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

FreudianSlippers

Manic Moran wrote: »

"It's the principle of the thing" is by no means an uncommon hill to die on, as it were. Yet American jurisprudence is extremely clear that there are defined limits beyond which, even if they make 'make sense' to some people, are not permitted. Example, if I'm visibly wearing a gun, the police are not permitted to stop me and ask if I have a license. They are not permitted to pull me over when driving to see if I have a driver's license and insurance. That sort of thing. The default position is that I am a law-abiding citizen unless I do something which indicates otherwise.

I would be interested to see this "jurisprudence" as any lawyer admitted to a State bar in the United States would be well aware that this statement is quite blanket and does not in any way apply to the United States on a Federal level.

As for the pulling over, I'd agree that simply pulling someone over for no reason is unconstitutional, but it misses the reality that many (maybe even most) police departments can tell if a car is insured from a plate scan.

FreudianSlippers

josip wrote: »

That website is for visitors.

"these prohibitions apply to both staff and members of the public"

EDIT: I just double-checked and the law applies to both members of public and staff and, in fact, everyone - it's a Federal law. The reliance for legislators to carry firearms is the 1967 regulation allowing legislators (and in some rare occasions their staff) "transporting within Capitol grounds firearms unloaded and securely wrapped."

So I'll go back and check MM's original post and edit/delete as appropriate if I misread it in any way.

Itssoeasy

Poor trump is losing the plot when compared to Nixon. That’s very harsh on Nixon to be compared to the current walking, talking mess. Nixon wasn’t perfect but 1) Nixon was never actually impeached. He had the decency to resign,2) the GOP in 1974 appear to have had spines and weren’t afraid of the president, 3) Nixon had a functioning brain and had policy positions based in something of reality.

FreudianSlippers

Itssoeasy wrote: »

Poor trump is losing the plot when compared to Nixon. That’s very harsh on Nixon to be compared to the current walking, talking mess. Nixon wasn’t perfect but 1) Nixon was never actually impeached. He had the decency to resign,2) the GOP in 1974 appear to have had spines and weren’t afraid of the president, 3) Nixon had a functioning brain and had policy positions based in something of reality.

I was reading (I'll try to find it again) that Trump is screaming at anyone who even mentions Nixon in any context.

Tchaikovsky

FreudianSlippers wrote: »

I was reading (I'll try to find it again) that Trump is screaming at anyone who even mentions Nixon in any context.

What an alpha male he is.

aloyisious

FreudianSlippers wrote: »

"these prohibitions apply to both staff and members of the public"

EDIT: I just double-checked and the law applies to both members of public and staff and, in fact, everyone - it's a Federal law. The reliance for legislators to carry firearms is the 1967 regulation allowing legislators (and in some rare occasions their staff) "transporting within Capitol grounds firearms unloaded and securely wrapped."

So I'll go back and check MM's original post and edit/delete as appropriate if I misread it in any way.

From the practice here in Ireland, unloaded means the magazine is NOT IN the magazine-way of the weapon. Loaded means the magazine has been inserted into the magazine-way on the weapon. There would also be no round in the breech of the weapon. The securely-wrapped definition might mean a pistol held in a strapped/buttoned pistol case or holster. Transporting being carrying while walking. I'm not sure if it's different in the U.S.

aloyisious

FreudianSlippers wrote: »

I was reading (I'll try to find it again) that Trump is screaming at anyone who even mentions Nixon in any context.

Because Nixon didn't fight on without admission of culpability, but resigned. That's not the Trump way of doing things.

Nody

Tchaikovsky wrote: »

What an alpha male he is.

Honestly this appears to be something of a general theme with the Trump Alpha male legions; they keep calling others soyboys, beta males, snowflakes, anarchists breaking the law etc. but the moment anything happens they run away crying how unfair everything is and they are the victims of prosecution. It looks like everything they are calling others is honestly their own behavior that they project on others because they are to afraid to admit it to themselves.

circadian

So, let's say Trump gets convicted by the Senate.

What happens to his pardons? Especially those that came after the election of Roger Stone, Paul Manafort and Charles Kushner (Jared's father).
Can pardons be revoked?

prawnsambo

circadian wrote: »

So, let's say Trump gets convicted by the Senate.

What happens to his pardons? Especially those that came after the election of Roger Stone, Paul Manafort and Charles Kushner (Jared's father).
Can pardons be revoked?

Don't think so. Otherwise there'd not be much point in issuing them. His conviction (or otherwise) by the Senate doesn't invalidate his powers as President. However, he's currently (reportedly) in a "If I can't have one, nobody can" sulk because of the doubt as to whether he can pardon himself.

pixelburp

Nody wrote: »

Honestly this appears to be something of a general theme with the Trump Alpha male legions; they keep calling others soyboys, beta males, snowflakes, anarchists breaking the law etc. but the moment anything happens they run away crying how unfair everything is and they are the victims of prosecution. It looks like everything they are calling others is honestly their own behavior that they project on others because they are to afraid to admit it to themselves.

