bubble and echo chamber will blind him to how things are really going.
When he loses, it will be like a lightning bolt out of the blue. He'll never see it coming.

duploelabs

spacecoyote wrote: »

You can add to this the fact he is now looking to appoint a member of his presidential election team to the Board of the Federal Reserve...one who is an outspoken critic of the Fed & who believes that the Fed shouldn't have control over rates

https://www.ft.com/content/d92145ec-9d18-11e9-b8ce-8b459ed04726

Paywalled so a couple of quotes:









We know that Trump is desperate to cut rates, so what she's saying must be music to his ears.

By the sound of things, if he had his way, he'd have the independence of the Fed gone too, and hand over the control of rates to himself

Trump wants a rate cut because it affects the interest repayments he personally has to make, anything else is a happy coincidence

Igotadose

Looks like the citizenship question won't be on the Census. As of yesterday, Trumpy was saying he was thinking of not running the census at all (a glaring violation of the Constitution) and was going to consult with his 'legal team.' Got to love how he places upholding the Constitution first and foremost in all his activities:

https://www.npr.org/2019/07/02/738187530/trump-administration-to-print-2020-census-without-citizenship-question

Another victory for the judicial process in the US over the Trump syndicate.

Leroy42

On the other hand, Trumps fundraising for 2020 is massive. $105m in Q2 I believe.

Now money in of itself won't win an election but it does show that there is plenty of support for Trump.

everlast75

Leroy42 wrote: »

On the other hand, Trumps fundraising for 2020 is massive. $105m in Q2 I believe.

Now money in of itself won't win an election but it does show that there is plenty of support for Trump.

Where are these donations coming from?

Small money donations from Joe Public, or big corporation donations from those that benefited from his tax cuts?

Genuine question btw.

Leroy42

Small donations, afaik

Quin_Dub

duploelabs wrote: »

Trump wants a rate cut because it affects the interest repayments he personally has to make, anything else is a happy coincidence

He definitely wants rate cuts for himself , but he also knows that the current economy is the only thing that he has going for him.

He inherited a growing economy ,artificially goosed it via the massive tax cuts , but they have now run out of steam and the impact of the lost Tax revenue is beginning to impact.

The economy is heading for a strong drop as the weight of debt begins to drag, a rates cut might stave that off long enough for him to get re-elected.

If the economy dips over the next 12-18 months there's nothing to save him and he knows it...

duploelabs

Leroy42 wrote: »

Small donations, afaik

The cynic in me is reminded of the 'small donations' made for the 'Save Walter White' site in Breaking Bad

Thepoet85

Professor Moriarty wrote:

reporting on some terrible conditions discovered by inspectors in border camps. Some damning photos too. A quote from the article:

My God that's hard to look at

How have we come so far as a people, the whole situation is a mess.

pixelburp

Leroy42 wrote: »

On the other hand, Trumps fundraising for 2020 is massive. $105m in Q2 I believe.

Now money in of itself won't win an election but it does show that there is plenty of support for Trump.

Given fondness for nickel-and-diming the tax payer, between fuel for his private jet, his trip to Ireland on the public purse, or making his love-in rallies "campaign speeches", I automatically presume there is some funny business going on with those numbers.

I mean campaign funding's as corrupt as hell in US politics to begin with - and not just the US at that going by Brexit - so when it comes to the Trumps it's safest to imagine there's an angle in all this.

Christy42

duploelabs wrote: »

The cynic in me is reminded of the 'small donations' made for the 'Save Walter White' site in Breaking Bad

While that may be going on it isn't in doubt that the man has a lot of support in rural areas. I mean 40% is low vs other presidents but given a motivated base it can raise money with 40% support.

TomOnBoard

So, according to the private Border Patrol Facebook page, the Latinx lawmakers who visited the migrant centres are "scum-buckets and hoes"!

How in God's name can people who revel in expressing such hatred for migrants and people trying to ensure they are treated humanely be trusted with the sacred duty of caring for them?

Disgusting behaviour piled on top of recent reports of appalling treatment of human beings. CBP has been a problem for years and didn't just become one in 2017. The problem here is that their cruel and brutal treatment of subjects has become both acceptable and desired by an Administration that has no moral compass.

Read the Propublica article for yourself and tell me its OK for public servants (serving and retired) to act that way!

https://www.propublica.org/article/secret-border-patrol-facebook-group-agents-joke-about-migrant-deaths-post-sexist-memes

everlast75

TomOnBoard wrote: »

So, according to the private Border Patrol Facebook page, the Latinx lawmakers who visited the migrant centres are "scum-buckets and hoes"!

How in God's name can people who revel in expressing such hatred for migrants and people trying to ensure they are treated humanely be trusted with the sacred duty of caring for them?

Disgusting behaviour piled on top of recent reports of appalling treatment of human beings. CBP has been a problem for years and didn't just become one in 2017. The problem here is that their cruel and brutal treatment of subjects has become both acceptable and desired by an Administration that has no moral compass.

