Donald Trump is the President Mark IV (Read Mod Warning in OP)

Penn

Fr Tod Umptious wrote: »

The reality is it's not the minority vote that matters but the majority, and the majority still happen to be white, christian and straight.

Plenty of white, Christian, straight people voted for Obama too though. If you can get the minority vote and still peel off a good portion of the majority, you're in with a better shot.

everlast75

Nermal wrote: »

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2018/oct/08/brett-kavanaugh-swearing-in-donald-trump

This may be the saltiest article I have ever seen. It's almost comical how Trump goads the Guardian into editorialising.

"The judge was found neither guilty nor innocent of allegations" is particularly eye-popping. Am I 'neither guilty nor innocent' of any crime anyone may choose to accuse me of? No: I am innocent, until I am criminally convicted.

You are always innocent until proven guilty.

What Trump said was "he was found innocent" - which implies a trial or even a legitimate investigation. There was not. Or do you dispute that?

There is a difference. I know it, you know it and he knows it. That is why he said it.

To repeat - he was not "found" innocent. It is a lie. Pure and simple.

It is almost as if he has the same level of ignorance of the law as Kavanaugh, who, when testifying before the Senate said on two occasions, that four witnesses stated that the incident didn't happen. That is not what they said. They said they could not recall it happening.

He knew or at least should know that people saying they could not recall the incident does not mean that it didn't happen.

Nermal

Penn wrote: »

People have been guilty of doing things but without there being enough evidence to convict them of it, have been found not guilty (and it's why the courts use Not Guilty rather than Innocent)....

What the Guardian is saying when they say "The judge was found neither guilty nor innocent of allegations" is that the investigation didn't yield any results which either proved he did it, or proved he didn't do it.

You admit in your post there is no verdict of 'innocent'. You cannot be 'found innocent', you ARE innocent - in the same state as you were before any trial took place. The Guardian's sentence is just nasty innuendo, designed to give an impression of doubt where legally there is none.

Captain Obvious

Nermal wrote: »

You admit in your post there is no verdict of 'innocent'. You cannot be 'found innocent', you ARE innocent - in the same state as you were before any trial took place. The Guardian's sentence is just nasty innuendo, designed to give an impression of doubt where legally there is none.

You're talking about criminal law though. The only people bound to the standards of criminal law are courts. Every one else can have an opinion.

Christy42

Nermal wrote: »

Penn wrote: »

People have been guilty of doing things but without there being enough evidence to convict them of it, have been found not guilty (and it's why the courts use Not Guilty rather than Innocent)....

What the Guardian is saying when they say "The judge was found neither guilty nor innocent of allegations" is that the investigation didn't yield any results which either proved he did it, or proved he didn't do it.

You admit in your post there is no verdict of 'innocent'. You cannot be 'found innocent', you ARE innocent - in the same state as you were before any trial took place. The Guardian's sentence is just nasty innuendo, designed to give an impression of doubt where legally there is none.

Trump lied about it and called Ford's testimony a hoax (he has no evidence and does not know either way). The guardian corrected it by pointing out we don't know either way.

Their statement is correct. The law does not have doubt (although it is a little contradictory since it assumes both sides are telling the truth as neither has been found guilty). However people are free to doubt and to be told what has and has not been shown to be true.

Penn

Nermal wrote: »

You admit in your post there is no verdict of 'innocent'. You cannot be 'found innocent', you ARE innocent - in the same state as you were before any trial took place. The Guardian's sentence is just nasty innuendo, designed to give an impression of doubt where legally there is none.

Again though, if you punch someone in the face, you are guilty of doing so regardless of the trial because you actually did do it, however you have not legally been found guilty of doing so. And in a trial, there may not be enough evidence to prove that you did it which means you might be found Not Guilty. That would not change the fact that you did actually do it and are actually guilty.

The Guardian's sentence is entirely accurate. The FBI (certainly from what we know publicly of the report anyway) didn't find any evidence to say he did not do it. The presumption of innocence in a legal sense is still with him, but there is absolutely still doubt there.

Stallingrad

Typically the narrative has moved on. From being 'credibile' Ford is now a liar and the whole think is a con perpetrated by the Dems. BK is now the victim. More red meat to his base.

Not sure I have the stomach to follow much more of this. If they do not get punished in the mid terms it's over.

seamus

removed2 wrote: »

trump said talor swift doesnt know anything about politics

Well sure, everyone know Kim Kardashian is the political genius of the celebrity world.