The right-leaning White American male seems to be such an emotionally fragile creature; but then fed on a diet of decades of American Exceptionalism, Good Man with a Gun, and other simplistic myths, all these vague lurches towards cultural or social parity must seem like a seismic upset to their glass towers. I don't even think I hate the Trumps, Hannity or Matt Gaetz's of this world anymore, they're just kinda pathetic really.

extra gravy

https://twitter.com/atrupar/status/1349798310740164608?s=19

"Beautiful new equipment"

Carfacemandog

That $2.5tn really could have come in handy over the last 12 months.

BobbyMalone

Is it odd that Trump isn't just using the official president twitter account to tweet?

VinLieger

BobbyMalone wrote: »

Is it odd that Trump isn't just using the official president twitter account to tweet?

He tried and they understandably deleted the tweets

Brian?

BobbyMalone wrote: »

Is it odd that Trump isn't just using the official president twitter account to tweet?

They took down his tweets when he tried.

BobbyMalone

VinLieger wrote: »

He tried and they understandably deleted the tweets

Brian? wrote: »

They took down his tweets when he tried.

That makes sense for his typical crazy tweets, but surely that one about the military would have been fine?

~Rebel~

Carfacemandog wrote: »

That $2.5tn really could have come in handy over the last 12 months.

I find that the hardest contradiction about living in America. The poverty, and inequality. The massive disparity in school quality. The healthcare system that'll bankrupt you for a broken arm. And for-profit prisons jam-packed to meet quotas. And all the while the state throws that sort of money to maintain a military force bigger than the rest combined.

I get the need for a strong deterrent, but it seems way out of proportion. Particularly when it's there in case it's required to protect their people - when in reality just a portion of that money could go so much further toward protecting their people domestically. Both for those who are already in trouble, and to stop the next generation of homeless or ill from falling through the cracks in the first place.

VinLieger

BobbyMalone wrote: »

That makes sense for his typical crazy tweets, but surely that one about the military would have been fine?

Im guessing if he spoke in capacity as trump the president, which would be a first, it would be okay but that tweet is obviously from trump the man

Itssoeasy

That press conference is a show of strength and especially the secret service chief said in a very nice way “don’t be starting ****e lads” because while the capitol police and DC police might have played nice, I can’t see the secret service letting the stuff that happened at the capitol especially with the new president and Vice President and several former Presidents in attendance.

pixelburp

mcmoustache wrote: »

Interesting polling out today challenging the idea that the GOP isn't the party of stupid.

https://twitter.com/ThePlumLineGS/status/1350109485482844160

What are these people if not stupid? Seriously, how are you meant to "listen and understand" these people when they're this deluded and detached from reality? These people are brainwashed. Meeting them in the middle or trying to understand their concerns is pointless. They don't even know what's real and what isn't. The only anyone needs to understand is that they're deluded and the problem is them, not the people who think that they're deluded. The delusion is the problem and that's what needs to be addressed.

Stupid, or just plain malicious? Perhaps the dark heart of the GOP is that it's simply the party of the Strongman now; if for the umpteenth time I might quote Sideshow Bob of the Simspons? "Your guilty conscience may move you to vote Democratic, but deep down you long for a cold-hearted Republican to lower taxes, brutalize criminals, and rule you like a king." In 2020 those words from 20 odd years ago simply feel succinct at this point.

Maybe the flaw in these polls - and our understanding of American politics - is the presumption that everyone in America wants to maintain a stable, fair democracy. That some would rather see the final form of Exceptionalism and the death cult obsession with "Duty" taken to its natural, logistical zenith. A dictatorship, swathed in patriotic intent and superficiality. Not like there aren't enough examples of authoritarianism voted in by the people. Not all those who did cast their ballot to destroy democracy were duped.

Quin_Dub

mcmoustache wrote: »

Interesting polling out today challenging the idea that the GOP isn't the party of stupid.

https://twitter.com/ThePlumLineGS/status/1350109485482844160

What are these people if not stupid? Seriously, how are you meant to "listen and understand" these people when they're this deluded and detached from reality? These people are brainwashed. Meeting them in the middle or trying to understand their concerns is pointless. They don't even know what's real and what isn't. The only thing anyone needs to understand is that they're deluded and the problem is them, not the people who think that they're deluded. The delusion is the problem and that's what needs to be addressed.

I don't think that a significant percentage of those people actually believe that there was this mass fraud , Dominion voting machines blah blah blah.

