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

pixelburp · 06-09-2018 5:42pm

It's hard not to see the grandstanding by Booker & Harris as testing the waters, or indeed preparing the ground, for a Presidential run. Booker especially; I've seen him at a couple other hearings and he is always the more animated, declarative, media friendly politician.

For Forks Sake · 06-09-2018 5:43pm

This is just pathetic by SHS https://twitter.com/PressSec/status/1037728144642506752?s=19

Quin_Dub · 06-09-2018 5:47pm

Rjd2 wrote: »

https://twitter.com/lachlan/status/1037731687449456640

Is that ****ing it?

Surely there has to be something more explosive to come, because that is dismal. 2020 isn't happening if he has nothing more explosive to come.

I think that's kinda his point - That , weak-sauce crap was considered "Confidential" and unsuitable for public hearing.

Why and on what basis was that decision made?

Similarly , the Dem Senator from Hawaii also released another "nothing" document about native Hawaiians and again the question is , why on earth was that marked as "committee confidential" ?

Basically - They are saying that the GOP are rushing this through before the elections in case they lose the senate and are hiding behind "Executive privilege" as an excuse to not have to do a proper job of vetting the guy.

Hurrache · 06-09-2018 5:49pm

Rjd2 wrote: »

https://twitter.com/lachlan/status/1037731687449456640

Is that ****ing it?

Surely there has to be something more explosive to come, because that is dismal. 2020 isn't happening if he has nothing more explosive to come.

He also lied about claiming not to being involved in the nomination process of Bill Pryor whereas emails released shows he was invited to an emergency meeting to discuss the nomination at a private law firm.

Igotadose · 06-09-2018 5:57pm

Larbre34 wrote: »

It doesn't. At least not in that way.

Under the 25th Amendment, Doctors would have to convince Pence and enough members of the exec branch to invoke the action and be the ones to remove him. No Doctor or Doctors can remove him directly.

PS I dont know the chicken and egg legality of getting Doctors into the equation in the first place.

25th amendment was ratified in 1965 and has been used a few times when the Prez quit (Nixon), or was having surgery or whatever. But, it's up to the President or Cabinet to invoke it. It would've been irresponsible for GWB, who was having surgery and required anesthesia, to not transfer running of the gummint to creepy Dick Cheney, so he used the 25th amendment for that.

However, it also seems like the President could ask to be let back in too (per Wikipedia): "
The President may take back the Presidency by sending a letter to the President pro tempore and the Speaker of the House. However, if the Vice President and the Cabinet think the President is still disabled and still cannot do his job, they can challenge his return. They have four days to write another declaration saying the President is still unable to do his job. The Vice President is still Acting President during these four days. Congress then has to get together within 48 hours, if they are not already in session. Then Congress has 21 days to make a decision. In the meantime, the Vice President is still Acting President.[19]"

So, even if Trump left, he could challenge it, and Congress would have 3 weeks to decide. Seems like the VP would be acting President during that time.

Still, my opinion much ado about nothing. I'm only heartened by a quote I read recently: "It's the economy, stupid, when the economy's going poorly. Not so much when it's going well." Imagine Pence loading the SCOTUS with anti-Roe types... maybe if the Dem's get the Senate, nothing's clear yet and the pollsters haven't distinguished themselves lately. Fivethirtyeight.com's saying 70% chance the House shifts Democratic, but that's not where it counts (majority's enough to draft impeachment articles.) Senate needs 66 votes to impeach. Unlikely. Trump'll fight it out no matter what happens, I still don't see him resigning unless Mueller's got serious smoking gun stuff or something else emerges, loans co-signed by Putin and Satan, transcripts of Trump sharing military secrets with the North Koreans, whatever. A Democratic House will give him fits, though, which will be quite entertaining.

Igotadose · 06-09-2018 6:00pm

pixelburp wrote: »

It's hard not to see the grandstanding by Booker & Harris as testing the waters, or indeed preparing the ground, for a Presidential run. Booker especially; I've seen him at a couple other hearings and he is always the more animated, declarative, media friendly politician.

He's from New Jersey. So am I. He's got a Meadowlands swamp full of buried skeletons. I'd hate to see him as the nominee.

