Trump v Biden 2020,The insurrection (pt 6) Read OP

Gregor Samsa

BobbyMalone wrote: »

That's not even what many of these 'post-Trumpists' want, though. They want all the events of the last few months (and years, in reality) to be brushed under the carpet so that there are no consequences.

This is it. Many long standing Republicans hitched their wagons onto Trump's troll train, happy enough to ignore the damage done by the cavalcade ploughing though civility along the way, and now realise that it's actually led them directly into the territory of sedition, terrorism and an actual attempt to overthrow democracy. They realise it's gone too far, and have to unhitch and reverse. But instead of admitting they were wrong and actually doing something about repairing the damage they caused, they now want everyone else to just ignore the devastation the train ride caused, and let them reset on some other track.

Carfacemandog

everlast75 wrote: »

I suspect pre-emptive pardons to Meadows who was on that call, Graham and others.

The truth will out.

Can't be certain on this, but I have heard that you apparently can't pardon treason, sedition or insurrection.

Gregor Samsa

Gregor Samsa wrote: »

This is it. Many long standing Republicans hitched their wagons onto Trump's.... But instead of admitting they were wrong and actually doing something about repairing the damage they caused, they now want everyone else to just ignore the devastation the train ride caused, and let them reset on some other track.

MANY ordinary American citzens are acting like this too. A typical projection of their malady is where they apply all blame in some cases to machinations and skullduggery of the US and Global Media, both printed and online as it it were some coriography on the media part.

everlast75

I think it will be known as the "Trump stink". Very hard to get off and has detrimental effects to your political and professional life apparently.

"Forbes Editor Warns Companies Not to Hire Kayleigh McEnany and Other Trump ‘Fabulists’"

https://www.thewrap.com/forbes-editor-warns-companies-not-to-hire-mcenany-kellyanne-conway-and-other-trump-fabulists/

Quin_Dub

hotmail.com wrote: »

I think there's a growing attitude that once Trump goes, it's time to move on and not hear from him.


Let's see if US media can resist themselves. I'm not hopeful.

I suspect that we'll continue to hear a lot about him , but much much less from him.

The media will absolutely cover all of his legal cases etc. etc. , but the majority will not give him a platform for his ramblings however.

All the signs have been there that Trump has never planned to leave the presidency and its now playing out

He has been posting a really bizzare meme on his twitter for a few years now Trump 2020, Trump 2024, Trump 2028 and so on.

Absolutely surreal.

Billy Mays

Smee_Again

Timberrrrrrrr wrote: »

Oh dear, talk about hitting them in the pockets, this tweet has started of a chain reaction asking companies why they rent space from Trump.

https://twitter.com/donwinslow/status/1348452909655093249?s=19

Almost $2M from ICBC a Chinese state owned bank.

The Raging Bile Duct

super_furry wrote: »

More than anything else, that's the one thing that's going to eat away at him.

He had the PGA Championship at his venue and they're taking it away from him. He's going to lose his fcuking mind.

And he can't even go onto Twitter and rant about it! Muahahaha...

osarusan

Timberrrrrrrr wrote: »

Oh dear, talk about hitting them in the pockets, this tweet has started of a chain reaction asking companies why they rent space from Trump.

https://twitter.com/donwinslow/status/1348452909655093249?s=19

I don't like this kind of stuff tbh.

If businesses voluntarily withdraw from their relationships with Trump that's one thing, but to shame businesses into doing it is another.

I've never understood/agreed with the focus on Trump the businessman (although of course he massively egged that pudding himself). I just focus on his as a politician, and I'd regard him as a disaster of one.

If there are court cases to follow, so be it.

But the creating of a list of business with some connections to Trump which will then be pressured to break those connections isn't something I want to see at all.

briany

The Raging Bile Duct wrote: »

And he can't even go onto Twitter and rant about it! Muahahaha...

He can always register an account on that last bastion of online hatespeech, Mumsnet.

everlast75

osarusan wrote: »

I don't like this kind of stuff tbh.

If businesses voluntarily withdraw from their relationships with Trump that's one thing, but to shame businesses into doing it is another.

I've never understood/agreed with the focus on Trump the businessman (although of course he massively egged that pudding himself). I just focus on his as a politician, and I'd regard him as a disaster of one.

If there are court cases to follow, so be it.

But the creating of a list of business with some connections to Trump which will then be pressured to break those connections isn't something I want to see at all.

Businesses benefit from associations with celebrities and politicians etc, and so they have to go with the good and the bad.

