Donald Trump Presidency discussion Thread VII (threadbanned users listed in OP)

Cody montana

RIGOLO wrote: »

Only an anti-TRumper would seriously IGNORE Obamas debt and level the blame for US debt problem at the foot of TRump.
The U.S. debt increased $9 trillion during the 8 years Obama was in office.

Perhaps you were paying attention to the moves in the US bond market this week. The 30 year Treasury bond yield hit a record low, which indicates investors have never had as much confidence in the US economy, and the US had never auctioned such debt so cheaply.
https://www.marketwatch.com/story/30-year-treasury-bond-yield-breaks-to-all-time-low-as-coronavirus-fears-lift-havens-2020-02-21
So again, your just expressing an opinion.
The market and bond yields are expressing the reality of booming US economy, booming international confidence in the US ecnonomy and uber-cheap debt.

"The yields of U.S. Treasury bonds, a fundamental marker of the U.S. economy, ticked Friday to a historic low.

This is usually a sign that investors are uncommonly nervous."

https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/2020/02/21/treasury-bonds-hit-historic-low-tale-two-markets-an-uncertain-us-economy-emerges/

pixelburp

Cody montana wrote: »

He was also bankrupt SIX times.
The current deficit in the US in ONE trillion.

He also started from the top, inheriting his father's substantial real estate portfolio. Trump is not a self-made man, and nowhere near the mythological concept of the "American dream" that one might admire; heck if anything, Ocasio-Cortez fulfils that more deftly (though we know how hysterical & hypocritical some get around her). He is the quintessential example of dynastic wealth writ large, and despite the monumental advantages he had growing into adulthood, still managed to make a series of terrible business decisions (Trump Steaks, Magazine, University, etc. etc.), while as you said, bankrupting himself numerous times. He is "the swamp" incarnate, and like Bush Jr. or Reagan, a good example how empty vessels can be useful tools in political strategies. "Drain the Swamp" indeed.

Donald Trump's one success is that he cultivated an image & myth of his wealth and success, mostly by presenting himself in the most ostentatious appearances of "cliche billionaire". He presents, in many ways, as the poor man's idea of the rich man; gold plating, limousines and large private jets. Living beyond his means to maintain a facade. I've estimated before that he's the last remaining tycoon of the classic mould: showy wealth as an intimidation tactic. All he needs are the cigars and top hats.

The man's a spoofer, and an idiot. A dangerous combination, albeit harmless enough in the pubs around the country where we've met that exact form of person. There's enough evidence on public record to prove his lack of intelligence, while anyone who started where he did - yet still struggle to maintain wealth - doesn't get to be called a Success Story.

Outlaw Pete

RIGOLO wrote: »

Seems to be a lot of bluster and opinion recently about TRump being some kind of Russian or Putin stooge.

Aye, never stops, but as you suggest, it's all just nonsense. No matter how many times the left faceplant on trying to paint Trump as a Russian asset, they nevertheless just keep attempting to do so as if nothing has happened. They cry Russia Russia Russia almost as much as they cry Racist Racist Racist these days (which is saying something given their love of the latter). Truth is any democrat currently running would be a welcome relief for Putin over Trump who has done more to displease the Kremlin than the last administration by a country mile. Giving lethal aid to Ukraine alone had Putin nostalgic about the Obama years.

https://www.brookings.edu/blog/order-from-chaos/2018/09/25/on-the-record-the-u-s-administrations-actions-on-russia/

The truth rarely penetrates leftist bubbles though. Here's just one example of Maddow on ONE show recently doing her damndest to try and tie the two in the minds of the US electorate:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UPpyn3QwSj0

Strange how there's been no outrage from leftist MSM about how a dossier which had sevenRussian sources was used by the DNC try and sway the electorate into voting for their candidate and of course also as a basis for the FBI obtaining surveillance warrants. Nah, they'd rather look the other way when it comes to where the real Russia collusion took place with regards to the 2016 election. Gonna be real hard to do that when the John Durham investigation findings drop though.

duploelabs

Outlaw Pete wrote: »