Warren's a well-intended Harvard prof, with some good and bad ideas. She'd be awesome in a debate versus Trump, probably not afraid to call a pig a pig.

Warren and someone not from the East coast (Harris?) might work. This kind of thing should be organizing now, though, time is passing.

pixelburp · 06-09-2018 6:06pm

Igotadose wrote: »

He's from New Jersey. So am I. He's got a Meadowlands swamp full of buried skeletons. I'd hate to see him as the nominee.

Warren's a well-intended Harvard prof, with some good and bad ideas. She'd be awesome in a debate versus Trump, probably not afraid to call a pig a pig.

Warren and someone not from the East coast (Harris?) might work. This kind of thing should be organizing now, though, time is passing.

Such as what? Not needling, but Booker has been a somewhat fringe figure in the Democrats, courted as a potential 2020 candidate but without much constant presence in media cycles. ARe there any actual scandals out there?

Igotadose · 06-09-2018 6:21pm

pixelburp wrote: »

Such as what? Not needling, but Booker has been a somewhat fringe figure in the Democrats, courted as a potential 2020 candidate but without much constant presence in media cycles. ARe there any actual scandals out there?

I remember the Newark Watershed thing, which this article mentions: https://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2016/07/cory-booker-hillary-clinton-veep-newark-214030

no charges stuck to him, but you get an idea about him from reading it. Being Mayor of Newark is an enormously thankless job, he did o.k. and stayed out of jail unlike some of his predecessors. He's not particularly pro-Israel, not sure how that serves him in the Presidential election, probably overall not making a big difference. https://www.nj.com/politics/index.ssf/2018/08/this_sign_could_lead_to_trouble_for_cory_booker.html shows one misstep he's made in this area already.

Captain Obvious · 06-09-2018 6:27pm

Rjd2 wrote: »

https://twitter.com/lachlan/status/1037731687449456640

Is that ****ing it?

Surely there has to be something more explosive to come, because that is dismal. 2020 isn't happening if he has nothing more explosive to come.

That's the point. No security reason for this document to be withheld from the public, only a political reason. It's just to demonstrate that documents are being hidden without proper cause.

Quin_Dub · 06-09-2018 7:25pm

Captain Obvious wrote: »

That's the point. No security reason for this document to be withheld from the public, only a political reason. It's just to demonstrate that documents are being hidden without proper cause.

Exactly - Grassley et al have basically said "This guy has a mountain of history & documentation , if we were to go through it properly like we're supposed to , we run the risk of not getting it done before the mid-terms and possibly losing the ability to fill the seat . So, let's just mark most of it as "executive privilege" so we can can get him confirmed asap."

Celticfire · 06-09-2018 8:27pm

Captain Obvious wrote: »

That's the point. No security reason for this document to be withheld from the public, only a political reason. It's just to demonstrate that documents are being hidden without proper cause.

Quin_Dub wrote: »

Exactly - Grassley et al have basically said "This guy has a mountain of history & documentation , if we were to go through it properly like we're supposed to , we run the risk of not getting it done before the mid-terms and possibly losing the ability to fill the seat . So, let's just mark most of it as "executive privilege" so we can can get him confirmed asap."

Booker a 2020 hopeful went on a grandstanding rant. " "This is about the closest I'll probably ever have in my life to an, 'I am Spartacus' moment.".....

Except.......

"We cleared the documents last night shortly after Senator Booker’s staff asked us to," said Bill Burck, who is the George W. Bush records representative that led the review of Kavanaugh’s records. "We were surprised to learn about Senator Booker’s histrionics this morning because we had already told him he could use the documents publicly. In fact, we have said yes to every request made by the Senate Democrats to make public documents public."

Rjd2 · 06-09-2018 9:14pm

He was grand standing it seems, what a shock. To be fair I doubt the audience it was aimed at aimed will ever find out tbh.

Manic Moran · 06-09-2018 9:21pm

listermint wrote: »

Manic still things that the minority conservative view is what the country wants. Where a smaller portion of the population with ridiculous notions of conservative past nostalgia belong in a future America.

A time when church was centre stage, Gays were illegal, women were in the kitchen and Abortion was illegal.