Trump is toxic, not because he mispoke or was caught drink driving, but because he incited a riot, tried to over turn a fair election and people are pi$$ed.

The Trump Stink is real and if it wasn't, companies would ignore the outcry until it blew over.

mariaalice

isn't he going to start a TV station? :P

Gregor Samsa

osarusan wrote: »

But the creating of a list of business with some connections to Trump which will then be pressured to break those connections isn't something I want to see at all.

I'd be quite happy to have a list of businesses he's involved in so that I can make up my mind myself whether I want to support them (and by extension him) financially or not. I don't see the problem with this, it's merely information. People can then choose to act on that information or not.

listermint

osarusan wrote: »

I don't like this kind of stuff tbh.

If businesses voluntarily withdraw from their relationships with Trump that's one thing, but to shame businesses into doing it is another.

I've never understood/agreed with the focus on Trump the businessman (although of course he massively egged that pudding himself). I just focus on his as a politician, and I'd regard him as a disaster of one.

If there are court cases to follow, so be it.

But the creating of a list of business with some connections to Trump which will then be pressured to break those connections isn't something I want to see at all.

But they went into business to get something out of him and particularly him being president.


So it stands to reason they should be held to account when that association is entirely negative like say for example inciting a coup.

Quin_Dub

everlast75 wrote: »

Businesses benefit from associations with celebrities and politicians etc, and so they have to go with the good and the bad.

Trump is toxic, not because he mispoke or was caught drink driving, but because he incited a riot, tried to over turn a fair election and people are pi$$ed.

The Trump Stink is real and if it wasn't, companies would ignore the outcry until it blew over.

Outside of the Golf Courses , almost all of his "Properties" are actually licence deals where other parties own the buildings but they licence the Trump name.

The value of the Trump brand is massively, permanently damaged now. They'll all be looking to see how they can get out of those deals now.

I would expect that a significant number of buildings that have a Trump sign over the door will be taking them down fairly soon.

fly_agaric

[PHP][/PHP]

everlast75 wrote: »

I think it will be known as the "Trump stink". Very hard to get off and has detrimental effects to your political and professional life apparently.

"Forbes Editor Warns Companies Not to Hire Kayleigh McEnany and Other Trump ‘Fabulists’"

https://www.thewrap.com/forbes-editor-warns-companies-not-to-hire-mcenany-kellyanne-conway-and-other-trump-fabulists/

It appears a bit hypocritcial + late in the day to me. Corporate America lining up to kick Trump and his patsies. They've enabled the US Republican party's descent into madness for decades now because they'll cut their tax bill + slash workers rights and regulations in the US and that is all that matters, right?

"Big Tech" companies have been only too willing to make money off the virtual bile (i.e. lies and hatred) spewed out by the wingnuts + wash their hands of it when it bleeds into violence in the real world.

Seems like since the events last week they've gotten a bit scared and may be starting to realise how badly they have fouled up their own nest in the US.

everlast75

mariaalice wrote: »

isn't he going to start a TV station? :P

According to bob woodward, that was his plan in 2015 when he lost

walshb

I am not at all a conspiracy theory type person

BUT, one that was mentiuoned here....

Trump deliberately installed as President to show people just how mad our world could get....shocking them into trusting in more stable human beings to "look after" us all......

osarusan

Gregor Samsa wrote: »

I'd be quite happy to have a list of businesses he's involved in so that I can make up my mind myself whether I want to support them (and by extension him) financially or not. I don't see the problem with this, it's merely information. People can then choose to act on that information or not.

If it turns out to be just a list of businesses so that people can make up their own minds, that's one thing, but let's be honest here, it is definitely going to turn into a public 'Why are you renting office space from Trump?'-style campaign.

listermint wrote: »

But they went into business to get something out of him and particularly him being president.


So it stands to reason they should be held to account when that association is entirely negative like say for example inciting a coup.

Maybe in some cases. But not in every case. A company that has been renting office space from Trump* for 20 years isn't in it for that reason.

*just an example, it could apply to people who have any kind of relationship with a Trump business.

ohnonotgmail

osarusan wrote: »

I don't like this kind of stuff tbh.

If businesses voluntarily withdraw from their relationships with Trump that's one thing, but to shame businesses into doing it is another.

I've never understood/agreed with the focus on Trump the businessman (although of course he massively egged that pudding himself). I just focus on his as a politician, and I'd regard him as a disaster of one.

If there are court cases to follow, so be it.