Aye, never stops, but as you suggest, it's all just nonsense. No matter how many times the left faceplant on trying to paint Trump as a Russian asset, they nevertheless just keep attempting to do so as if nothing has happened. They cry Russia Russia Russia almost as much as they cry Racist Racist Racist these days (which is saying something given their love of the latter). Truth is any democrat currently running would be a welcome relief for Putin over Trump who has done more to displease the Kremlin than the last administration by a country mile. Giving lethal aid to Ukraine alone had Putin nostalgic about the Obama years.

https://www.brookings.edu/blog/order-from-chaos/2018/09/25/on-the-record-the-u-s-administrations-actions-on-russia/

The truth rarely penetrates leftist bubbles though. Here's just one example of Maddow on ONE show recently doing her damndest to try and tie the two in the minds of the US electorate:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UPpyn3QwSj0

Strange how there's been no outrage from leftist MSM about how a dossier which had sevenRussian sources was used by the DNC try and sway the electorate into voting for their candidate and of course also as a basis for the FBI obtaining surveillance warrants. Nah, they'd rather look the other way when it comes to where the real Russia collusion took place with regards to the 2016 election. Gonna be real hard to do that when the John Durham investigation findings drop though.

I'm not going to bother picking that horsesh!t apart as you refused to engage proactively and in good faith when challenged

sid waddell

Maddow is excellent. She seems to really trigger a lot of Trump supporters for reasons far beyond her excellent journalism
- primarily among them the fact that she's an extremely smart, strong woman and a lesbian. The exact sort of combination that Trump supporters cannot handle. And they're never able to challenge the content of her programme, instead dealing merely in angry, cliched generalities - there's a good example of this a couple of posts above.

serfboard

sid waddell wrote: »

Maddow is excellent. She seems to really trigger a lot of Trump supporters for reasons far beyond her excellent journalism
- primarily among them the fact that she's an extremely smart, strong woman and a lesbian. The exact sort of combination that Trump supporters cannot handle. And they're never able to challenge the content of her programme, instead dealing merely in angry, cliched generalities - there's a good example of this a couple of posts above.

Not really a fan of Maddow myself. She takes a five-minute story, and stretches it out for almost half an hour. I gave up watching her videos on YouTube, because I found myself roaring at her: “Get to the effing point”, before I stopped watching the video.

duploelabs

serfboard wrote: »

Not really a fan of Maddow myself. She takes a five-minute story, and stretches it out for almost half an hour. I gave up watching her videos on YouTube, because I found myself roaring at her: “Get to the effing point”, before I stopped watching the video.

She dives deep, but that's the context needed for some of the articles she presents

PropJoe10

pixelburp wrote: »

He also started from the top, inheriting his father's substantial real estate portfolio. Trump is not a self-made man, and nowhere near the mythological concept of the "American dream" that one might admire; heck if anything, Ocasio-Cortez fulfils that more deftly (though we know how hysterical & hypocritical some get around her). He is the quintessential example of dynastic wealth writ large, and despite the monumental advantages he had growing into adulthood, still managed to make a series of terrible business decisions (Trump Steaks, Magazine, University, etc. etc.), while as you said, bankrupting himself numerous times. He is "the swamp" incarnate, and like Bush Jr. or Reagan, a good example how empty vessels can be useful tools in political strategies. "Drain the Swamp" indeed.

Donald Trump's one success is that he cultivated an image & myth of his wealth and success, mostly by presenting himself in the most ostentatious appearances of "cliche billionaire". He presents, in many ways, as the poor man's idea of the rich man; gold plating, limousines and large private jets. Living beyond his means to maintain a facade. I've estimated before that he's the last remaining tycoon of the classic mould: showy wealth as an intimidation tactic. All he needs are the cigars and top hats.

The man's a spoofer, and an idiot. A dangerous combination, albeit harmless enough in the pubs around the country where we've met that exact form of person. There's enough evidence on public record to prove his lack of intelligence, while anyone who started where he did - yet still struggle to maintain wealth - doesn't get to be called a Success Story.

He is quite the opposite of the American dream. He is just about the best example of someone using bluster, fake information and nonsense in an apparently charming way to fool people into believing otherwise, though. Its quite a remarkable story and shows the power of social media.