All the things that Ireland has shed itself over the past few decades

This is what Manic alligns himself with, and i suppose if you allign yourself with that 'republican conservative view' then you believe it.

Any thing else is 'progressive' boooooo, you know the stuff that the majority of the American electorate voted for.

Oh, bull***. Show me a single post in the last ten years where I have expressed an anti-abortion position, believe there should be no gay marriage, or that my wife belongs in the kitchen.

Not everybody who votes Republican is in favor of those positions. As evidenced by California voters in referenda, a hell of a lot of Democrats do. How else to explain the State which landslided for Obama in the same election put into the Constitution a prohibition on gay marriage?

Don’t project on me, I have done you the service of not projecting on you.

It was obviously the direction a majority of those who voted wanted to be taken. There are arguments for the electoral college, but "it accurately reflects the will of the people" isn't one of them.

It’s not supposed to. It’s supposed to represent the will of the States. If the population of those States didn’t vote for her, it seems they were not particularly enthralled with her policy positions.

oscarBravo · 06-09-2018 9:31pm

Manic Moran wrote: »

It’s not supposed to. It’s supposed to represent the will of the States. If the population of those States didn’t vote for her, it seems they were not particularly enthralled with her policy positions.

The population of the States did vote for her.

You talked about the direction the country wants to be taken. Which do you suppose is a more accurate reflection of that wish: the number of votes cast by they people, or the outcome of filtering those votes through an anachronistic electoral system?

It's as if someone decided that the FPTP voting system wasn't damaging enough to democracy, and came up with a way of making it even less representative.

listermint · 06-09-2018 9:32pm

You can't be a republican and not allign yourself with the packing of the supreme court with conservative judges. It's an attempt to drag the country back 40 years.

What exemplifies republican conservative to you then ?

Let me guess is it the tax give away.? Giving all your money back to big business and insuring civil workers get no pay rises. Because it's patriotic.?

What exactly is the republican movement about .. I'm intrigued

UsedToWait · 06-09-2018 9:34pm

Manic Moran wrote: »

Not everybody who votes Republican is in favor of those positions.

What I can't understand Manic, is why you and other genuine conservative by nature Republicans haven't already repudiated this execrable human being that has hijacked your party and flown it straight into Trump Tower

mcmoustache · 06-09-2018 9:42pm

listermint wrote: »

You can't be a republican and not allign yourself with the packing of the supreme court with conservative judges. It's an attempt to drag the country back 40 years.

What exemplifies republican conservative to you then ?

Let me guess is it the tax give away.? Giving all your money back to big business and insuring civil workers get no pay rises. Because it's patriotic.?

What exactly is the republican movement about .. I'm intrigued

To be fair, it's likely that he's a low tax, pro gun republican voter. He hasn't promoted the crazy end of the republican stuff on here and argues in good faith on here. I can understand why he has his views even if I don't agree with them.

I'll also add that he hasn't been a cheerleader for Trump. He has provided factual counterarguments to claims made here by those who dislike Trump. I think he may have even stated that a year ago.

I'd be inclined not to view manic through the same lens as a lying, trolling Trumper and instead view him as someone who has a different political opinion who lives in the same reality as everyone else. It can be civil.

listermint · 06-09-2018 9:46pm

Everyone is low tax. It's a stupid position to hold. If we could all not pay tax then of Course we would. Unfortunately that doesn't pay for the roads the hospitals the elderly or 'the troops' so excuse me if I'm not enamoured with the idea of being low tax.

Hence why I asked what is the republican party about ? Now today and why in the jaysus anyone would support them.

It's a group of conservatives eating themselves from the inside out. Seems to have been taken over by the tea party and the federalist society. I don't actually see the defense of it. But I'd be keen for him to give his synopsis

UsedToWait · 06-09-2018 9:48pm

^ I don't doubt Manic's bona fides, unlike most Trumpists.
I do doubt his sense of smell though.
Trump has stunk up his party, and been enabled all the way.

26000 Elephants · 06-09-2018 9:51pm

Rjd2 wrote: »

He was grand standing it seems, what a shock. To be fair I doubt the audience it was aimed at aimed will ever find out tbh.

So what was John Cornyn's grandstanding earlier in the day all about if these docs had been cleared?