Read the Propublica article for yourself and tell me its OK for public servants (serving and retired) to act that way!

https://www.propublica.org/article/secret-border-patrol-facebook-group-agents-joke-about-migrant-deaths-post-sexist-memes

"When Mexico sends its people, they're not sending their best."

"They're sending people that have a lot of problems, and they're bringing those problems with us. They're bringing drugs. They're bringing crime. They're rapists. And some, I assume, are good people."

This comes from the top.

StringerBell

peddlelies wrote: »

Gee whiz, not that long ago I thought it was a manufactured crisis. What happened?

Well, if you thought the humanitarian crisis at the border was a manufactured one you probably need to broaden your news intake.

I credit you for the naked deflection though.

weisses

Manic Moran wrote: »

On another matter entirely, since the case came up on the previous version of this thread when talking about pardons, the court martial today found Gallagher not guilty of the charge of murdering a captured ISIS fighter, not least because someone else testified that he killed the fighter, who was wounded with a breathing tube, as an act of mercy.

It seems that Gallagher's juniors didn't like him, and may have cobbled up all the various accusations which had piled on to the case. Gallagher was convicted of posing for a photo with the body, and reportedly did actually stab the fighter without obvious cause, though he was also acquitted of such a crime. Possibly because the prosecution's case had basically collapsed on itself.

Outcome didn't really matter

The supreme leader would have pardoned him regardless the outcome ...... Farce

TomOnBoard

weisses wrote: »

Manic Moran wrote: »

On another matter entirely, since the case came up on the previous version of this thread when talking about pardons, the court martial today found Gallagher not guilty of the charge of murdering a captured ISIS fighter, not least because someone else testified that he killed the fighter, who was wounded with a breathing tube, as an act of mercy.

It seems that Gallagher's juniors didn't like him, and may have cobbled up all the various accusations which had piled on to the case. Gallagher was convicted of posing for a photo with the body, and reportedly did actually stab the fighter without obvious cause, though he was also acquitted of such a crime. Possibly because the prosecution's case had basically collapsed on itself.

Outcome didn't really matter

The supreme leader would have pardoned him regardless the outcome ...... Farce

I disagree. Unless there has been a widespread conspiracy to lie by other witnesses, there were many holes in the prosecution case. Gallagher was an idiot to have posed in the picture. That was his crime.

James Brown

peddlelies wrote: »

If she's grossly exaggerating things or straight out lying she deserves to be called out on it just like Trump. The beneficiaries of lies while an obvious noble cause in this case should not take precedent over that.

She's claiming she was physically and sexually intimated which are outrageous claims. She was in the company of dozens who also made the trip. She claimed she toured the entire facility. There's contrasting reports that she shouted at agents once she arrived and only toured one part of the facility.

Given that there's cameras everywhere in those facilities maybe the truth will come out.

Why are you at great pains to dismiss her accounts as backed up by those who accompanied her? The testimonies from women separated from their children and their claims the place was cleaned up for the visit and they start allowing them wash themselves for the visit?

TomOnBoard wrote: »

I disagree. Unless there has been a widespread conspiracy to lie by other witnesses, there were many holes in the prosecution case. Gallagher was an idiot to have posed in the picture. That was his crime.

Gallagher stabbed the kid in the neck, that's not disputed. A lower ranking soldier took the blame for the murder to get Gallagher off, he confessed to that, as he had immunity anyway. This sends a bad message to the world and I know the U.S. Army won't be happy with the result.

After Scott made the declaration, a visibly angry prosecutor accused him of lying, saying Scott had told investigators a different story several times and changed it only after he was granted immunity, which prevents him from being charged in the killing.

“So you can stand up there and you can lie about how you killed the ISIS prisoner so Chief Gallagher does not have to go to jail,” John said, using a common acronym for Islamic State. “You don’t want Chief Gallagher to go to jail, do you?”

“He’s got a wife and family,” Scott said. “I don’t think he should be spending his life in prison.”
https://www.latimes.com/politics/la-me-ln-navy-seal-war-crimes-trial-gallagher-scott-takes-blame-20190621-story.html

pixelburp

Looks like Trump's kinda getting his request of "tanks" at the 4th July parade; Bradleys (technically troop carriers I think? *looks at Manic Moran*) have been seen transported into DC last night. Whole thing sounds like it's going to be incredibly jingoistic, even by the metrics of 4th July. Trump has promised his speech would be non-partisan, but I doubt many are taking that at face value.

I know tanks at parades aren't an uncommon sight even in Wester Democracies (in fact it's debatable this whole avenue of Trumps desires stemmed from his presence at France's own Bastille Parade), but I can understand why military hardware rolling through a parade on US soil feels tonally jarring. Many would have grown up watching Red Square parades, the sight of tanks in a parade becoming emblematic of military or authoritarian rule. But given he thinks "bussing" was just a transport logistics problem, history isn't Trump's strong suit.