nav[aria-label="Primary Navigation"] { padding: 0; & ul { list-style: none; width: 100%; display: flex; flex-direction: row; justify-content: start; align-items: start; gap: 30px; padding: 0; & li { margin: 0; } & ul li { list-style: none; } } }

Child Item

Donald Trump Presidency discussion thread III

Quin_Dub

This thread is for the continuing discussion of Donald Trumps's presidency in the US and any related matters.

Please ensure that you are familiar with the charter before posting.

Thanks.

Find more posts tagged with

Quick Links

Comments

Itssoeasy

I just read through the WSJ transcript and my head hurts. He didn't know he had a meeting and room full of people it seems. What was the point of the WSJ asking questions as he seem to ignore the question or go back to something else or talk about how great an athlete he was(I doubt he's ever run in his life), it's just like a scratched CD skipping reading his words.

ECO_Mental

Itssoeasy wrote: »

I just read through the WSJ transcript and my head hurts. He didn't know he had a meeting and room full of people it seems. What was the point of the WSJ asking questions as he seem to ignore the question or go back to something else or talk about how great an athlete he was(I doubt he's ever run in his life), it's just like a scratched CD skipping reading his words.

You forget that Trump is only interested in Trump, he doesn't read the daily brief only has about 2 3 hours of meetings a day. Rocks up to sign something and blabbers on about the ONLY thing he does know and that is Trump. This is why more than a year after the election he sill is rambling on how great a victory he had in the election. He is too stupid and has no interest on learning about actually governing and tbh that's a good thing....

LiamaDelta

ECO_Mental wrote: »

You forget that Trump is only interested in Trump, he doesn't read the daily brief only has about 2 3 hours of meetings a day. Rocks up to sign something and blabbers on about the ONLY thing he does know and that is Trump. This is why more than a year after the election he sill is rambling on how great a victory he had in the election. He is too stupid and has no interest on learning about actually governing and tbh that's a good thing....

I'd have to disagree with your last four words (the rest I agree with

). His disinterest and stupidity allows Pence Ryan and anybody else with an agenda, to do what they want to, as at the end of the day Donald will sign it if it makes him look good.

Mancomb Seepgood

LiamaDelta wrote: »

I'd have to disagree with your last four words (the rest I agree with ). His disinterest and stupidity allows Pence Ryan and anybody else with an agenda, to do what they want to, as at the end of the day Donald will sign it if it makes him look good.

Agree 100%.What the Department of the Interior is up to could have consequences that won't be easily reversed:

https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2018/01/22/the-damage-done-by-trumps-department-of-the-interior

And that's just one example.Behind the circus that is the Trump White House,wicked things are being done.

spacecoyote

Itssoeasy wrote: »

I just read through the WSJ transcript and my head hurts. He didn't know he had a meeting and room full of people it seems. What was the point of the WSJ asking questions as he seem to ignore the question or go back to something else or talk about how great an athlete he was(I doubt he's ever run in his life), it's just like a scratched CD skipping reading his words.

I think you could be misreading that one to be honest.
I
I wouldn't be in any way surprised if there was no meeting at all & that's the reason he was acting surprised.

If you look at the timing, unnamed white house aide drops in the meeting right at the time that the interviewer is about to delve into the whole Russia collusion Mueller piece. I would suspect it was more of a "let's wrap this up before he puts his foot in it again" type of meeting rather than a genuine one

Itssoeasy

spacecoyote wrote: »

Itssoeasy wrote: »

I just read through the WSJ transcript and my head hurts. He didn't know he had a meeting and room full of people it seems. What was the point of the WSJ asking questions as he seem to ignore the question or go back to something else or talk about how great an athlete he was(I doubt he's ever run in his life), it's just like a scratched CD skipping reading his words.

I think you could be misreading that one to be honest.
I
I wouldn't be in any way surprised if there was no meeting at all & that's the reason he was acting surprised.

If you look at the timing, unnamed white house aide drops in the meeting right at the time that the interviewer is about to delve into the whole Russia collusion Mueller piece. I would suspect it was more of a "let's wrap this up before he puts his foot in it again" type of meeting rather than a genuine one

I never thought about that angle. That makes sense. Although I'm not sure if he would know anyway what his schedule is at any point.I say that as he clearly doesn't have a good memory despite what he says.

david75

Even before he was president he would have been in a bubble. Told where to be at what time and ushered from place to place meeting to meeting. All that stuff would happen around him. Effectively he’s tour managed by his assistants.
He doesn’t have to worry about what time I have to be there or who I have to meet next. It would all happen around him and done for him.

Now that he’s president it’s much the same thing, possibly even more so.

Be good to know when the last time he even handled real money was. When was the last time he went to the store and bought something.

Probably never has.

Water John

Reminds me of the story of Bush Snr, who didn't know what the scanner in the supermarket was for.

Manic Moran

On a related one to the Walmart announcement, this is a win for the Republicans in a swing state.

http://www.autoguide.com/auto-news/2018/01/production-of-the-ram-heavy-duty-is-returning-to-the-united-states.html

The automaker will invest $1 billion in order to move production of the heavy-duty pickup from Saltillo, Mexico to the freshly retooled Michigan site. It will add 2,500 jobs to the Detroit suburb when the plant overhaul is complete in 2020.

“It is only proper that our employees share in the savings generated by tax reform and that we openly acknowledge the resulting improvement in the U.S. business environment by investing in our industrial footprint accordingly,” CEO Sergio Marchionne said in a prepared statement.

FCA also announced over 60,000 of its US employees would be receiving $2,500 bonuses, another result of the tax reform bill passed by the Trump administration late last year.

Igotadose

Dollar at 3 year low vs. Euro. !MAGA: https://www.irishtimes.com/business/economy/dollar-hits-three-year-low-against-euro-1.3356594
Within the spoutathon that was the WSJ interview, Trumpy went on about his infrastructure, errr, "plan." Seems like his answer is foreign companies hiring cheap american workers to work on projects funded 'privately' (so, tolls and bonds and all that good stuff), with an easily found $200bn from the gummint. Someone obviously laid this out for him and he probably mostly got it right. He also piped up with, "We're not taking anything from the military," so expect the $200bn to come from health care or social security. But, that's actually almost incidental - his repeated mentioning of 'privatising' the work is what's concerning here. Not sure how much of this goes on already in the US - probably, a lot, state governments hire private contractors all the time and I imagine the fed does, and I'm sure with the attack on regulation underway by the WH, this new infrastructure plan will be rife with corruption.

And the worst of it, is that it'll all fall on the backs of the taxpayers. With the new tax laws, I imagine the ultra-rich are dying to get a piece of the infrastructure action.

Hopefully there'll be more coming out about the infrastructure 'plan'. Trumpy mentions this'll be in focus in 2018. Big bucks for him and his slimy corporation, I'm sure.

Leroy42

There is little doubt that US needs significant infrastructure spending over the next few years. The problem is how to pay for it.

GOP have boxed themselves in a bit here as they have already given away the possibility of getting money from any increase in the economy by their recent tax giveaway, which they claim will be paid for by increased growth etc. The best they project it that it is zero sum game.

So corporate America will not be paying for it. The second option is public America (workers etc), but that would involve tax increases which would go totally against the recent tax plan and destroy the base.

So the only option is to make it look like nobody is paying for it, ie public/private. Whereby the private companies get to get all the profits and the majority of the risks. That would make it look like Trump is getting it done whilst not costing anybody anything, at least until the projects open (so likely well past reelection).

It shows have crazy the recent tax reduction plan was. They gave it all away up front and left nothing for the government to deal with the known issues that they face. WHy not even step down the CT rate cut over a few years, with the "extra CT" gained being put directly t the infrastructure.

Hande hoche!

Water John wrote: »

Reminds me of the story of Bush Snr, who didn't know what the scanner in the supermarket was for.

Complete aside to Trump but that was a myth.

https://www.snopes.com/history/american/bushscanner.asp

jobbridge4life

Leroy42 wrote: »

There is little doubt that US needs significant infrastructure spending over the next few years. The problem is how to pay for it.

GOP have boxed themselves in a bit here as they have already given away the possibility of getting money from any increase in the economy by their recent tax giveaway, which they claim will be paid for by increased growth etc. The best they project it that it is zero sum game.

So corporate America will not be paying for it. The second option is public America (workers etc), but that would involve tax increases which would go totally against the recent tax plan and destroy the base.

So the only option is to make it look like nobody is paying for it, ie public/private. Whereby the private companies get to get all the profits and the majority of the risks. That would make it look like Trump is getting it done whilst not costing anybody anything, at least until the projects open (so likely well past reelection).

It shows have crazy the recent tax reduction plan was. They gave it all away up front and left nothing for the government to deal with the known issues that they face. WHy not even step down the CT rate cut over a few years, with the "extra CT" gained being put directly t the infrastructure.

The infrastructure thing was always a rouse, it was about massive, unprecidented privatisation. That will fit perfectly into the Randian dreams of many Republicans, establishment included.

Overheal

Leroy42 wrote: »

There is little doubt that US needs significant infrastructure spending over the next few years. The problem is how to pay for it.

GOP have boxed themselves in a bit here as they have already given away the possibility of getting money from any increase in the economy by their recent tax giveaway, which they claim will be paid for by increased growth etc. The best they project it that it is zero sum game.

So corporate America will not be paying for it. The second option is public America (workers etc), but that would involve tax increases which would go totally against the recent tax plan and destroy the base.

So the only option is to make it look like nobody is paying for it, ie public/private. Whereby the private companies get to get all the profits and the majority of the risks. That would make it look like Trump is getting it done whilst not costing anybody anything, at least until the projects open (so likely well past reelection).

It shows have crazy the recent tax reduction plan was. They gave it all away up front and left nothing for the government to deal with the known issues that they face. WHy not even step down the CT rate cut over a few years, with the "extra CT" gained being put directly t the infrastructure.

Seeing this problem at the state level. SC Gov McMaster last year pushed to slash state taxes for businesses and the wealthy. He also vetoed a good amount of education funding - including the ~$20M replacement of our school bus fleet, many of which have rear-mounted engines. If you have heard about these rear-engined busses, yes, they like to spontaneously combust because they love to overheat. Just a couple weeks ago another bus caught fire just a few minutes after dropping off its last passenger that afternoon.

http://www.independentmail.com/story/news/2018/01/03/old-school-bus-catches-fire-anderson-just-minutes-after-students-dropped-off/1001596001/

Back in November, the same thing happened except almost 30 kids were on board at the time.

http://www.foxcarolina.com/story/36804039/greenville-co-school-bus-catches-fire-with-29-students-on-board

I follow McMaster on FB and I can tell you he will talk about just about anything else, but his veto. Some of the oldest buses are from '95, aka when Overheal was in the 1st grade....

The state leg' delayed its veto for some reason last week but will probably override the veto this week. Im just baffled how they can do this and expect not to be primaried hard. Fortunately he's up for the boot this November.

Leroy42

Overheal wrote: »

Im just baffled how they can do this and expect not to be primaried hard. Fortunately he's up for the boot this November.

Simply, because politics in the US is broken and does not serve the people. You are given little choice, and due to the set up in many cases your choice means little anyway as the state votes the way it does always.

The recent vote in Alabama gives some hope that things can start to chance, but even with such a terrible candidate, the GOP almost got in.

eire4

Leroy42 wrote: »

Simply, because politics in the US is broken and does not serve the people. You are given little choice, and due to the set up in many cases your choice means little anyway as the state votes the way it does always.

The recent vote in Alabama gives some hope that things can start to chance, but even with such a terrible candidate, the GOP almost got in.

I sadly have to agree with your first paragraph as that is the reality in the US at the moment and it can be argued that the US is currently an oligarchy and not a democracy.

I would actually say in terms of the recent Alabama vote that to me it actually showed just how broken the system is and how also a significant percentage of Americans are so hate filled that they will vote against their own best interests economically again and again.
Firstly turnout was 40.4% which they actually considered good. Pretty pathetic when you consider 40% turnout good. So given the result was basically a split only 20% of the Alabama electorate actually voted against Roy Moore who was an incredibly horrendous candidate. Even if you look past the sexual abuse and child abuse allegations against him the mans record is so hate filled it is scary and yet even with all that only 20% actually voted against him. So for me while yes technically Doug Jones did win I did not see much hopeful news in that election result when you look a little closer at it.

Itssoeasy

Steve bannon has been summoned to testify before a grand jury in US Russia inquiry.

Headshot

Itssoeasy wrote: »

Steve bannon has been summoned to testify before a grand jury in US Russia inquiry.

Link here:

https://www.nytimes.com/2018/01/16/us/politics/steve-bannon-mueller-russia-subpoena.html

Hopefully Bannon will be very sore on what happened to him and goes all out on Trump

spacecoyote

Not sure if this is fake or not, as it doesn't link to any back up, but if true would be some serious poetic justice

https://twitter.com/EdKrassen/status/953015685826846720

B0jangles

spacecoyote wrote: »

Not sure if this is fake or not, as it doesn't link to any back up, but if true would be some serious poetic justice

https://twitter.com/EdKrassen/status/953015685826846720

It's being reported in other sources, but I don't know how reliable they are:

http://www.hougansydney.com/whats-happening-in-haiti/breaking-news-haiti-to-unsealed-files-pertaining-to-former-haitian-dictator-jean-claude-duvalier-laundering-money-through-trump-tower-during-his-time-in-power

The above is a general news site about Haiti

PopePalpatine

spacecoyote wrote: »

Not sure if this is fake or not, as it doesn't link to any back up, but if true would be some serious poetic justice

https://twitter.com/EdKrassen/status/953015685826846720

Especially considering the amount of conspiracy theories about the Clintons' and their foundation's activities in Haiti.

Overheal

I would take that with a grain of salt.

Quin_Dub

B0jangles wrote: »

It's being reported in other sources, but I don't know how reliable they are:

http://www.hougansydney.com/whats-happening-in-haiti/breaking-news-haiti-to-unsealed-files-pertaining-to-former-haitian-dictator-jean-claude-duvalier-laundering-money-through-trump-tower-during-his-time-in-power

The above is a general news site about Haiti

Overheal wrote: »

I would take that with a grain of salt.

So far , agreed - Only appearing on small fringe sites so far..

Will hold judgement for now...

Seems a bit too neat and "conspiracy theory-ish" for my liking..

Overheal

Yeah there are no named officials or judges, no direct quotes. And way too convenient for the circumstances.

PopePalpatine

Yep, gods forbid Trump actually has a reason (beyond gaslighting his voters) to whine about "fake news".

Overheal

Of course, Republicans won't give a damn about balancing a budget while in power - neither did the Democrats

http://reason.com/blog/2018/01/16/gop-leaders-tell-fiscal-hawks-to-fly-awa

I'm more and more convinced the country is just royally ****ed over; I can't imagine how we get back to any sort of rational, bipartisan medium, short of another great disaster - which will probably just cause a huge war, and more spending.

Leroy42

Headshot wrote: »

Link here:

https://www.nytimes.com/2018/01/16/us/politics/steve-bannon-mueller-russia-subpoena.html

Hopefully Bannon will be very sore on what happened to him and goes all out on Trump

There is simply no advantage to Bannon being cooperative. He will destroy whatever cred he still has with the alt-right and potentially land himself in hot water.

It is not like he will be welcomed as a hero onto the left if he did.

Better to keep his mouth shut so that he holds the threat of talking rather than talking and losing everything. He continues to be important based on what he could do, he loses that as soon as he speaks.

If there is something there (and given both his refusal to testify and Trumps refusals it is clear that something is up) then talking can only lead to bad things. What did being up front do for Flynn? Nothing, Trump tossed him aside quicker than a used hanky, and although he has already tossed Bannon aside there is always the chance to get back in or at least stay relevant.

You can bet that Bannon is already thinking of Breitbard MkII.

Professor Moriarty

Leroy42 wrote: »

There is simply no advantage to Bannon being cooperative. He will destroy whatever cred he still has with the alt-right and potentially land himself in hot water.

It is not like he will be welcomed as a hero onto the left if he did.

Better to keep his mouth shut so that he holds the threat of talking rather than talking and losing everything. He continues to be important based on what he could do, he loses that as soon as he speaks.

If there is something there (and given both his refusal to testify and Trumps refusals it is clear that something is up) then talking can only lead to bad things. What did being up front do for Flynn? Nothing, Trump tossed him aside quicker than a used hanky, and although he has already tossed Bannon aside there is always the chance to get back in or at least stay relevant.

You can bet that Bannon is already thinking of Breitbard MkII.

That's a fair point. However, it would be foolish in the extreme to lie to a grand jury should he eventually testify.

Leroy42

Professor Moriarty wrote: »

That's a fair point. However, it would be foolish in the extreme to lie to a grand jury should he eventually testify.

I assume that they are betting that it never reaches that point.

Second, it is very hard to prove one is lying. Mistaken, incorrect, wrong but to actually prove they are lying needs evidence. (not saying it can't be done but my bet is they think it won't be).

It is surprising that this development is not screaming for all the media. A major person, both in the campaign and the WH, has refused to testify to a committee and has now been subpoenaed by Mueller.

This is despite the WH claiming repeatedly that the investigation is almost over, that nothing has been found and that they are fully cooperating.

The Chief Strategist of the WH has just been served a subpoena to testify in a collusion investigation into POTUS.

This really is pretty big news.

spacecoyote

Leroy42 wrote: »

There is simply no advantage to Bannon being cooperative. He will destroy whatever cred he still has with the alt-right and potentially land himself in hot water.

It is not like he will be welcomed as a hero onto the left if he did.

Better to keep his mouth shut so that he holds the threat of talking rather than talking and losing everything. He continues to be important based on what he could do, he loses that as soon as he speaks.

If there is something there (and given both his refusal to testify and Trumps refusals it is clear that something is up) then talking can only lead to bad things. What did being up front do for Flynn? Nothing, Trump tossed him aside quicker than a used hanky, and although he has already tossed Bannon aside there is always the chance to get back in or at least stay relevant.

You can bet that Bannon is already thinking of Breitbard MkII.

Its actually a funny one to think through. On the one hand, yes, he has lost his platform and may wish to try & gain favour with Trump and the various Breitbart backers again.

But on the other hand, he has kind of worked with the agenda of wanting to see the whole system burn to the ground. Seeing a President impeached, and the two sides of political system in chaos would play massively into that agenda. There would be no bigger step he could really take in relation to that than to throw Trump & a large faction of the Rep party under the bus (maybe this is purely wishful thinking)