Rjd2 · 06-09-2018 9:55pm

26000 Elephants wrote: »

So what was John Cornyn's grandstanding earlier in the day all about if these docs had been cleared?

Maybe both are ****ing idiots?

Coryn more likely clueless than grand standing (not a great look tbf) while Brooker making a lazy play for the 2020 nomination.

**** show personified.

mcmoustache · 06-09-2018 9:59pm

listermint wrote: »

Everyone is low tax. It's a stupid position to hold. If we could all not pay tax then of Course we would. Unfortunately that doesn't pay for the roads the hospitals the elderly or 'the troops' so excuse me if I'm not enamoured with the idea of being low tax.

Hence why I asked what is the republican party about ? Now today and why in the jaysus anyone would support them.

It's a group of conservatives eating themselves from the inside out. Seems to have been taken over by the tea party and the federalist society. I don't actually see the defense of it. But I'd be keen for him to give his synopsis

Yeah, that's tricky. There are a lot of people who still see the republican party as the party of nixon, reagan and the bushes. Right now, the crazies are in charge and Ryan and McConnell are exploiting it, presumably for the courts.

The Republican Party has gone from being a conservative party in a free country to openly courting fascism. Maybe that penny hasn't dropped yet for some of their voters but it has for many of their high-profile members who aren't in Congress.

I too would like this change addressed by actual conservatives but maybe it's still being processed. Personally, I'd like to hear from our resident libertarian from Donegal who lives in the States - he was also a sane rational conservative who wrote clearly. That being said, I can understand the reluctance given the state of the Republican Party and it's president right now.

Beechwoodspark · 06-09-2018 10:02pm

Seth Tillman on prime time cheerleading for trump. Useless. Doesn’t even address the substantial issues. Just kept to the line “we had an election and trump won”

prawnsambo · 06-09-2018 11:23pm

Twitter has eventually perma-banned Alex Jones.

Trasna1 · 06-09-2018 11:33pm

listermint wrote: »

Everyone is low tax. It's a stupid position to hold. If we could all not pay tax then of Course we would. Unfortunately that doesn't pay for the roads the hospitals the elderly or 'the troops' so excuse me if I'm not enamoured with the idea of being low tax.

Hence why I asked what is the republican party about ? Now today and why in the jaysus anyone would support them.

It's a group of conservatives eating themselves from the inside out. Seems to have been taken over by the tea party and the federalist society. I don't actually see the defense of it. But I'd be keen for him to give his synopsis

Republicans are about minimal tax. Just enough for the state to function with a military, law enforcement and basic infrastructure. They do not see the states role to get in the way of private enterprise, and a true fundamentalist republican wouldn't offer help to private enterprise when it gets into difficulty. But republicanism is a spectrum

When you have a two party system, the main parties become a broad church or brand as opposed to being like a party that we might recognise in Ireland. The republicans are essentially a coalition of conservative interests with the different factions or groupings within more resembling the standalone parties we have here.

Headshot · 06-09-2018 11:55pm

prawnsambo wrote: »

Twitter has eventually perma-banned Alex Jones.

Couldn't happen to a nicer bloke

Larbre34 · 07-09-2018 12:13am

Beechwoodspark wrote: »

Seth Tillman on prime time cheerleading for trump. Useless. Doesn’t even address the substantial issues. Just kept to the line “we had an election and trump won”

How is that guy in receipt of money to teach our kids anything. Rolling his eyes at the suggestion that the US is in dangerous times and persisting with the 'election is over, nothing to see here' mantra.

Atlantic Dawn · 07-09-2018 12:18am

Donald T 13/8 on PP for 2020, easier money than any SSIA.

mcmoustache · 07-09-2018 12:19am

prawnsambo wrote: »

Twitter has eventually perma-banned Alex Jones.

Good.
Now I want to see the Trumpers from AH defend him on free speech grounds despite this being Twitter expressing their freedom of expression.

mcmoustache · 07-09-2018 12:23am

Atlantic Dawn wrote: »

Donald T 13/8 on PP for 2020, easier money than any SSIA.

That's not great for an incumbent with no challenger two years before an election.

Why do you think he'll serve a second term?

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

Comments