2020 US Presidential Election (aka: The Trump Coronation)

Timberrrrrrrr

duploelabs wrote: »

It's like waking up and hearing Ode to Joy playing softly.

In other news

Hydroxychloroquine: FDA revokes emergency use of malaria drug Trump promoted as coronavirus cure

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/us-politics/hydroxychloroquine-trump-coronavirus-cure-fda-covid-19-drugs-a9567266.html

I dunno, I was looking forward to the excuses that were forthcoming, I guess we will never know the answers now.

duploelabs

francois wrote: »

He's fretting about what Bolton may reveal in his book. Injunction on the way. Apparently everything he says is "classified"

Yup

https://twitter.com/cspan/status/1272629770795311105

Brian?

duploelabs wrote: »

Yup

https://twitter.com/cspan/status/1272629770795311105

Is Bolton actually breaking the law then? It would seem like serious own goal if he does and he's way too smart for that.

frag420

Brian? wrote: »

Is Bolton actually breaking the law then? It would seem like serious own goal if he does and he's way too smart for that.

I would imagine (and hope) that Bolton has had his own legal team and that of the publishers look over any and all content, there is no way they would go to rent without all bases covered.

And hasn't President Chump already quoted to the press/public content based on conversations he has had with Bolton, other politicians, heads of states etc, they would all have to be highly classified according to himself so there is a president perhaps ( I am no legal scholar so open to correction)

Quin_Dub

frag420 wrote: »

I would imagine (and hope) that Bolton has had his own legal team and that of the publishers look over any and all content, there is no way they would go to rent without all bases covered.

And hasn't President Chump already quoted to the press/public content based on conversations he has had with Bolton, other politicians, heads of states etc, they would all have to be highly classified according to himself so there is a president perhaps ( I am no legal scholar so open to correction)

I think that the general rule is that "when the president says it , it's ok" insofar as a President can't technically "leak" confidential information as they have authority to declassify anything that they like.

duploelabs

Brian? wrote: »

Is Bolton actually breaking the law then? It would seem like serious own goal if he does and he's way too smart for that.

In the video he says to a reporter 'any conversation with me is classified', which begs the question how the reporter able to publish it if every conversation is classified

Brian?

duploelabs wrote: »

In the video he says to a reporter 'any conversation with me is classified', which begs the question how the reporter able to publish it if every conversation is classified

It's obviously a ridiculous thing to say. So I automatically dismissed that.

I was wondering more about "the process" Barr refers to.

Igotadose

What's subtle is Trump threatening to sicc the AG onto Bolton. Uhh... he's not Trump's lawyer. He's the head of the DOJ. (Well, o.k. Barr behaves like he's Trump's lawyer.) If Bolton committed some sort of act of espionage, the AG wouldn't get involved initially, the FBI might.

timsey tiger

Quin_Dub wrote: »

I think that the general rule is that "when the president says it , it's ok" insofar as a President can't technically "leak" confidential information as they have authority to declassify anything that they like.

I think this correct. The president has the authority to deem anything that is classified as unclassified and I understand there is no issue if he does it implicitly. Although, it can cause a media storm if he is seen to do so in appropriately, which Trump was accused of earlier in his presidency in conversation with the Russian ambassador.

duploelabs

timsey tiger wrote: »

I think this correct. The president has the authority to deem anything that is classified as unclassified and I understand there is no issue if he does it implicitly. Although, it can cause a media storm if he is seen to do so in appropriately, which Trump was accused of earlier in his presidency in conversation with the Russian ambassador.

Nor would I think that he can retrospectively classify any conversation

timsey tiger

duploelabs wrote: »

Nor would I think that he can retrospectively classify any conversation

Well attempting to do that might prove interesting in terms of first amendment rights, notwithstanding that it would seem pretty pointless.

Quin_Dub

duploelabs wrote: »

Nor would I think that he can retrospectively classify any conversation

timsey tiger wrote: »

Well attempting to do that might prove interesting in terms of first amendment rights, notwithstanding that it would seem pretty pointless.

I think they key question is whether the NDA type of thing that Bolton would have signed on taking the job would apply to the content of his book.

Clearly lots of former politicians etc. have written books about their time in office so he's allowed write a book so I don't think they can stop the whole book at all.

They could demand specific redactions , but suggesting that he can never disclose anything that was ever said in conversation with the President is patently ridiculous , but consistent with Trump and his view of "Absolute Presidential Immunity" and the like.

DrumSteve

Quin_Dub wrote: »

I think they key question is whether the NDA type of thing that Bolton would have signed on taking the job would apply to the content of his book.

Clearly lots of former politicians etc. have written books about their time in office so he's allowed write a book so I don't think they can stop the whole book at all.

They could demand specific redactions , but suggesting that he can never disclose anything that was ever said in conversation with the President is patently ridiculous , but consistent with Trump and his view of "Absolute Presidential Immunity" and the like.