The fact that he even feels the need to respond to the political positioning of a pop star goes to show just how pathetic this whole presidency is. There is no motivation here except ego and money. He's always run his life like he's on reality TV and this is no different.

Leroy42

And I don't think they will. They might lose some seats, but nothing like their actions warrant.

Whether or not you believe in the policies that they are pursuing, the GOP and Trump complete disintegration of anything resembling US standards is appalling. Let us not forget that their have very credible reports on Russian election interference to which the GOP and Trump have taken no action whatsoever.

Is this is the type of politics one needs in order to get stuff done, then the country is so far from being functional as to be written off.

Biggest mass shooting in the history of the US, and not one single thing has been done. Continued school shootings and not one thing done.

3000 Puerto Ricans dead and nothing done. A continued war in Afghanistan, and Trump has done zero to point to any idea of an exit strategy.

The US is being thorn apart and it is the US citizens that have happily cheering it on. They have spent so much on trying to protect themselves from the foreign invaders that, just like 9/11, they have become blind to the domestic threats.

We thought W Bush was rock bottom, but Obama proved to be nothing but breathing space, time for the more militant to get re-energised. Trump is only the outcome of the problem. He will be replaced at some stage, and the big fear is that someone actually competent will take his place. Behind the scenes Trump is achieving a hell of a lot that will impact on the US for years to come, but the next iteration will be able to do that and complete the takeover of the US to the authoritarian state that many GOP'ers seem to wish for.

But in terms of the Mid-terms making a big difference, no I cannot see that happening.

The American public were right in that the Swamp needed to be drained, and that HC was the wrong way to go. It seems, though, that that belief has now run its course. Maybe the voters are simply tired, they tried and failed so no point trying again. Or maybe this is the US that the people of America really want.

Penn

Leroy42 wrote: »

The American public were right in that the Swamp needed to be drained, and that HC was the wrong way to go. It seems, though, that that belief has now run its course. Maybe the voters are simply tired, they tried and failed so no point trying again. Or maybe this is the US that the people of America really want.

Trump lost the popular vote by 3 million, the electoral college allows a few small states to completely swing the election, and (can't remember if it was said here or I seen it on Twitter) two Senators representing the 600,000 people of Wyoming have the same power as two Senators representing almost 40,000,000 people in California.

This is the US that the minority of people of America want, but the systems America have in place allows the minority to act as the majority.

HC was definitely the wrong way to go. Said it before, but I think if anyone else was the Democratic nominee, they would have won. It was the hatred of Hilary and the baggage she brings with her that caused the loss of key swing states.

ancapailldorcha

Penn wrote: »

Trump lost the popular vote by 3 million, the electoral college allows a few small states to completely swing the election, and (can't remember if it was said here or I seen it on Twitter) two Senators representing the 600,000 people of Wyoming have the same power as two Senators representing almost 40,000,000 people in California.

This is the US that the minority of people of America want, but the systems America have in place allows the minority to act as the majority.

HC was definitely the wrong way to go. Said it before, but I think if anyone else was the Democratic nominee, they would have won. It was the hatred of Hilary and the baggage she brings with her that caused the loss of key swing states.

You can see it even here sometimes where some posters will equate anti-Trump with pro-Democrat.

The electoral college rewards parties for having their voters spread out in rural areas instead of concentrating them in cities, like the UK's First Past the Post system.

It came about during slavery when slaveowners wanted slaves to be accounted for in districts but not to actually be enfranchised so an odious compromise was reached whereby every three out of five slaves would be counted when determining the state's total population. It gave disproportionate influence to Southern states as a result.

everlast75

Leroy42 wrote: »

And I don't think they will. They might lose some seats, but nothing like their actions warrant.

Whether or not you believe in the policies that they are pursuing, the GOP and Trump complete disintegration of anything resembling US standards is appalling. Let us not forget that their have very credible reports on Russian election interference to which the GOP and Trump have taken no action whatsoever.

Is this is the type of politics one needs in order to get stuff done, then the country is so far from being functional as to be written off.

Biggest mass shooting in the history of the US, and not one single thing has been done. Continued school shootings and not one thing done.

3000 Puerto Ricans dead and nothing done. A continued war in Afghanistan, and Trump has done zero to point to any idea of an exit strategy.

The US is being thorn apart and it is the US citizens that have happily cheering it on. They have spent so much on trying to protect themselves from the foreign invaders that, just like 9/11, they have become blind to the domestic threats.

We thought W Bush was rock bottom, but Obama proved to be nothing but breathing space, time for the more militant to get re-energised. Trump is only the outcome of the problem. He will be replaced at some stage, and the big fear is that someone actually competent will take his place. Behind the scenes Trump is achieving a hell of a lot that will impact on the US for years to come, but the next iteration will be able to do that and complete the takeover of the US to the authoritarian state that many GOP'ers seem to wish for.

But in terms of the Mid-terms making a big difference, no I cannot see that happening.

The American public were right in that the Swamp needed to be drained, and that HC was the wrong way to go. It seems, though, that that belief has now run its course. Maybe the voters are simply tired, they tried and failed so no point trying again. Or maybe this is the US that the people of America really want.

And as further evidence of this being the Trump party, and not the Repubican party, a story broke overnight which involved Rick Gates using Israeli intelligence to influence social media in order to beat people such as Ted Cruz in the primaries.

So, if there is nothing wrong according to the Republican party with using foreign governments to influence the election against the Libs,
then surely they will have a problem with using such influence against their fellow Reps? Right? Right???

My guess is a big fat "nope". It doesn't matter what Trump does, they will eat it up.

everlast75

ancapailldorcha wrote: »

You can see it even here sometimes where some posters will equate anti-Trump with pro-Democrat.

The electoral college rewards parties for having their voters spread out in rural areas instead of concentrating them in cities, like the UK's First Past the Post system.

It came about during slavery when slaveowners wanted slaves to be accounted for in districts but not to actually be enfranchised so an odious compromise was reached whereby every three out of five slaves would be counted when determining the state's total population. It gave disproportionate influence to Southern states as a result.

I 100% agree that the Electoral College system needs reform, but the fact of the matter is that the Dems had no problem with Obama getting the nod as a result of that vote before.

If you want to do the right thing, it should be done regardless of the timing.

Christy42

everlast75 wrote: »

ancapailldorcha wrote: »

You can see it even here sometimes where some posters will equate anti-Trump with pro-Democrat.

The electoral college rewards parties for having their voters spread out in rural areas instead of concentrating them in cities, like the UK's First Past the Post system.

It came about during slavery when slaveowners wanted slaves to be accounted for in districts but not to actually be enfranchised so an odious compromise was reached whereby every three out of five slaves would be counted when determining the state's total population. It gave disproportionate influence to Southern states as a result.

I 100% agree that the Electoral College system needs reform, but the fact of the matter is that the Dems had no problem with Obama getting the nod as a result of that vote before.

If you want to do the right thing, it should be done regardless of the timing.

While it should be done regardless of timing the electoral college did not benefit Obama. He won the popular vote both times as well as the college.

pixelburp

Hard to know from an outsider's point of view, but it often feels like there's no appetite to have discussions over reform at a national level; the well appears to be so poisoned by lobbyists, 'states rights' extremists and so on, that something akin to our own Constitutional Convention would be next to impossible. Better to rule in hell than serve in heaven n' all that; there are now too many, too enriched by a system slowly eating itself through its own inequities.

Clearly a debate should be had about lifetime appointments to the Supreme Court, or indeed the recent partisan influence therein - just as a start - but instead politics has become so ... "sport'ified" for want of a better word, there's no way to have that grown-up conversation without it devolving into the Tucker Carlsons, or Mitch McConnells of this world turning it into something else. No more than any other functioning nation, Americans are a proud people, but you get the sense they're believing their own hype too much; that the USA is perfect, God's own land and nothing needs to change.

"The system is broken" may sound like hyperbole but clearly there's something amiss yet nobody in power wants to touch it. So the only option appears to be this continued limping on, partisan politics increasing exponentially until ... ... what? Kleptocracy? Secessionist movements? Even if the Democrats somehow wrangled back Congress and the Senate, I just see the Republicans breaking out the Obstructionist Playbook, and the system spins around again.

The nation seems to lack any kinda of cultural self-reflection.

relax carry on

Stallingrad wrote: »

Typically the narrative has moved on. From being 'credibile' Ford is now a liar and the whole think is a con perpetrated by the Dems. BK is now the victim. More red meat to his base.

Not sure I have the stomach to follow much more of this. If they do not get punished in the mid terms it's over.

I'm at the point of giving up on this too. I'm running out of f**ks to give and am just becoming numb to the whole thing.

For a "won't someone think of the children" moment, what message does the situation in the US send to children whose parents try to teach them to play by the rules etc? Trump has never played by the accepted rules. He's a narcissistic bully and conman who has risen on a tide of ignorance and populism. His own rules involve tax fraud, bribery and sexual assault. His entourage is a collection of sycophantic yes men and criminals. Why would any parent want their child to follow the accepted rules if all you need do is con your way to the top?*

*Granted not everyone can have a rich daddy or helpful Russians to bail you out of your many many disasterous mistakes both personal and business.

Apologies for the rant.

demfad

https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2018/10/15/was-there-a-connection-between-a-russian-bank-and-the-trump-campaign

A revisiting of the Trump tower server/Alfa bank server/spectrum health server story. This is about a server in Trump tower communicating with an Alpha Bank server in Moscow and a Spectrum Health server in Chicago. (Betsy DeVos and her brother Eric Prince are Spectrum Health). When Alpha bank were contacted about the server, the Trump server quickly changed its DNS record which the Alpha server subsequently picked up. (indicates human interaction).
It was confirmed that there was an FBI investigation into a connection between the Trump organization and Russian Banks and this was a major breakthrough.
When the NYTimes published the story it was watered down so badly it looked like the investigation was over and had found nothing.

investigating donald trump, f.b.i. sees no clear link to russia

The news that there was a live Federal investigation into Trump/Russia would have torpedoed Trump the week before the election. The below parrallel investigation from a Slate reporter story shows the extent of what was known on this. Something hasn't been right in the NYTimes for a few years now. (Compare this to the week long Front Page stories on the FBI reopening of the email investigations.) The investigator whose story was diluted altered by NYTimes (Lichtblau) left the NYTimes as a result.
http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/cover_story/2016/10/was_a_server_registered_to_the_trump_organization_communicating_with_russia.html

Who is investigating this now?

Trump and the GOP just appointed Brian Benczkowski a lawyer who worked for Alfa Bank to lead the DOJ's criminal division. Benczkowski had overseen the report for Alfa Bank about its Trump ties, and he refuses to recuse himself. At his confirmation, he said his investigation found “there was no communications link between the Trump Organization and Alfa Bank."

Trump campaign’s law firm Jones Day (also Don McGahn’s firm) represents Alfa and Russian oligarchs: 11 lawyers in total in WH so far. Jones Day has done work for businesses belonging to a long list of Russian oligarchs including Oleg Deripaska, Viktor Vekselberg, and Alexander Mashkevich.

But guess who else is from Jones/Day?

Solicitor General Noel Francisco, next in line to supervise Mueller.
https://shugerblog.com/2018/02/09/associate-attorney-general-rachel-brand-is-out-who-is-next-in-line-on-mueller-investigation/

Autocracy in plain sight now.


I will just throw these coincidences out there:

Vincent Tchenguiz (Former biggest shareholder SCL Group Ltd) & Mikhail Fridman (Letterone) are co-located at 35 Park Lane, London.
SCL=Cambridge Analytica/AggregateIQ controlled over Brexit/Trump election periods by The Mercers with Steve Bannon as VP.
Mikhail Fridman is one of the 3 billionaire owners of Alfabank.

Alfabank majority owns 47% Vimpelcom (2nd largest mobile co in Russia). In 2016 Renaissance Technology (Mercer) boosts its investment Vimpelcom to about $6m.

aloyisious

If one was to link up the NYT part of the above post with the fact that Don's attacks on the "failing NYT" serve to push up it's trustworthy ratings amongst those who oppose Don, along with the NYT reportedly making a hames of a credible story linking US and Russian banking and business concerns collaboration who coincidentally have strong business and personal friendships with Don and his family concerns, one might ask if the NYT is divided from within, despite the occasional story about the SDNY DA and Grand jury hearings into local skulduggery tenuously linked to the other investigation.

For those unaware of the meaning of making a hames, it's a colloquial Irish way of saying "you're making a mess of things" unconnected to its original meaning. https://stancarey.wordpress.com/2012/11/07/making-a-hames-of-it/

In connection with that other investigation, has there been anything in the ether about it lately? Things have been very silent on that front, even from the great divider.

demfad

aloyisious wrote: »

If one was to link up the NYT part of the above post with the fact that Don's attacks on the "failing NYT" serve to push up it's trustworthy ratings amongst those who oppose Don, along with the NYT reportedly making a hames of a credible story linking US and Russian banking and business concerns collaboration who coincidentally have strong business and personal friendships with Don and his family concerns, one might ask if the NYT is divided from within, despite the occasional story about the SDNY DA and Grand jury hearings into local skulduggery tenuously linked to the other investigation.

For those unaware of the meaning of making a hames, it's a colloquial Irish way of saying "you're making a mess of things" unconnected to its original meaning. https://stancarey.wordpress.com/2012/11/07/making-a-hames-of-it/

In connection with that other investigation, has there been anything in the ether about it lately? Things have been very silent on that front, even from the great divider.

In the election period now so indictments will be paused.

It's funny WRT NY times I think you are right. I think Trump (and his backers) as candidate and campaigner was able to bring pressure to bear on certain people in the NYTimes.

As case in point last week a NYtimes column listed it as Trump's best week ever: listing the Supreme court nomination and good news on the economy. It glaringly omitted to mention it's own huge story on Trump Tax history!

everlast75

Just as a thought, I can't help but notice how much Trump strives to deepen the divide between left and right.

Hosting Kavanaugh at the WH. Obama specifically didn't do that, because he wanted to not make a show of politics. Trump made sure to do it.

Trump then goes on to call on those that worked against Kavanaugh, "evil".

I said it before, it was clear that there were fractures in the American geo-political landscape. Trump just decided to take a jackhammer to them and profit off of it.


When Fox call Trump out for causing a divide, you know you have gone too far.

https://twitter.com/revrrlewis/status/1049618431266426880

ELM327

Penn wrote: »

Trump lost the popular vote by 3 million, the electoral college allows a few small states to completely swing the election, and (can't remember if it was said here or I seen it on Twitter) two Senators representing the 600,000 people of Wyoming have the same power as two Senators representing almost 40,000,000 people in California.

This is the US that the minority of people of America want, but the systems America have in place allows the minority to act as the majority.

HC was definitely the wrong way to go. Said it before, but I think if anyone else was the Democratic nominee, they would have won. It was the hatred of Hilary and the baggage she brings with her that caused the loss of key swing states.

The electoral college is not necessarily related to the senate.
And the disparity in electoral college votes is not 600,000 to 40,000,000

Penn

ELM327 wrote: »

The electoral college is not necessarily related to the senate.
And the disparity in electoral college votes is not 600,000 to 40,000,000

I know, I was talking about them as two different issues, not connected, but I could have made that clearer. Apologies.

I'm just saying that the electoral college itself is a stupid system considering how some small swing states can change the election results. And it's also stupid that in the Senate, each state gets two Senators regardless of the population of those states.

In both cases, it's not always the will of the majority.

everlast75

Niki Hayley gone.

It's been a while since we have had a firing. They used to be prolific. Sad!

I suppose we may be getting a lot more after the mid-terms..

pixelburp

Haven't seen anything myself, but is it a firing or her just leaving? I'd be shocked about the former, 'cos I had thought Hayley was one of the few die-hard supporters who had managed to keep her head and down and ruffle few enough feathers.

everlast75

pixelburp wrote: »

Haven't seen anything myself, but is it a firing or her just leaving? I'd be shocked about the former, 'cos I had thought Hayley was one of the few die-hard supporters who had managed to keep her head and down and ruffle few enough feathers.

"Accepted her resignation". That could mean anything at all though...

https://twitter.com/axios/status/1049662012559634432

Penn

everlast75 wrote: »

"Accepted her resignation". That could mean anything at all though...

https://twitter.com/axios/status/1049662012559634432

Googled her to find a news source but a lot of articles from two hours ago or so about her taking flights paid for by business executives and possible ethics violations in doing so. Seems the likely reason.

Captain Obvious

Penn wrote: »

Googled her to find a news source but a lot of articles from two hours ago or so about her taking flights paid for by business executives and possible ethics violations in doing so. Seems the likely reason.

Ethics violations? In the Trump administration? Hardly a reason to resign is it?

Penn

Captain Obvious wrote: »

Ethics violations? In the Trump administration? Hardly a reason to resign is it?

Only when you get caught doing it.

StringerBell

Haley's resignation has come out of the blue for me anyway, interested to see what's happened here

She was always an odd choice for Trump given how vocal a critic of his she was.

Quin_Dub

StringerBell wrote: »

Haley's resignation has come out of the blue for me anyway, interested to see what's happened here

She was always an odd choice for Trump given how vocal a critic of his she was.

Is this a move to position herself as a Trump alternative in 2020?