Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

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

Options
1…238239241243244…326

Comments

  • Options
    #7202
    Brian?
    Moderators, Recreation & Hobbies Moderators Posts: 20,807 Mod ✭✭✭✭Brian?


    Foxtrol wrote: »
    We've now gone full circle back to the original point that despite Dems still championing unions and union supported policies, the white blue collar (or whatever term you want to describe them) still went out and voted for Trump.

    The 'culture war' talking points backed up by quick fix promises for economic issues are simply more powerful to that group than dem policies that would help them.

    Yeah, wasn't I the one who made that point?

    they/them/theirs


    And so on, and so on …. - Slavoj Žižek




  • Options
    #7203
    Brian?
    Moderators, Recreation & Hobbies Moderators Posts: 20,807 Mod ✭✭✭✭Brian?


    Foxtrol wrote: »
    But it is flat out wrong.

    That poster was ignoring polls that show union favourability using an empty, throwaway phrase.

    It would be like ignoring the favourability of abortion access in polls because of the role religion plays in US culture and their lobbying power.

    Corporations and Religion are both very powerful groups but anyone claiming that either 'is America' just highlights that person has no real understanding of the country outside of lazy caricatures.

    I agreed with the poster because the meaning I took was "Corporate America controls America"

    they/them/theirs


    And so on, and so on …. - Slavoj Žižek




  • Options
    #7204
    moon2
    Registered Users Posts: 677 ✭✭✭moon2


    Brian? wrote: »
    I agreed with the poster because the meaning I took was "Corporate America controls America"

    I can agree with that and strongly disagree with the original "america is anti union" statement.

    None of the people in the 300+ employee Boston based company I worked for were in a union. My contract had a clause saying my employment would terminate as soon as I joined a union.

    It's a shame that all of us are being counted as "anti union" due to the lazy and incorrect use of some arbitrary numbers.


  • Options
    #7205
    Foxtrol
    Registered Users Posts: 11,016 ✭✭✭✭Foxtrol


    Brian? wrote: »
    Yeah, wasn't I the one who made that point?

    My post was in agreement with you.

    There is however a group of posters that regularly lament that the dems could win back the 'blue collar' voter if only they'd move further to the left on a number of issues (today's case being union support), when at this point it is obvious that these voters simply aren't coming back to the dems unless they discard other core progressive beliefs.


  • Options
    #7206
    Capt'n Midnight
    Moderators, Recreation & Hobbies Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators, Technology & Internet Moderators Posts: 90,749 Mod ✭✭✭✭Capt'n Midnight


    Brian? wrote: »
    Trump in 2016 fooled these people into thinking he could bring back well paying manufacturing jobs. He couldn’t, no one can.
    Back in the day US corporations used to make small margins and taxes were high so a lot of money was reinvested in improving productivity.

    Nowadays margins are closer to 50% and most of the profit goes to shareholders.

    With margins like that you might as well get everything drop shipped from China.


    Most of the worlds tax havens are UK protectorates. Now that they are out of the EU it'll get interesting.

    However, the US uses a different scam. Hold your profits in the US Virgin Islands until there's a tax amnesty and then repatriate them.

    So if the EU and US do a tit for tat on Boeing vs. Airbus the question of US corporations avoiding tax could become an issue. And the EU can and does fine corporations Billions.


    Anyway , under Trump's presidency corporate welfare continued. Compare the covid payments to Industry and Joe Public. How much did Billionaires get in tax cuts ? And how much will Joe Public get as a result of Trump and GOP ?


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #7207
    Brian?
    Moderators, Recreation & Hobbies Moderators Posts: 20,807 Mod ✭✭✭✭Brian?


    Foxtrol wrote: »
    My post was in agreement with you.

    There is however a group of posters that regularly lament that the dems could win back the 'blue collar' voter if only they'd move further to the left on a number of issues (today's case being union support), when at this point it is obvious that these voters simply aren't coming back to the dems unless they discard other core progressive beliefs.