Has anyone ever asked him if he thought that applied to Obama also?

francois

Timberrrrrrrr wrote: »

I dunno, I was looking forward to the excuses that were forthcoming, I guess we will never know the answers now.

No doubt a "new" poster will be along to enlighten us all

Overheal

francois wrote: »

No doubt a "new" poster will be along to enlighten us all

Or old threads will become zombies...

Fox is defending WaterGait by saying the president had leather shoes on, so of course a slight incline was a challenge. Watch below, I’ve confirmed the video playback works:

https://twitter.com/realdonaldrumpf/status/1272690409169444864?s=21

Edit: where are all the Trump ads? He is getting brutalized out there with, you know, his record:

[url]

https://twitter.com/cwebbonline/status/1272861345503866880?s=21[/url]

eagle eye

francois wrote:

No doubt a "new" poster will be along to enlighten us all

That poster has been on the site for well over two years.
Its very disrespectful of you to suggest that somebody do that.
I'd suspect if you think this way you have done it or would do it.

eagle eye

Overheal wrote:

Fox is defending WaterGait by saying the president had leather shoes on, so of course a slight incline was a challenge. Watch below, I’ve confirmed the video playback works:

The video works for me and it's the first time I seen it. What's the issue there? What happened?

Overheal

eagle eye wrote: »

That poster has been on the site for well over two years.
Its very disrespectful of you to suggest that somebody do that.
I'd suspect if you think this way you have done it or would do it.

Oh, longer than that..

Overheal

eagle eye wrote: »

The video works for me and it's the first time I seen it. What's the issue there? What happened?

#WaterGait.

If you watched the video in the link I posted it’s self explanatory surely.

francois

eagle eye wrote: »

That poster has been on the site for well over two years.
Its very disrespectful of you to suggest that somebody do that.
I'd suspect if you think this way you have done it or would do it.

You suspect incorrectly

Overheal

Ho Ly ****

https://twitter.com/vicjkim/status/1272814714662215681?s=21

Relations with DPRK have taken a complete nosedive under President Trump. They literally bombed the inter-liaison office with South Korea.

Quin_Dub

Overheal wrote: »

Ho Ly ****

https://twitter.com/vicjkim/status/1272814714662215681?s=21

Relations with DPRK have taken a complete nosedive under President Trump. They literally bombed the inter-liaison office with South Korea.

To be honest , they are doing what they've always done - Seizing an opportunity.

They saw that Trump was a rampant narcissist and would give them the Photo-Op that they've wanted for years so they got that.

Now , they see that Trump is being hammered from all sides so they lob a grenade (literally) over the fence to stir the pot a bit more as they recognise that no one will do anything to stop them.


Not a word from Trump of course - This is his latest tweet from this morning

https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/1272871304572678144

Clearly oblivious to the reality that the growth is from almost zero because everything was shut and it's still 65% below where it was last year..

The rest of his twitter feed is full of him retweeting himself!!

https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/1272737867576590336

eagle eye

francois wrote:

You suspect incorrectly

Well why would you insult another poster like that then?

eagle eye

Overheal wrote:

If you watched the video in the link I posted it’s self explanatory surely.

All I see is Trump and some random guy walking carefully down a walkway. Is there something else?

Timberrrrrrrr

eagle eye wrote: »

All I see is Trump and some random guy walking carefully down a walkway. Is there something else?

And his difficulty lifting a glass of water to his lips?

francois

eagle eye wrote: »

Well why would you insult another poster like that then?

You are attributing an insult where none exists. I was merely making a point about what has occurred in the past with posters who have been banned.
I see no further usefulness in continuing this discussion.

Overheal

“ A former prosecutor in special counsel Robert Mueller’s office–who quit the Roger Stone prosecution after Attorney General Bill Barr overruled the sentencing recommendations made by the career prosecutors on the case–will put on his whistleblower hat and dish on that day in recent DOJ infamy.

“Zelinsky and John W. Elias, two current DOJ prosecutors, are going to testify under subpoena before the House Judiciary Committee“

https://lawandcrime.com/high-profile/former-mueller-prosecutor-will-put-on-his-whistleblower-hat-testify-about-bill-barrs-intervention-in-roger-stone-case/

#Barrisma rolls onward

Silentcorner

Overheal wrote: »

“Differing opinion” is not what I would call derailing a thread with selective technological literacy. Or continuing to post nonsense repeatedly that is demonstrably untrue. I call it bad faith posting.

This is a thread where at least 90% of posters all hold the same position, it is an extreme one...we all know the next person to be banned won't be coming from that 90%.

We all know why.

Anyway ignoring the upset posters above. The Donald has praised how we have vaccines for everything including AIDs.

https://twitter.com/Acyn/status/1272933012657725441

Overheal

Silentcorner wrote: »

This is a thread where at least 90% of posters all hold the same position, it is an extreme one...we all know the next person to be banned won't be coming from that 90%.

We all know why.

Because we all post in good faith. It’s not rocket surgery.