But the creating of a list of business with some connections to Trump which will then be pressured to break those connections isn't something I want to see at all.

lie down with a dog and get fleas.

Quin_Dub

fly_agaric wrote: »

[PHP][/PHP]

It appears a bit hypocritcial + late in the day to me. Corporate America lining up to kick Trump and his patsies. They've enabled the US Republican party's descent into madness for decades now because they'll cut their tax bill + slash workers rights and regulations in the US and that is all that matters, right?

"Big Tech" companies have been only too willing to make money of the virtual bile (i.e. lies and hatred) spewed out by the wingnuts + wash their hands of it when it bleeds into violence in the real world.

Seems like since the events last week they've gotten a bit scared and may be starting to realise how badly they have fouled up their own nest in the US.

Isn't that always the way?

For a large swathe of the Corporate world as long as they are legally making money, they are happy.

Now though they are seeing huge risk to their revenues in being associated with Trump and his high profile inner circle.

Cynical yes , but it's the reality of the world they operate in.

Morals are secondary to Profits.

everlast75

Ooft

https://twitter.com/donk_enby/status/1348484125825658887?s=19

nolivesmatter

Timberrrrrrrr wrote: »

Oh dear, talk about hitting them in the pockets, this tweet has started of a chain reaction asking companies why they rent space from Trump.

https://twitter.com/donwinslow/status/1348452909655093249?s=19

I get the hate for Trump but seems unfair to target these companies. They're just renting office space and may have been doing long before the whole Trump ****show began.

seamus

Quin_Dub wrote: »

Outside of the Golf Courses , almost all of his "Properties" are actually licence deals where other parties own the buildings but they licence the Trump name.

The value of the Trump brand is massively, permanently damaged now. They'll all be looking to see how they can get out of those deals now.

I would expect that a significant number of buildings that have a Trump sign over the door will be taking them down fairly soon.

Yep, and it'll kill him having to watch it happen.

Even those high up in the Trump organisation now will be strongly advising a change of brand, remove the Trump name from it and call it something else or the business will go down the toilet.

Afaik, Trump himself is no longer totally in control so it won't be down to him, his children have some leadership stakes in it. But the ego is so strong, his refusal to drop the Trump name could tear the whole thing apart.

briany

everlast75 wrote: »

According to bob woodward, that was his plan in 2015 when he lost

I have to wonder if he'd be happy with merely that, now.

But, more importantly, considering the amount of ammo there to prosecute him with, does he really want to continue being a pain after he's left office, making yet more enemies? I could imagine that Biden's administration would tacitly agree not to go after Trump if Trump were to just f**k off and live a quiet life somewhere, because prosecuting Trump is politically volatile as well. It would be a bitter pill to swallow for all sides to do that, of course, but it might allow for the closest thing to normality. Trump, as crazy as he is, will still, I believe, give pause if he's warned that the ability to attend golf tournaments would be revoked, due to his being in prison.

So that could be the choice. But if it is the choice, and Trump continues bleating on for even one day after he's no longer in office, then I say throw the book at the man.

Melanchthon

everlast75 wrote: »

Ooft

https://twitter.com/donk_enby/status/1348484125825658887?s=19

I am nearly certain over a month ago they were saying the same thing?

Gregor Samsa

everlast75 wrote: »

Ooft

[url]

https://twitter.com/donk_enby/status/1348484125825658887?s=19[/url]

I like the misphrase "Things will get better before they get worse"

I think they meant to say "Things will get worse before they get even worse"

seamus

nolivesmatter wrote: »

I get the hate for Trump but seems unfair to target these companies. They're just renting office space and may have been doing long before the whole Trump ****show began.

They're specifically targetting large corporates, because their decision to rent office space in a specific location is largely determined by prestige and not by need.

For example, there's no good reason for Salesforce to build a huge fancy office building on the Dublin quays. A big square building in an industrial estate in Ballyfermot would be just as good and a fraction of the price.
But you couldn't bring visiting executives to Ballyfermot and wow them.

This is the same reason they rent office space in a Trump building. So they can show off their location, show off how wealthy and blue-chip they really are. Ditching it and moving to another building two blocks away is no skin off their nose.

briany

Gregor Samsa wrote: »

I like the misphrase "Things will get better before they get worse"

I think they meant to say "Things will get worse before they get even worse"

Ah, they have nothing to worry about. I'm sure all they were talking about on Parler was how beautiful the democratic process is like the fine upstanding, law-abiding Americans they are.

:pac: