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

Penn

Quin_Dub wrote: »

They are a bit.

The Supreme court can be seen to have "upheld the rule of law" and not set precedent , whilst potentially delaying the inevitable long enough to cover Trump before the Election.

One good thing about it though, his tax returns remain an election issue, which means Biden can continue to hit him for his taxes being under investigation and Trump trying everything to keep them under wraps.

It's a very minor benefit, but a benefit nonetheless.

Penn

Also, in New York 'Black Lives Matter' is being painted on the street in giant letters pretty much right in front of Trump Tower.

Quin_Dub

Penn wrote: »

One good thing about it though, his tax returns remain an election issue, which means Biden can continue to hit him for his taxes being under investigation and Trump trying everything to keep them under wraps.

It's a very minor benefit, but a benefit nonetheless.

He is kicking off in a big way on Twitter.

Tweeting "PROSECUTORIAL MISCONDUCT!" repeatedly

Jack1985

''AND GOT CAIGHT''

Who is Caight?

sid waddell

Penn wrote: »

One good thing about it though, his tax returns remain an election issue, which means Biden can continue to hit him for his taxes being under investigation and Trump trying everything to keep them under wraps.

It's a very minor benefit, but a benefit nonetheless.

I nearly think the Democrats should pick out about three or four issues that they believe will really hurt Trump in the election and focus on them relentlessly.

The tax thing is one of those.

One thing everybody hates, regardless of background, is the feeling that they are being cheated.

Painting Trump as a fraud who is cheating on his taxes, and cheating you (the voter), the little person (only the little people pay taxes, as Leona Helmsley said), that there is one law for the rich like Trump and one law for everybody else, it hits at people's most basic sense of justice, and can generate anger on a very personal level, which is a great motivator in elections.

StringerBell

I mean....you can't even blame caight on an autocorrect, thankfully I have never followed him on Twitter or anything else so only ever see his quoted ones here and various social media shares.

The misconduct thing, **** knows. Assume its him starting his defence against the NY prosecutor since he has been told he can subpoena his records.

Leroy42

sid waddell wrote: »

I nearly think the Democrats should pick out about three or four issues that they believe will really hurt Trump in the election and focus on them relentlessly.

The tax thing is one of those.

One thing everybody hates, regardless of background, is the feeling that they are being cheated.

Painting Trump as a fraud who is cheating on his taxes, and cheating you (the voter), the little person (only the little people pay taxes, as Leona Helmsley said), that there is one law for the rich like Trump and one law for everybody else, it hits at people's most basic sense of justice, and can generate anger on a very personal level, which is a great motivator in elections.

Is it? It wasn't in 2016, it wasn't when they were partially released and when it was shown he wasn't paying much taxes people said he was just being smart.

There are plenty of Americans that hate paying taxes, especially federal taxes. They thing it al goes on woke projects, and unemployment benefits and paying single moms to have more babies.
They of course never think that their military costs $750bn a year and Trump increased that by $200bn over the time he has been in office.

Jack1985

56 Florida ICU's are at capacity

sid waddell

Leroy42 wrote: »

Is it? It wasn't in 2016, it wasn't when they were partially released and when it was shown he wasn't paying much taxes people said he was just being smart.

There are plenty of Americans that hate paying taxes, especially federal taxes. They thing it al goes on woke projects, and unemployment benefits and paying single moms to have more babies.
They of course never think that their military costs $750bn a year and Trump increased that by $200bn over the time he has been in office.

Yet Trump successfully framed Hillary Clinton as "crooked", ie. a cheat. The truth or otherwise of such allegations is by the by.

But the fact that Trump's base were angry at what they perceived to be Clinton cheating them shows there is at least a latent sense of economic justice among Trump's support base.

How to unlock that and turn it against Trump and the Republican party in general, who are cheats and corrupt and crooked, is the question.

Cody montana

Jack1985 wrote: »

56 Florida ICU's are at capacity

More testing....fool!
Deaths have soared too?

Leroy42

sid waddell wrote: »

Yet Trump successfully framed Hillary Clinton as "crooked", ie. a cheat. The truth or otherwise of such allegations is by the by.

But the fact that Trump's base were angry at what they perceived to be Clinton cheating them shows there is at least a latent sense of economic justice among Trump's support base.

How to unlock that and turn it against Trump and the Republican party in general, who are cheats and corrupt and crooked, is the question.

I think we can safely knock the idea that the hatred for HC was anything other than a mixture of misogyny, anti progressive ideals, and a push back against Obama.

Pretty much anything that HC has ever been accused of has been done, to some extent, by someone in the Trump WH and yet there is never any outcry.

Jack1985

Cody montana wrote: »

More testing....fool!
Deaths have soared too?

Unfortunately we will see death's sky rocket amongst majority red states over the next few days and weeks.

It's like watching New York on replay.

sid waddell

Leroy42 wrote: »

I think we can safely knock the idea that the hatred for HC was anything other than a mixture of misogyny, anti progressive ideals, and a push back against Obama.

Pretty much anything that HC has ever been accused of has been done, to some extent, by someone in the Trump WH and yet there is never any outcry.

It was certainly all of the above things too.

But Trump's base genuinely believed Hillary Clinton was making out financially like a bandit at their expense. Never mind it may not have been true.

That has to show at least an ingrained, base level idea of economic justice, even if it was tapped in all the wrong ways.

CelticRambler

pixelburp wrote: »

Serious genuine question, possibly worth a separate thread but one that I can't help but speculate - no matter how ostensibly hyperbolic it might seem (and I know it is): do people think the Trump era might hasten the fragmentation of the United States? It's a bit pat to talk of the "American Experiment", but does anyone think there's a chance of the country breaking apart? I've never known it to in such turmoil and in a near-constant state of self reflection or existential crisis.

... Yet secessionist movements are fringe at the very best - or laughing stocks at worst. There's no roiling equivalent to Catalonia or Scotland - or even Quebec to use a more localised example - within its heart. Even among those movements who'd lament at the state of things.

This is a very interesting topic, especially when seen against the backdrop of the disuniting Kingdom in our own back yard, arising in part from the antics of the same people up to mischief behind the scenes.

But there's one huge difference between the UK, or Catalonia, or the Basque region, or the Corsicans, or the former Czechoslovaks or the former Yugoslavs: here, in Europe, these are all "indigenous people" agitating for a restoration of their social, political and cultural autonomy.

Over in the US, every state is essentially a colony of disgruntled Europeans who opted out of the societal norms of the day and decided to build a new life for themselves on the basis of land stolen from its original owners, and in towns (then cities) built against all natural logic.

I do wonder, though, whether some states with a very distinctive "personality" - such as California, Florida, Louisiana or Utah - might think more seriously about secession if Trump pulls off a win in November. Such a split in the country has been the subject of (or featured as a plot line in) several recent fictional scenarios, so it's not as far out-of-mind as you might think.

sid waddell

CelticRambler wrote: »

This is a very interesting topic, especially when seen against the backdrop of the disuniting Kingdom in our own back yard, arising in part from the antics of the same people up to mischief behind the scenes.

But there's one huge difference between the UK, or Catalonia, or the Basque region, or the Corsicans, or the former Czechoslovaks or the former Yugoslavs: here, in Europe, these are all "indigenous people" agitating for a restoration of their social, political and cultural autonomy.

Over in the US, every state is essentially a colony of disgruntled Europeans who opted out of the societal norms of the day and decided to build a new life for themselves on the basis of land stolen from its original owners, and in towns (then cities) built against all natural logic.

I do wonder, though, whether some states with a very distinctive "personality" - such as California, Florida, Louisiana or Utah - might think more seriously about secession if Trump pulls off a win in November. Such a split in the country has been the subject of (or featured as a plot line in) several recent fictional scenarios, so it's not as far out-of-mind as you might think.

The US breaking up is the wet dream of Putin. Which is why he funds these farcical "secesssionist" movements.

One of the first things the Democrats should do if and when they ever get a trifecta again is make DC and Puerto Rico states.

This would give them a guaranteed four more senators and a few more electoral college votes in the case of Puerto Rico.

ECO_Mental

sid waddell wrote: »

Painting Trump as a fraud who is cheating on his taxes, and cheating you (the voter), the little person (only the little people pay taxes, as Leona Helmsley said), that there is one law for the rich like Trump and one law for everybody else, it hits at people's most basic sense of justice, and can generate anger on a very personal level, which is a great motivator in elections.

This is one of the greatest trick that America has created to keep poor people down ….the American dream is that you too can be a millionaire if you work hard enough, so everybody thinks they can be a (and will be) a millionaire at some stage. So seeing the rules for the rich are different for them doesn't bother a lot of Americans, because they see themselves as millionaires and want those rules when they get there themselves.

You are poor because you dont work hard enough!...tough luck...dust yourself off and get back on the horse crap.

eire4

ECO_Mental wrote: »

This is one of the greatest trick that America has created to keep poor people down ….the American dream is that you too can be a millionaire if you work hard enough, so everybody thinks they can be a (and will be) a millionaire at some stage. So seeing the rules for the rich are different for them doesn't bother a lot of Americans, because they see themselves as millionaires and want those rules when they get there themselves.

You are poor because you dont work hard enough!...tough luck...dust yourself off and get back on the horse crap.

The whole I got mine and who cares about anybody else and that me me mentality is so prevalent a part of American culture. Not to say it does not exits in Ireland it does but not to the extent it does in the US.

The American dream is a delusion as well and has been for a long time. Socio-economic mobility in the US is one of the lowest in the developed world. According to the Global Social Mobility Index this year the US is ranked 27th putting the US near the bottom of developed nations. Ireland as an aside is ranked 18th.

TomOnBoard

As the great George Carlin said: "The reason they call it the American Dream is because you have to be asleep to believe it."

That just about sums up the cult mentality that drives the slow march of millions of lower and middle class Americans who work two and three jobs (when they can get them) to make another buck or two for the benefit of the top 10%. Such egregious terms as 'Supply-side' and 'Trickle-down' economics have underpinned US politics for decades. What all that means is that while poo' folk are making lots of bread for the Robber Baron classes, they will benefit from the crumbs that fall from the table.

I'd love to get Carlin's take on Trump's version of America First and the rest of that nationalist bull**** that now characterises 'so much winning'..

Penn

Michael Cohen on his way back to jail for breaching his house arrest requirements by going out to eat at a restaurant because obviously the one thing to do when you get an insanely lucky break by being granted early release from jail due to a global pandemic is go eat at a f*cking restaurant...

This was Trump's lawyer.... He had a law degree...

TomOnBoard

Penn wrote: »

Michael Cohen on his way back to jail for breaching his house arrest requirements by going out to eat at a restaurant because obviously the one thing to do when you get an insanely lucky break by being granted early release from jail due to a global pandemic is go eat at a f*cking restaurant...

This was Trump's lawyer.... He had a law degree...

Donald the Great! Always did surround himself with 'The Best People'... Cohen's highly intelligent behaviour in this instance is proof of that....

TomOnBoard

Two big things today give me hope for the future of US politics and the country, despite the sleaze pool that Trump would have it become.

The 1st is that US Attorney Berman, a registered Republican, took on Trump/Barr's shenanigans and won.
The 2nd is that Trump's two SCOTUS picks voted in favour of the Supreme Court decisions in Trump v Mazars.

Small wins perhaps... But welcome and invigorating... Hopefully many such cases of Republicans doing the right thing as the poisonous cult of Trumpism is dealt with.

TomOnBoard

Penn wrote: »

Michael Cohen on his way back to jail for breaching his house arrest requirements by going out to eat at a restaurant because obviously the one thing to do when you get an insanely lucky break by being granted early release from jail due to a global pandemic is go eat at a f*cking restaurant...

This was Trump's lawyer.... He had a law degree...

There appears to be more to this than meets the eye.

While Cohen's need to dine out in Manhattan went against the craw of most people, it looks like the reason he was sent back to prison was that he refused to sign his house-arrest agreement, allegedly because it prohibits him from writing his promised book on Trump. He refused to accept this condition of his release on 1st Amendment grounds, and was promptly placed in shackles in the court.

Hmmmmm! Verry Interesting.... I'm not for a moment suggesting that somehow the Bureau of Prisons could be 'influenced' to try and silence Cohen... Could it???

I wonder if this attempt will join a long line of previous failed Trump efforts to silence former swampies like Omarosa, Wolff, Bolton as well as more normal people like Mary Trump and Carl Bernstein?? If so, Cohen's gonna need a bigger safe to hold the proceeds of da buk....

aloyisious

Judge Emmet Sullivan, the District Court judge hearing the case against Michael Flynn being heard by him has taken further steps in dealing with the case. After the DOJ decided to drop it's charges against Flynn out of the blue, Judge Sullivan appointed a separate judge to evaluate the DOJ request to drop the charges. Three judges on the appeal court panel for the DC area [in a 2-1 ruling] then ordered him to dismiss the charges against Flynn after some-one brought an appeal against his decision not to immediately terminate the case after the DOJ decision to drop the Flynn prosecution. Judge Sullivan has asked today for a full eleven-judge sitting of the DC appeal court to review his handling of the case and the 3-judge earlier ruling ordering him to drop the charges.

Water John

This Judge, who I presume has seen much of the evidence, is not letting go, until he's ordered to.

Itssoeasy

Water John wrote: »

This Judge, who I presume has seen much of the evidence, is not letting go, until he's ordered to.

Well a hearing by the full court was an option he had should the ruling go against him which it did 2-1 so it's not a case of this judge not letting go, he's using the options available to him. I think he's right honestly because the DOJ were wrong to intervene to the level they did.

StringerBell

According to a lot of the legal types the argument of the decision against him holds very little weight and there was talk to the full panel reviewing without being asked to do so, in that case I guess the full panel appeal was always likely and this has plenty of track left to run.

It's an absolute joke that a man who plead guilty twice and is a traitor to his country is somehow in the box seat to escape jail time. Two guilty pleas!

TomOnBoard

The court's decision to tell Sullivan to back off Flynn, authored by Judge Neomi Rao attracted widespread criticism for being way outside the powers of the Court. Rao, who took Kavanaugh's seat is serving as Trump's shield on that court. I reckon that the en banc hearing will lacerate her and reverse the finding.

PropJoe10

Just came across this on YouTube. I really dislike Rachel Maddow as a presenter but this piece really does hit home in terms of the bizarre times we live in, and how so many scandals/dumb moments involving Trump just get forgotten because there's ten new ones every day you wake up:

StringerBell

Her take last night in the SC decisions matches up with my own actually I caught a bit of it there a few minutes ago.

Yes both decisions went against him technically, but the thinking that practically they are both wins for him doesn't hold up necessarily for me either.

The house one, no argument. No chance of anything happening before the election, he got what he wanted.

But the state one, it's a clear direction that he has no special treatment when it comes to fighting subpoenas so yes he can go back now to the lower court to fight the subpoena but it doesn't necessarily have to drag on for weeks or months indefinitely.

There is a chance for a little late summer early autumn surprise for him there in my opinion.

Tell me how

StringerBell wrote: »

Her take last night in the SC decisions matches up with my own actually I caught a bit of it there a few minutes ago.

Yes both decisions went against him technically, but the thinking that practically they are both wins for him doesn't hold up necessarily for me either.

The house one, no argument. No chance of anything happening before the election, he got what he wanted.

But the state one, it's a clear direction that he has no special treatment when it comes to fighting subpoenas so yes he can go back now to the lower court to fight the subpoena but it doesn't necessarily have to drag on for weeks or months indefinitely.

There is a chance for a little late summer early autumn surprise for him there in my opinion.

It shows how bizarre a situation it is with him that on reading your post, my immediate though was that I hope he doesn't get a late summer early autumn surprise as if it was negative enough (for him) it would lead to massive calls from GOP of it being political and used to suggest that if he loses, it'll be because of some state level judge wanting to make a name for themselves.

Forget Covid, the abymsal leadership, the blind eye to Russia, the regressive environmental steps, the absence of a wall, the business focused bail outs etc etc, 'They're trying to steal the election!!!' will be the cry from the Republican side.