    Ah I see. I agree, there are far too many American obsessed with social issues to the detriment of their own economic prosperity.

    they/them/theirs


    And so on, and so on …. - Slavoj Žižek




  • Options
    #7208
    reforger
    Registered Users Posts: 73 ✭✭reforger


    As expected, Trump has announced a full pardon for his former National Security Adviser Michael Flynn.


  • Options
    #7209
    Headshot
    Registered Users Posts: 53,871 ✭✭✭✭Headshot


    reforger wrote: »
    As expected, Trump has announced a full pardon for his former National Security Adviser Michael Flynn.

    absolutely disgusting and corrupt as ****

    Thank **** this man will be out in his ass come Jan and hopefully the law and creditors catch up with Trump


  • Options
    #7210
    Timberrrrrrrr
    Registered Users Posts: 25,408 ✭✭✭✭Timberrrrrrrr


    reforger wrote: »
    As expected, Trump has announced a full pardon for his former National Security Adviser Michael Flynn.

    Unfortunately I think we will see many more over the next few weeks, The Trump zealots will lap it up of.course, you already see it on Twitter where they are calling Flynn a "true patriot".


  • Options
    #7211
    Itssoeasy
    Registered Users Posts: 39,443 ✭✭✭✭Itssoeasy


    So I see that general Michael Flynn has been pardoned in full. Not unexpected but still why he lied to the fbi and possibly because of who he lied to them for has never fully come out. As far as I can remember there was nothing exactly wrong with the incoming NSA talking to foreign governments prior to the inauguration on general stuff. The issue was why he felt he needed to lie to the FBI about these activities if there was nothing to hide.

    Also, the fact that not once but twice general Flynn plead guilty to the charge of lying to the FBI in open court when if he felt there was no guilt, then plead not guilty.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #7212
    StringerBell
    Registered Users Posts: 14,029 ✭✭✭✭StringerBell


    We have entered the final stretch for this cabaal with that pardon. The real fun will start when he attempts to pardon himself, presumably Manafort will be home before long. Mike Flynn, in every sense of the word a traitor to his country and his escaping justice is heralded by many who would think themselves patriotic. Such a backwards worldview in so many areas of the States. I just feel pity for them for the most part, 30 years of Fox news and right wing media consumption seems to have had the same impact lead in the drinking water would have had over the same period of time.

    "People say ‘go with the flow’ but do you know what goes with the flow? Dead fish."



  • Options
    #7213
    aloyisious
    Registered Users Posts: 11,547 ✭✭✭✭aloyisious


    Looking at Trump's period on popular TV shows, it's probable that's where he learned that gullible people can be conned by the medium of TV. It look's likely that others agreed with him and played along with him to get him elected. He's still using the medium to try persuade the gullible that he was cheated in the election, today still claiming he won it.


  • Options
    #7214
    looksee
    Registered Users Posts: 28,075 ✭✭✭✭looksee


    The Supreme Court has spoken, and decided that NY's Cuomo's anti-Covid regulations are unconstitutional in so far as they apply to religious meetings.

    All the things that need attention and they are arguing that if a bike shop is free to operate then religious services should be allowed to go ahead. Like you have several hundred people gathering in a bike shop.

    They are beyond hope, leave them at it. Presumably (their) God will prevent people who attend these services from getting the disease that He visited on the world, but they may well be free to carry it home to the vulnerable.

    Meanwhile Trump is dismantling the place as he leaves.

    Let them get on with it, there is only so far you can concern yourself with stupidity.


  • Options
    #7215
    robinph
    Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 24,068 Mod ✭✭✭✭robinph


    looksee wrote: »
    The Supreme Court has spoken, and decided that NY's Cuomo's anti-Covid regulations are unconstitutional in so far as they apply to religious meetings.

    All the things that need attention and they are arguing that if a bike shop is free to operate then religious services should be allowed to go ahead. Like you have several hundred people gathering in a bike shop.

    They are beyond hope, leave them at it. Presumably (their) God will prevent people who attend these services from getting the disease that He visited on the world, but they may well be free to carry it home to the vulnerable.

    Meanwhile Trump is dismantling the place as he leaves.