BUT - They are perfectly happy to go along with that storyline if it means that they can prevent a Democrat taking the White House.

Remember , Power is all that matters to them - Their Guy over all others by any means necessary or possible.

So , whilst there are definitely people in the GOP base that have seriously gone down a rabbit hole of Conspiracy Theory indoctrination , most just despise Democrats and people that are "different" to them so they'll use whatever excuse they think might work to get what they want.

Delusion isn't the problem , Hatred is.

aloyisious

~Rebel~ wrote: »

I find that the hardest contradiction about living in America. The poverty, and inequality. The massive disparity in school quality. The healthcare system that'll bankrupt you for a broken arm. And for-profit prisons jam-packed to meet quotas. And all the while the state throws that sort of money to maintain a military force bigger than the rest combined.

I get the need for a strong deterrent, but it seems way out of proportion. Particularly when it's there in case it's required to protect their people - when in reality just a portion of that money could go so much further toward protecting their people domestically. Both for those who are already in trouble, and to stop the next generation of homeless or ill from falling through the cracks in the first place.

It'd be worth checking to see how much goes on wages, heating, lighting, property upkeep and housing, clothing food & the other basic things that apply in the average household. Throw in planes, ships, land vehicles upkeep & POL, AND the Reserve Forces. it's not all arms and ammo, which incidentally do have a shelf life and need to be expended before the use-by date is reached, dud rounds explode in the breech during firing, barrels warp from firing heat. Its not all shiny buttons & clean suits on humans. If you throw in the president who has pet projects [a wall and space force] which has the military moving sums from its budget around to keep him happy, the bill gets bigger.

Dohnjoe

Quin_Dub wrote: »

I don't think that a significant percentage of those people actually believe that there was this mass fraud , Dominion voting machines blah blah blah.

BUT - They are perfectly happy to go along with that storyline if it means that they can prevent a Democrat taking the White House.

Remember , Power is all that matters to them - Their Guy over all others by any means necessary or possible.

So , whilst there are definitely people in the GOP base that have seriously gone down a rabbit hole of Conspiracy Theory indoctrination , most just despise Democrats and people that are "different" to them so they'll use whatever excuse they think might work to get what they want.

Delusion isn't the problem , Hatred is.

The mentality for many seems to be my sports team vs yours. Substitute sports with politics, and only two teams in the league.

Gbear

josip wrote: »

But the law over your way has been on the side of the ordinary, god-fearing citizens for 250 years now.
So why the disconnect between the police and policed that you've described above?

I think it's important to note what the police are in the US.

Their origins were often as slave patrols designed to catch runaway slaves, or as the private army of the capital class designed to break up labour organisations, brutalise strikers and the like.

I'm not entirely certain the An Garda Siochana have a totally clean past, and I'm sure there has been a great deal of scandal and collaboration with criminal elements in the government and the Catholic church down through the years, but I think there's still a fundamental difference to what the Gards are vs US police that means we can treat them as public servants rather than a militant arm of the authoritarian state.

It's why, despite its unpopularity, abolishing the police in the US and starting from scratch is actually a completely reasonable stance to take, as peculiar as it seems to us in Ireland.

Quin_Dub wrote: »

I don't think that a significant percentage of those people actually believe that there was this mass fraud , Dominion voting machines blah blah blah.

I think there is a more troubling root cause here than simple belief or unbelief. Many of these people are not capable of coherent thought. They don't so much believe in fraud, as are incapable of operating on the basis of facts and truth. Their perception of reality is untethered from reality.

~Rebel~

Gbear wrote: »

I think it's important to note what the police are in the US.

Their origins were often as slave patrols designed to catch runaway slaves, or as the private army of the capital class designed to break up labour organisations, brutalise strikers and the like.

I'm not entirely certain the An Garda Siochana have a totally clean past, and I'm sure there has been a great deal of scandal and collaboration with criminal elements in the government and the Catholic church down through the years, but I think there's still a fundamental difference to what the Gards are vs US police that means we can treat them as public servants rather than a militant arm of the authoritarian state.

It's why, despite its unpopularity, abolishing the police in the US and starting from scratch is actually a completely reasonable stance to take, as peculiar as it seems to us in Ireland.



I think there is a more troubling root cause here than simple belief or unbelief. Many of these people are not capable of coherent thought. They don't so much believe in fraud, as are incapable of operating on the basis of facts and truth. Their perception of reality is untethered from reality.

Not that peculiar either, given that's it's pretty much exactly what happened in the North. A fundamentally biased police force (RUC) was dissolved and replaced from scratch by a new one (PSNI) with a clean slate. Plenty of officers from the old police force reapplied and were accepted, but no-one was under any illusions that this was a different thing, with new and better standards.

It makes total sense for plenty of municipalities in the US to do similar.

Manic Moran

FreudianSlippers wrote: »

Except this isn't true is it?

https://www.uscp.gov/visiting-capitol-hill/regulations-prohibitions/prohibited-items

EDIT: Based on a later post, I double-checked the law and regulations and it's clear that the quoted post is either misleading or incorrect, so I stand by the original post. Carriage of firearms applies to "transporting within Capitol grounds firearms unloaded and securely wrapped." I would not agree that means "Carriage of firearms" and/or "armed" in its ordinary meaning as quoted.

You would have to look at precedent in other restricted areas. For example, until about three years ago, California had an environment where carriage of firearms in public was permitted only if the weapon were unloaded (Excepting those with concealed carry permits). Both pistol and ammunition could be easily accessible, and it was highly recommended that the pistol be in a secure retention system (Modern systems are extremely fast to unlock, such as biometrically locked ones), but the practical reality was that you could be armed, as long as you had a couple of seconds to actually ready the weapon. It means in this context that the average congressman can't be armed around the capitol grounds to the extent of a 'quick-draw' in the highly unlikely event of a mugging or assassination attempt, but (s)he can certainly be armed to the extent that in an event such as a riot which occurred last week, he/she has a practical firearm to hand. This is a permission not granted to the general public.

FreudianSlippers wrote: »

I would be interested to see this "jurisprudence" as any lawyer admitted to a State bar in the United States would be well aware that this statement is quite blanket and does not in any way apply to the United States on a Federal level.

For a one-stop shop, see the discussion on Federal caselaw in this opinion from PA. https://www.supremecourt.gov/DocketPDF/19/19-426/117265/20190927110840127_Hicks%20-%2038636%20Roelker%202%20Brief%20Appendix.pdf
The central ruling US Supreme Court precedent is Terry v Ohio, note how as applied by the Federal 3rd, 4th, 6th and 10th Circuit Courts of Appeal to individuals observed with a firearm, all of whom found it was a violation of the fourth to stop them for the mere act of having or wearing a firearm. The Third circuit observed that detaining someone for carrying a firearm which might be illegal was akin to detaining someone for having a wallet because it might contain counterfit bills. Certainly, those rulings need not necessarily apply to other circuits such as the 9th, but thus far, there are many rulings at the State and Federal level going one way, and none the other, universality seems likely. There are fine details at the State level depending on whether the state leans towards a prohibition on either open or concealed carriage, which will affect the specific circumstances of any interaction, but for the last few years, -no- state (courtesy of the 7th circuit) has a blanket prohibition on the carriage of firearms.

Detritus70

I find this website endlessly entertaining and shall return to it a lot for the next while.
It is a tracker of people who took part in storming the Capitol and how their criminal cases are progressing.
It's a gallery of hateful idiots.

https://seditiontracker.com/

jill_valentine

Detritus70 wrote: »

I find this website endlessly entertaining and shall return to it a lot for the next while.
It is a tracker of people who took part in storming the Capitol and how their criminal cases are progressing.
It's a gallery of hateful idiots.

https://seditiontracker.com/

This is very interesting. That guy Pezzola caught my eye in every photo I saw him in, because of how calm he looked compared to everyone else, and his earpiece. Turns out he's an ex marine Proud Boy, and he was one of the guys who smashed the exterior windows, using the stolen Capitol Police shield.

It was also a Proud Boy who smashed the chamber doors in before Ashli Babbitt charged in.

After their leader's arrest and their recent statements, there were a million reasons to see these guys coming, and they still seem to have been given pretty much free rein to instigate a large chunk of this mess.

W[itness]-1 stated that other members of the group talked about things they had done during
the day, and they said that anyone they got their hands on they would have killed, including Nancy Pelosi.
W-1 further stated that members of this group, which included “Spaz,” said that they would have killed
[Vice President] Mike Pence if given the chance. According to W-1, the group said it would be returning
on the “20th,” which your affiant takes to mean the Presidential Inauguration scheduled for January 20,
2021, and that they plan to kill every single “m-fer” they can.

W-1 stated the men said they all had firearms or access to firearms.

Windmill100000

Detritus70 wrote: »

I find this website endlessly entertaining and shall return to it a lot for the next while.
It is a tracker of people who took part in storming the Capitol and how their criminal cases are progressing.
It's a gallery of hateful idiots.

https://seditiontracker.com/

Thanks for that.

Jenna Ryan has a link to her twitter saying she is going to be there breaking all their windows blah blah.

Did she really think that she could put that out there and not face the repercussions? Or did she think she would be a hero and Trump would pardon her?

Wonder how she feels now she has been thrown under the bus by Trump?