Caquas

Caquas wrote: »

I don’t apologise for linking this case to Irish politics. We are on an Irish website.

Blagojevich was convicted of seeking campaign contributions after he had succeeded in making a tax change which benefitted paediatricians who had lobbied unsuccessfully for years. He was upset that they wouldn’t contribute to his re-election campaign (which is legally ring fenced and not available to the candidate personally). My point is that Irish politicians are relieved of this inconvenience because Irish taxpayers are obliged to contribute to incumbents regardless of our political views.

It’s time you apologised for calling me a liar now that I’ve improved your legal education. At the very least you should acknowledge that after eight years, Blagojevich has served his time and Trump was right to commute his sentence. No one in Ireland has spent 8 years in jail except for murder but you wanted Blagojevich to serve 14 years for attempting to get campaign funding from a medical lobby. The Irish love to pillory corrupt politicians until they need to bend the rules to get planning, or a medical card or a pension or ...... .

Here’s another layman’s guide to the Blagojevich case for your continuing education (that two second wiki search seems a long time ago Jack!)

https://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2017/11/02/rod-blagojevich-mercy-corruption-chicago-illinois-governor-215781"]https://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2017/11/02/rod-blagojevich-mercy-corruption-chicago-illinois-governor-215781[/URL]

And I won’t apologise for linking this case to another relevant example from Irish politics (which the Irish media will never mention while they regurgitate the NYT/CNN on Blagojevich.)

How do we fill Senate seats? At the whim of a defeated Taoiseach even as the Seanad election campaign is underway (itself a farrago of democracy). The outgoing Taoiseach decides to fill the seat with .... a defeated TD in order to ..... boost his chances of election to that incorrigible institution!.
https://galwaybayfm.ie/galway-bay-fm-news-desk/taoiseach-appoints-outgoing-minister-and-galway-west-td-sean-kyne-to-seanad/

And will anyone ask this failed Dail candidate whether his fate was the electorate’s judgement on this extravagant purchase. By strange coincidence the owner of this airport is also a Senator nominated by the previous outgoing Taoiseach.
https://www.thejournal.ie/aran-islands-airport-4961554-Jan2020/

But Rod Blagojevich- now there’s an outrage! Eight years in jail is not enough for the “liberal” media. He used the F word while talking about Obama’s seat and the FBI have the wiretaps to prove it.

StringerBell

What does something that happens in an Irish political context have to do with a convicted criminal in the U.S? I'm missing the relevance.

PropJoe10

Outlaw Pete wrote: »

Strange how there's been no outrage from leftist MSM about how a dossier which had sevenRussian sources was used by the DNC try and sway the electorate into voting for their candidate and of course also as a basis for the FBI obtaining surveillance warrants. Nah, they'd rather look the other way when it comes to where the real Russia collusion took place with regards to the 2016 election. Gonna be real hard to do that when the John Durham investigation findings drop though.

Last time I checked, this was a thread on Donald Trump's Presidency, not a thread on the alleged wrongdoing of members of the DNC.

If the DNC acted inappropriately then that's totally worthy of investigation, but using supposed wrongdoing by the DNC does NOT excuse the actions of Trump since 2015 with regard to Russian interference. Whataboutism, as I'm sure has been pointed out to you before (and ignored, I'm sure) is an old Soviet tool used to spread discord and confusion - using the DNC as an equivalency to excuse Trump's conduct is utterly ridiculous.

Still waiting to see actual evidence of wrongdoing by the "left" as you put it, but if it materialises, I hope it's investigated as it should be. None of it will have any impact or relevance to what Trump is doing, though.

Not sure why I keep responding to you, but I'm looking forward to a day when you might actually be interested in responding to posts or questions put to you here.

sid waddell

To me it seems pretty obvious how all this will end up ahead of the election. Trump's purges of the FBI and the DOJ will enable him to open bogus investigations into by then nominee Sanders being a supposed Russian agent. As another poster said, an integral part of fascism is purging the levers of state so they can then be used against political opponents.

Conspiracy theories and projection are front, central and everywhere else in this evil regime.

Caquas

StringerBell wrote: »

What does something that happens in an Irish political context have to do with a convicted criminal in the U.S? I'm missing the relevance.

Don’t strain your brain.

Posters here are outraged about what (they mistakenly think) Blagojevich did with Obama’s Senate seat. I try to educate them and I also point to what the caretaker Taoiseach did with a Senate vacancy here.

But hey, nothing to see here, move along now.

Christy42

StringerBell wrote: »

What does something that happens in an Irish political context have to do with a convicted criminal in the U.S? I'm missing the relevance.

Trump has been especially blatant in his support of corruption recently. New levels of talking about anything but Trump are required.

sid waddell

Caquas wrote: »

Don’t strain your brain.

Posters here are outraged about what (they mistakenly think) Blagojevich did with Obama’s Senate seat. I try to educate them and I also point to what the caretaker Taoiseach did with a Senate vacancy here.

But hey, nothing to see here, move along now.

Why don't you answer the poster's question instead of engaging in insults and bizarre and irrelevant attempts at whataboutery?

Caquas

sid waddell wrote: »

Why don't you answer the poster's question instead of engaging in insults and bizarre and irrelevant attempts at whataboutery?

I could hardly be clearer and this is absolutely not “whataboutery” .

We are on an Irish website discussing the jailing of the Governor of Illinois who posters here thought (wrongly) was convicted of corruptly filling Obama’s Senate seat. In addition to answering the various falsehoods and setting out the facts (which the Irish media won’t report), I pointed to the recent filling of a seat in Seanad Éireann by the Taoiseach.

The relevance should be obvious but if you still can’t see it, just relax.

sid waddell

Caquas wrote: »

I could hardly be clearer and this is absolutely not “whataboutery” .

We are on an Irish website discussing the jailing of the Governor of Illinois who posters here thought (wrongly) was convicted of corruptly filling Obama’s Senate seat. In addition to answering the various falsehoods and setting out the facts (which the Irish media won’t report), I pointed to the recent filling of a seat in Seanad Éireann by the Taoiseach.

The relevance should be obvious but if you still can’t see it, just relax.

It's literally a textbook definition of whataboutery.

A Taoiseach filling an Irish senate seat has no relevance whatsoever to the topic.

aloyisious

Caquas wrote: »

I could hardly be clearer and this is absolutely not “whataboutery” .

We are on an Irish website discussing the jailing of the Governor of Illinois who posters here thought (wrongly) was convicted of corruptly filling Obama’s Senate seat. In addition to answering the various falsehoods and setting out the facts (which the Irish media won’t report), I pointed to the recent filling of a seat in Seanad Éireann by the Taoiseach.

The relevance should be obvious but if you still can’t see it, just relax.

I think we are discussing the in-office activities of Don Trump, the sitting president of the US, including his use of the presidential pardon in US politics. You are bringing Irish Oireachtas politics into the President Don Trump US election thread. Maybe we should just leave a decision on whether or not to respond to the Irish politics distraction you are providing to the thread to the US persons involved in this debate?

Call Me Jimmy

everlast75 wrote: »

Its very clear what the Russian tactic is here. Push Trump because he is their stooge and push the most divisive candidate on the left.

3 things -

1) In Bernie's defence, he renounced Russia's interference (Trump welcomed it and refuses to acknowledge it)

2) Bernie sometimes is his own worst enemy when people accuse him of being divisive. Here is an example now why Russia want him to do well - it'll split the Dem vote - which benefits Trump

https://twitter.com/BernieSanders/status/1231021453270769664?s=19

3) Russia bet Bernie is the best person for trump to run against. The message is simple - Capitalism Vs Socialism.
(Mind you - every poll I've seen says Bernie beats Trump)

I just find it that putting so much stock in what Russia 'want' gives them so much more power than they ever could ask for. Russia are in the heads of the american people, I would say driven by a media that is pushing it for some reason.

What can Russia do? Propagandise and spew out misinformation just like all adverserial powers do in each others elections. As you say, they will push either side or both but their power comes from the american people believing their efforts should affect who THEY vote for, or blame the people Russia tries to prop up at any moment.

Maximal disruption means they will switch their tactics, but the only relevant question about who they want (not that it should matter to the american public) is what US president will back off the geopolitical stage the most? Apparently this is the danger, we are told Trump is too nice to Russia hence why Putin loves him.

But people also give out about Trump increasing military spending which is not good for Russia and the effects of which will long outlast Trumps 4 or 8 years if he is overhauling and updating equipment etc. Then there is the Ukraine example where apparently he loves Russia so much he gave Ukraine the ability to stop them encroaching.

On the other hand you have Bernie Sanders who is finding ways to pay for medicare for all and agrees with severely limiting the Us influence over the world which means MUCH less military spending.

I can't see how anyone thinks Putin would want Trump more than Sanders. Edit: However I can see how Russia would calculate that Bernie Sanders will stay in line with the establishment on a lot of things.

Again though, the main point is that over-analysing who the Russian's want is the only way they gain any significant power in the election.

Leroy42

Trump is ripping the US democracy apart. He is ripping apart the FBI,CIA, the judicial system. He has completely (or better said greatly enhanced) the partisan nature of House and Senate. He has weakened Nato and alliances.

People don't believe the media, and are willing to believe whatever they are told once that comes from their guy.

It isn't Trump in particular that Russia wants, he is simply the perfect option to get the outcome they want.

A divided US is far easier to take on than a focused US. A US with no strong allies, and a weakened Europe due to lack of alignment with the US.

Call Me Jimmy

Leroy42 wrote: »

Trump is ripping the US democracy apart. He is ripping apart the FBI,CIA, the judicial system. He has completely (or better said greatly enhanced) the partisan nature of House and Senate. He has weakened Nato and alliances.

I think Nato being less reliant on one country for funding strengthens it, what are you referring to? There is no doubt some bitterness growing between some countries and the US I agree.

I think saying he is ripping the FBI CIA and judicial system apart is incredible. What are you referring to there specifically? His commenting on judges /cases in public is the worst but I think the american system was designed to withstand that and will, don't you think?

duploelabs

Call Me Jimmy wrote: »

I think Nato being less reliant on one country for funding strengthens it, what are you referring to? There is no doubt some bitterness growing between some countries and the US I agree.

I think saying he is ripping the FBI CIA and judicial system apart is incredible. What are you referring to there specifically? His commenting on judges /cases in public is the worst but I think the american system was designed to withstand that and will, don't you think?

OK, as a microcosm on just the Stone case, do you think those prosecutors walked out for sh!ts and giggles?

Call Me Jimmy

duploelabs wrote: »

OK, as a microcosm on just the Stone case, do you think those prosecutors walked out for sh!ts and giggles?

They decided to walk out, how is that destroying the justice system? I've said Trump shouldn't have commented I don't think it was unreasonable for Barr to say the sentence was too much, my understanding is the DOJ has every right to do what it did. I'm no legal expert but the judge seemed to implicitly agree by giving a much shorter sentence than what was recommended (like 1/3 I think). I don't see where the problem is other than Trump speaking about it.

sid waddell

Call Me Jimmy wrote: »

I can't see how anyone thinks Putin would want Trump more than Sanders. Edit: However I can see how Russia would calculate that Bernie Sanders will stay in line with the establishment on a lot of things.

Putin wants Trump in power. He's only using Sanders to split the Democratic party to grease the path for Trump.

Here's why Putin wants Trump and not Sanders. A Sanders administration would be competent for a start. It would not treat the European Union as an enemy. It would not be a haven of naked corruption and intent on destruction of the rule of law or widespread vilification of ethnic and sexual minorities. It would not fire anybody in the intelligence services who spoke up about Russian interference. It would mean the social liberals would be firmly in the ascendant. Because the US is still seen as the leader of the international community, it would dampen much of the momentum surrounding the worldwide far right that Russia depends on to create division in different countries. If Sanders won, it's likely you'd see the end of Bolsonaro in Brazil by 2022, Duterte in the Philippines would be gone by then also and UK public opinion might well swing against Boris Johnson. Nothing would kill the far right internationally than to see Trump as a loser. There would be the possibility of a domino effect. Trump is the spiritual king of the far right internationally and they would have a much harder time without him, and thus so would Putin.

Call Me Jimmy

Eviscerating the military budget and the US counter-intelligence capabilities and military presence overseas is outweighed by Bernie being socially liberal?

Bernie election ends the populist nationalist movement worldwide? What the hell

EDIT: Although it does make sense if you put the geopolitical shift down to people essentially being 'trendy'

sid waddell

Call Me Jimmy wrote: »

Eviscerating the military budget and the US counter-intelligence capabilities and military presence overseas is outweighed by Bernie being socially liberal?

Bernie election ends the populist nationalist movement worldwide? What the hell

EDIT: Although it does make sense if you put the geopolitical shift down to people essentially being 'trendy'

None of that is a serious response.

Trump has allowed Putin to do pretty much whatever he wants militarily.

duploelabs

Call Me Jimmy wrote: »

They decided to walk out, how is that destroying the justice system? I've said Trump shouldn't have commented I don't think it was unreasonable for Barr to say the sentence was too much, my understanding is the DOJ has every right to do what it did. I'm no legal expert but the judge seemed to implicitly agree by giving a much shorter sentence than what was recommended (like 1/3 I think). I don't see where the problem is other than Trump speaking about it.

So are you ok with the president influencing the judiciary?

Unfortunately you're in the minority (within over 1,100 members of the latter)
https://www.nytimes.com/2020/02/16/us/politics/barr-trump-justice-department.html

Call Me Jimmy

duploelabs wrote: »

So are you ok with the president influencing the judiciary?

Unfortunately you're in the minority (within over 1,100 members of the latter)
https://www.nytimes.com/2020/02/16/us/politics/barr-trump-justice-department.html

The post you quoted is one where I said it's not ok.

It's not defensible and it's probably the dumbest and most damaging thing Donald Trump does.

I don't think it constitutes a crisis and I don't think even public criticism between branches threatens the integrity of the system no matter how egregious and irresponsible it feels for the president to act like this. I have only seen signs of how little effect it has on the judiciary, I don't think they have been compromised in any way.

Don't mistake me for someone who thinks it's sunshine and rainbows, just offering some counter points as I see them, which seems to be few and far between in these Trump threads. Like when people say he's destroying the institutions, I'm pushing back on that because I don't think it's the case.

Nody

Call Me Jimmy wrote: »

They decided to walk out, how is that destroying the justice system? I've said Trump shouldn't have commented I don't think it was unreasonable for Barr to say the sentence was too much, my understanding is the DOJ has every right to do what it did. I'm no legal expert but the judge seemed to implicitly agree by giving a much shorter sentence than what was recommended (like 1/3 I think). I don't see where the problem is other than Trump speaking about it.

Well to bad your understanding is wrong; have a look at this where an actual lawyer goes through what happened in the case. Yes; it is that bad that the president and the DOJ are breaking up the justice system. Yes; the sentencing proposal was anchored within DOJ and yes even the judge ripped DOJ a new one on how the DOJ handled it. Oh and those people quitting happened to be among the best laywers in the country that were well respected and over 2000 prosecutors and all the federal judges are meeting to discuss how to handle it. But yea, clearly a minor issue here with only Trump tweeting or something.

aloyisious

Call Me Jimmy wrote: »

The post you quoted is one where I said it's not ok.

It's not defensible and it's probably the dumbest and most damaging thing Donald Trump does.

I don't think it constitutes a crisis and I don't think even public criticism between branches threatens the integrity of the system no matter how egregious and irresponsible it feels for the president to act like this. I have only seen signs of how little effect it has on the judiciary, I don't think they have been compromised in any way.

Don't mistake me for someone who thinks it's sunshine and rainbows, just offering some counter points as I see them, which seems to be few and far between in these Trump threads. Like when people say he's destroying the institutions, I'm pushing back on that because I don't think it's the case.

Would you think that Russia is doing what was called mind-****ing in the Nixon era with its activities in unsettling the US elections?

Do you believe that Don, in his criticism of his own intelligence agencies and his statements that he trusts the Russian president over them, is merely being justifiably critical of them?

Taking that last point, do you think that Don [by sacking his last acting DNI for briefing the US Congress Int committee on Russia's activities] acted in a reasonable manner conducive to the US Int community having faith in their president's intent to defend the US against Russian intelligence agencies activities in the US?