    Let them get on with it, there is only so far you can concern yourself with stupidity.

    But much like the Trump claimed "win" in the case about how close election observers were allowed to get (we want to watch the vote - OK stand there - we'll go to court - OK you can watch the vote from over there - Yay, we win) the case in New York no longer applies anyway as the restrictions don't currently apply as the restrictions have been lifted.

    Guess if they need to bring them back in they can just close the bike shops as well and then there is no "discrimination".


  • Options
    #7216
    Roanmore
    Registered Users Posts: 1,801 ✭✭✭Roanmore


    They are nearly hitting 2000 deaths a day now which is shocking.


  • Options
    #7217
    Quin_Dub
    Moderators, Politics Moderators, Social & Fun Moderators Posts: 15,018 Mod ✭✭✭✭Quin_Dub


    StringerBell wrote: »
    We have entered the final stretch for this cabaal with that pardon. The real fun will start when he attempts to pardon himself, presumably Manafort will be home before long. Mike Flynn, in every sense of the word a traitor to his country and his escaping justice is heralded by many who would think themselves patriotic. Such a backwards worldview in so many areas of the States. I just feel pity for them for the most part, 30 years of Fox news and right wing media consumption seems to have had the same impact lead in the drinking water would have had over the same period of time.

    Is there not a real risk for Trump in these pardons?

    If Flynn has been pardoned , he can now be deposed about the whole thing and he cannot plead the 5th etc.

    I suspect that Manafort will get a commutation not a pardon like Stone, which ensures he has to keep his mouth shut.


  • Options
    #7218
    looksee
    Registered Users Posts: 28,075 ✭✭✭✭looksee


    robinph wrote: »
    But much like the Trump claimed "win" in the case about how close election observers were allowed to get (we want to watch the vote - OK stand there - we'll go to court - OK you can watch the vote from over there - Yay, we win) the case in New York no longer applies anyway as the restrictions don't currently apply as the restrictions have been lifted.

    Guess if they need to bring them back in they can just close the bike shops as well and then there is no "discrimination".

    No mention on the Mayor's twitter feed, but the NY Times seems to suggest they are open, its hard to keep up!


  • Options
    #7219
    EltonJohn69
    Registered Users Posts: 4,158 ✭✭✭EltonJohn69


    Sloppy Steve is definitely next, but can Trump actually pardon himself ? He just has to admit guilt ?


  • Options
    #7220
    Quin_Dub
    Moderators, Politics Moderators, Social & Fun Moderators Posts: 15,018 Mod ✭✭✭✭Quin_Dub


    EltonJohn69 wrote: »
    Sloppy Steve is definitely next, but can Trump actually pardon himself ? He just has to admit guilt ?

    He doesn't have to "admit guilt" to anything - Precedent set for that from the Nixon pardon , but it remains a massive legal question as to whether he can pardon himself.

    There are even those that are questioning the legality of him pardoning Flynn & Stone (and who ever else he pardons in the next few weeks) as they are being pardoned for crimes that had impacts on Trump himself.

    If he tries it , it will absolutely definitely be challenged in Court.


  • Options
    #7221
    Leroy42
    Registered Users Posts: 15,483 ✭✭✭✭Leroy42


    Quin_Dub wrote: »
    He doesn't have to "admit guilt" to anything - Precedent set for that from the Nixon pardon , but it remains a massive legal question as to whether he can pardon himself.

    There are even those that are questioning the legality of him pardoning Flynn & Stone (and who ever else he pardons in the next few weeks) as they are being pardoned for crimes that had impacts on Trump himself.

    If he tries it , it will absolutely definitely be challenged in Court.

    One thing that surely we have learned from Trump at this stage is that if it isn't specifically prohibited then he will do it and let others worry about challenging it.

    TBF, he has won nearly every time he has used this option, there has not been much pushback no matter what he did.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #7222
    Quin_Dub
    Moderators, Politics Moderators, Social & Fun Moderators Posts: 15,018 Mod ✭✭✭✭Quin_Dub


    Leroy42 wrote: »
    One thing that surely we have learned from Trump at this stage is that if it isn't specifically prohibited then he will do it and let others worry about challenging it.

    TBF, he has won nearly every time he has used this option, there has not been much pushback no matter what he did.

    Perhaps , but he will no longer be President and will no longer have the protections that that office provides nor will he have the DOJ going to bat for him.


  • Options
    #7223
    Leroy42
    Registered Users Posts: 15,483 ✭✭✭✭Leroy42


    Quin_Dub wrote: »
    Perhaps , but he will no longer be President and will no longer have the protections that that office provides nor will he have the DOJ going to bat for him.

    Sure, but he will at the time. Is anyone really going to go to court about Flynn? I would wager no.

    And if Trump pardons himself, it gets so tied up in legalise, that nobody really knows the actual answer, so it would end up all the way to SCOTUS.

    I just don't see it happening. GOP, while they may not want to protect him as much, still have 74m voters to worry about losing. Trump will play this card that the GOP have abandoned him and that won't sit well with many voters who will continue to believe that the election itself was robbed, so really Trump was only protecting himself for a deep state out to get him, and by extension, them.


  • Options
    #7224
    listermint
    Registered Users Posts: 33,643 ✭✭✭✭listermint


    One thing im very much looking forward to with the demise of trump is the end of the absolute mind meltingly stupid nicknames for all asunder that oppose him.


  • Options
    #7225
    Quin_Dub
    Moderators, Politics Moderators, Social & Fun Moderators Posts: 15,018 Mod ✭✭✭✭Quin_Dub


    Leroy42 wrote: »
    Sure, but he will at the time. Is anyone really going to go to court about Flynn? I would wager no.

    And if Trump pardons himself, it gets so tied up in legalise, that nobody really knows the actual answer, so it would end up all the way to SCOTUS.

    I just don't see it happening. GOP, while they may not want to protect him as much, still have 74m voters to worry about losing. Trump will play this card that the GOP have abandoned him and that won't sit well with many voters who will continue to believe that the election itself was robbed, so really Trump was only protecting himself for a deep state out to get him, and by extension, them.

    Don't disagree , it will be an absolute mess if he does it.

    As you can see from the tweet from Gaetz that he shared - The angle is absolutely going to be "I need it to defend myself from the Angry Liberal Mob and the Deep-state " etc.

    The contortions that the the GOP would have to knot themselves into would be of epic proportions.

    But the precedent it would set were it allowed to stand would be horrendous which is why I think that if he did it and it was challenged in the SCOTUS, it would get over-turned.

    Even given how Partisan the SCOTUS now seems to be , they would see the future risks of this.

    If a President can pardon themselves , could they ever be impeached?


  • Options
    #7226
    Leroy42
    Registered Users Posts: 15,483 ✭✭✭✭Leroy42


    Quin_Dub wrote: »
    Don't disagree , it will be an absolute mess if he does it.

    As you can see from the tweet from Gaetz that he shared - The angle is absolutely going to be "I need it to defend myself from the Angry Liberal Mob and the Deep-state " etc.

    The contortions that the the GOP would have to knot themselves into would be of epic proportions.

    But the precedent it would set were it allowed to stand would be horrendous which is why I think that if he did it and it was challenged in the SCOTUS, it would get over-turned.

    Even given how Partisan the SCOTUS now seems to be , they would see the future risks of this.

    If a President can pardon themselves , could they ever be impeached?

    Just on this, and I am open to correction, but wouldn't SCOTUS be determining whether is was legal or not, regardless of the implications? That is for legislators to deal with, SCOTUS can only deal with the law as it stands.

    From my understanding, there is nothing that prohibits Trump from pardoning himself (there is nothing to say he can either) and thus on what grounds could SCOTUS overturn it?

    I don't know, maybe they could, but Trump will be banking on them not being able to, or if they are it would take so long and cause so much hassle that it wouldn't matter to him.


  • Options
    #7227
    EltonJohn69
    Registered Users Posts: 4,158 ✭✭✭EltonJohn69


    Quin_Dub wrote: »
    He doesn't have to "admit guilt" to anything - Precedent set for that from the Nixon pardon , but it remains a massive legal question as to whether he can pardon himself.

    There are even those that are questioning the legality of him pardoning Flynn & Stone (and who ever else he pardons in the next few weeks) as they are being pardoned for crimes that had impacts on Trump himself.

    If he tries it , it will absolutely definitely be challenged in Court.

    Great, sounds like we have enough material for another season of the Trump show anyway


  • Options
    #7228
    aloyisious
    Registered Users Posts: 11,547 ✭✭✭✭aloyisious


    Leroy42 wrote: »
    Just on this, and I am open to correction, but wouldn't SCOTUS be determining whether is was legal or not, regardless of the implications? That is for legislators to deal with, SCOTUS can only deal with the law as it stands.

    From my understanding, there is nothing that prohibits Trump from pardoning himself (there is nothing to say he can either) and thus on what grounds could SCOTUS overturn it?

    I don't know, maybe they could, but Trump will be banking on them not being able to, or if they are it would take so long and cause so much hassle that it wouldn't matter to him.

    It might be worth their honours keeping in mind the statement he made about himself personally going unto a New York Street and shooting another person and no one caring about it, then for them to imagine the fate of that fellow citizen he theorized about shooting while they ponder his notion that he can issue a presidential pardon to himself without a fear of some judge saying "whoa there, that's outside the bounds of presidential executive privilege". There has to be a limit put on the craziness-level he's brought the presidency to presently and not let him continue with his B/S "I was only joking" lies. They are duty-bound to call a halt to his irrational imagining of presidential power limits.


  • Options
    #7229
    Carfacemandog
    Registered Users Posts: 2,042 ✭✭✭Carfacemandog


    All this self pardoning talk is kind of moot anyone, as pardons have no impact upon state trials/sentences and the State Department of New York is likely to be laying charges in Trump within hours of him finishing his term (12pm, Jan 20th).


  • Options
    #7230
    astrofool
    Registered Users Posts: 16,459 ✭✭✭✭astrofool


    Quin_Dub wrote: »
    He doesn't have to "admit guilt" to anything - Precedent set for that from the Nixon pardon , but it remains a massive legal question as to whether he can pardon himself.

    There are even those that are questioning the legality of him pardoning Flynn & Stone (and who ever else he pardons in the next few weeks) as they are being pardoned for crimes that had impacts on Trump himself.

    If he tries it , it will absolutely definitely be challenged in Court.

    I imagine nothing will happen until Barr is gone and a new AG is installed.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #7231
    Quin_Dub
    Moderators, Politics Moderators, Social & Fun Moderators Posts: 15,018 Mod ✭✭✭✭Quin_Dub


    Leroy42 wrote: »
    Just on this, and I am open to correction, but wouldn't SCOTUS be determining whether is was legal or not, regardless of the implications? That is for legislators to deal with, SCOTUS can only deal with the law as it stands.

    From my understanding, there is nothing that prohibits Trump from pardoning himself (there is nothing to say he can either) and thus on what grounds could SCOTUS overturn it?

    I don't know, maybe they could, but Trump will be banking on them not being able to, or if they are it would take so long and cause so much hassle that it wouldn't matter to him.

    A lot depends on what he tries to pardon himself for.

    If he limits it to his time in office , then maybe it might stand - But most of his problems are from before he was Elected.

    The Cohen Campaign finance violations case along with a potential multitude of charges relating to his business activities, some of which must reach the level of being Federal crimes are all from before he became POTUS.

    Using the Nixon pardon as a template if all he does is pardon himself for the period 20/01/16 to 20/01/20 then he protects himself from Hatch act /Emolument clause or similar kinds of charges , not much else.

    What he needs is a "Pardon for all previous crimes" and I simply do not see how him giving that to himself could ever hold legal water.

    A Pence switcheroo then a Pardon whilst utterly abhorrent, probably has a better chance of being considered "legal".

    Either way he is absolutely going to utterly debase the office of President quite a bit more before he leaves , that's for certain.


This discussion has been closed.
Advertisement