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
Hi all,
Vanilla are planning an update to the site on April 24th (next Wednesday). It is a major PHP8 update which is expected to boost performance across the site. The site will be down from 7pm and it is expected to take about an hour to complete. We appreciate your patience during the update.
Thanks all.

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

1…9192949697…323

Comments

  • #2792
    Larbre34
    Registered Users Posts: 23,780 ✭✭✭✭Larbre34


    Atlantic Dawn wrote: »
    Donald T 13/8 on PP for 2020, easier money than any SSIA.

    Money back if he's a non-runner?


  • #2793
    dr.fuzzenstein
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 16,635 ✭✭✭✭dr.fuzzenstein


    mcmoustache wrote: »
    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.

    They could and they would. They have mastered the art of facing east and west at the same time.


  • #2794
    Manic Moran
    Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 16,200 Mod ✭✭✭✭Manic Moran


    oscarBravo wrote: »
    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.

    With respect, no, that demonstrates a fundamental misunderstanding of the nature of the US. A Presidential Election is actually some 51 separate elections, each election determining who a State will vote for to become their President. The position of President was created to the United States as a “them”, not an “it”. The States voted, they voted for Trump over Clinton. It’s as simple as that.

    -Any- representative system has the possibility of the party with fewer votes actually winning. Unlike the UK, for example, (where such a result has happened a few times) though, the US is a federal system. Like many federal systems, such as the EU, votes are disproportional to avoid the running roughshod of the smaller states than bigger ones.

    As for why I haven’t repudiated Trunp, I never supported him in the first place. I did not vote for him in the primary, I did not vote for him in the general. I have quite clearly stated that he is an embarrassment to the office and would be happy to see him out of office in 2020. That does not mean that I must support all anti-Trump positions merely because they are anti-Trump. If I see holes in logic or differ in opinion, I will make mention.


  • #2795
    everlast75
    Registered Users Posts: 18,955 ✭✭✭✭everlast75


    So within hours of Kavanaugh, who was the only choice who voiced the view a sitting president should be immune from prosecution, refusing to agree that a president can be supoenaed, rudy confirms that Trump will not answer written questions from Mueller. This all seems legit


  • #2796
    Manic Moran
    Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 16,200 Mod ✭✭✭✭Manic Moran


    mcmoustache wrote: »
    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?

    What are the odds on the challenger?

    Oh, right, as you said, there is none. So Trump’s odds are better than his opponent. It’s been mentioned a few times, now, but the biggest reason Trump may get a second term is the Democrats. No viable candidate with appeal to the swing States is being put forward as yet, and the Democratic Party is currently fractured in three, with little sign of a coming together in unified opposition. Republicans have a demonstrated ability to set aside their internal differences to vote for the R candidate, when the alternative is a D.


  • Advertisement
  • #2797
    ECO_Mental
    Registered Users Posts: 2,473 ✭✭✭ECO_Mental


    Kamala Harris put some pressure on Kavanaugh yesterday and it rattled him. She asked him did he every discuss the Mueller probe with one of Trump Lawyers. He didn't want to answer it. She didn't press him to hard towards the end and moved on but I read some where that they have info but its not rock solid. But it certainly rattled him;)

    6.1kWp south facing, South of Cork City



  • #2798
    Leroy42
    Registered Users Posts: 15,472 ✭✭✭✭Leroy42


    ^^^^I saw that exchange. There is no doubt in my mind that Kavannagh has discussed the Mueller probe with somebody in terms of Trump.

    None of it will make any difference. The GOP control the senate and as such this is nothing but trying to delay the inevitable. Those GOP supporters really need to start some critical thinking about where the GOP is willing to take the county.

    They showed previously, under Obama, that they are more than willing to leave a SCOTUS placed unfilled for as long as it takes to get what they want. Now they are showing they are prepared to play fast and loose with the process to try to fast track the appointment to suit themselves.

    I get it that low taxes and gun rights are important to many people, but more important than the country itself?


  • #2799
    Quin_Dub
    Moderators, Politics Moderators, Social & Fun Moderators Posts: 14,961 Mod ✭✭✭✭Quin_Dub


    Manic Moran wrote: »
    What are the odds on the challenger?

    Oh, right, as you said, there is none. So Trump’s odds are better than his opponent. It’s been mentioned a few times, now, but the biggest reason Trump may get a second term is the Democrats. No viable candidate with appeal to the swing States is being put forward as yet, and the Democratic Party is currently fractured in three, with little sign of a coming together in unified opposition. Republicans have a demonstrated ability to set aside their internal differences to vote for the R candidate, when the alternative is a D.

    This is the key - The Democrat voters have a terrible habit of not voting at all if they don't particularly like the Democratic candidate , whereas as you say the GOP voter is far more likely to focus on the (R) and ignore the "who" as required to ensure that "their side" win.

    I've seen a few Twitter posts with a tag line of "Vote Blue no matter who" - If the Dems can actually do that , then they have a solid chance of taking both houses..

    But if they continue to vote/behave the way they have in previous election cycles , they are making things extremely difficult for themselves


  • #2800
    Quin_Dub
    Moderators, Politics Moderators, Social & Fun Moderators Posts: 14,961 Mod ✭✭✭✭Quin_Dub


    Leroy42 wrote: »
    ^^^^I saw that exchange. There is no doubt in my mind that Kavannagh has discussed the Mueller probe with somebody in terms of Trump.

    None of it will make any difference. The GOP control the senate and as such this is nothing but trying to delay the inevitable. Those GOP supporters really need to start some critical thinking about where the GOP is willing to take the county.

    They showed previously, under Obama, that they are more than willing to leave a SCOTUS placed unfilled for as long as it takes to get what they want. Now they are showing they are prepared to play fast and loose with the process to try to fast track the appointment to suit themselves.

    I get it that low taxes and gun rights are important to many people, but more important than the country itself?


    This issue with Senator Leahy is the only potential thing that might derail his confirmation.
    Sen. Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.) said Wednesday that emails being withheld by Senate Republicans show that Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh may have lied under oath during his prior confirmation hearings in 2004 and 2006.

    The Democrat claimed that six emails from Kavanaugh’s time in the George W. Bush White House may contradict testimony Kavanaugh gave when being confirmed for his federal judgeships. But according to Leahy, Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa) has labeled the emails as “committee confidential,” meaning they can’t be released to the public.

    “There is simply no reason they can’t be made public,” Leahy said during confirmation hearings Wednesday.


  • #2801
    everlast75
    Registered Users Posts: 18,955 ✭✭✭✭everlast75


    Quin_Dub wrote: »
    This issue with Senator Leahy is the only potential thing that might derail his confirmation.

    Was listening to Maddow last night and the Alaskan Rep is under fierce pressure on two fronts re Kavanaugh - firstly his position on race issues and secondly Roe Vs Wade.

    If the Dems can flip 2 Reps and get the rest of the Dems to vote against then its game over


  • Advertisement
  • #2802
    Leroy42
    Registered Users Posts: 15,472 ✭✭✭✭Leroy42


    Quin_Dub wrote: »
    This issue with Senator Leahy is the only potential thing that might derail his confirmation.

    Sessions lied under oath. I doubt that is going to be any impediment to the GOP getting this through.

    DNC are dong all they can, but it is about as useful as the protesters that are making noise and being taken out of the hearing.

    Kavannagh is going to SCOTUS, there is no way to stop it.

    The GOP are looking at the very real possibility of losing the House, the low chance of loosing the Senate, but the very high chance that Trump is a goner. This could very well be there last chance for the next few years to get the SCOTUS balanced to there view. This is a lifetime appoinitment, a chance to revole Roe v's Wade, and in many cases will be seen as a way to stop the creeping liberal agenda in its tracks. Lock down gun freedom for the next 30+ years.


  • #2803
    StringerBell
    Registered Users Posts: 14,017 ✭✭✭✭StringerBell


    Is it just me or is there one very conspicuous name missing from the multitude of officials coming out to say it wasn't them (the op-ed)

    Also, Trump can't say the word anonymous :) he had two shots at it and just couldn't do it

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



  • #2804
    StringerBell
    Registered Users Posts: 14,017 ✭✭✭✭StringerBell


    Leroy42 wrote: »
    Sessions lied under oath. I doubt that is going to be any impediment to the GOP getting this through.

    DNC are dong all they can, but it is about as useful as the protesters that are making noise and being taken out of the hearing.

    Kavannagh is going to SCOTUS, there is no way to stop it.

    This ^^^^

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



  • #2805
    Zubeneschamali
    Registered Users Posts: 16,686 ✭✭✭✭Zubeneschamali


    Leroy42 wrote: »
    Kavannagh is going to SCOTUS, there is no way to stop it.

    Maybe so, but they want to hang a big sign up about Roe vs. Wade - when it is struck down by Kavanaugh, the Dems get to use that against every R senator in a purple state who voted for him. They can't say they weren't warned.


  • #2806
    oscarBravo
    Technology & Internet Moderators Posts: 28,790 Mod ✭✭✭✭oscarBravo


    Manic Moran wrote: »
    With respect, no, that demonstrates a fundamental misunderstanding of the nature of the US. A Presidential Election is actually some 51 separate elections, each election determining who a State will vote for to become their President. The position of President was created to the United States as a “them”, not an “it”. The States voted, they voted for Trump over Clinton. It’s as simple as that.

    I'm not misunderstanding the system; I'm disagreeing with your initial assertion. Here it is again:
    Manic Moran wrote: »
    ...the direction [Clinton] wanted to take the country obviously was not the direction the country wanted to be taken, or she would have won.

    We're not discussing the weird mechanics of how the USA elects its President; we're literally discussing "what the country wants". I'm arguing that if more people in a country vote for A than for B, then the country wants A. You're arguing that if the electoral college translates a majority for A into a win for B, then the country wants B.

    I accept that Trump won. I accept that the electoral college is designed to replace the will of the people with a best-guess approximation of the will of the states based on an assortment of interpretations of the will of the peoples of those respective states. I don't accept that it can be meaningfully described as representing what the country wants.


  • #2807
    Celticfire
    Registered Users Posts: 1,701 ✭✭✭Celticfire


    Quin_Dub wrote: »
    This issue with Senator Leahy is the only potential thing that might derail his confirmation.

    Perhaps Senator Leahy could join his colleague and have a Spartacus moment of his own. It's plainly obvious that Sen Booker thought that he had the silver bullet and dramatically wished to deliver it. He was sure that he had Kavanaugh guilty of agreeing with racial profiling. Too bad that he in his rush to have his Spartacus moment he didn't actually realize that he was opposed to it. I wonder how much Bookers odds dropped for the 2020 run after his massive swing and miss?


  • #2808
    26000 Elephants
    Registered Users Posts: 3,152 ✭✭✭26000 Elephants


    Celticfire wrote: »
    Perhaps Senator Leahy could join his colleague and have a Spartacus moment of his own. It's plainly obvious that Sen Booker thought that he had the silver bullet and dramatically wished to deliver it. He was sure that he had Kavanaugh guilty of agreeing with racial profiling. Too bad that he in his rush to have his Spartacus moment he didn't actually realize that he was opposed to it. I wonder how much Bookers odds dropped for the 2020 run after his massive swing and miss?

    I think you might have missed the entire point that Booker was making concerning the 'protected' status of those emails.


  • #2809
    StringerBell
    Registered Users Posts: 14,017 ✭✭✭✭StringerBell


    Celticfire wrote: »
    Perhaps Senator Leahy could join his colleague and have a Spartacus moment of his own. It's plainly obvious that Sen Booker thought that he had the silver bullet and dramatically wished to deliver it. He was sure that he had Kavanaugh guilty of agreeing with racial profiling. Too bad that he in his rush to have his Spartacus moment he didn't actually realize that he was opposed to it. I wonder how much Bookers odds dropped for the 2020 run after his massive swing and miss?


    He obviously didn't think he was guilty of agreeing to racial profiling considering he read the thing before releasing it.

    The point was very, very obvious. You don't even miss it yourself you just can't defend it.

    There is no way those emails should have been deemed necessary to withhold from the public. It is more evidence that they are rushing this through without the proper diligence as it is their man and they are worried about the midterms.

    Nobody expects Republicans to play fair so it's even a position you need to waste time defending.

    Silver bullet my arse, it's a good illustration of how the party on power is subventing the process alright.

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



  • #2810
    Rjd2
    Registered Users Posts: 11,992 ✭✭✭✭Rjd2


    26000 Elephants wrote: »
    I think you might have missed the entire point that Booker was making concerning the 'protected' status of those emails.

    Maybe , but he is right to point out the grand standing tbf. Fair is fair.


  • #2811
    Leroy42
    Registered Users Posts: 15,472 ✭✭✭✭Leroy42


    Rjd2 wrote: »
    Maybe , but he is right to point out the grand standing tbf. Fair is fair.

    How else should he have done it? I mean the guy was trying to make a point. Had he just released them without saying anything Trump would probably call him out for treason.

    HE is trying to highlight the nature of the process that the GOP is running in order to get their man in before the mid-terms.

    Should he have maybe written a strongly worded e-mail? Maybe appeared on CNN, where Trump and his supporters would simply dismiss it as Fake News.

    It is telling that you seem more interested in his PR than the issue itself.


  • Advertisement
  • #2812
    Quin_Dub
    Moderators, Politics Moderators, Social & Fun Moderators Posts: 14,961 Mod ✭✭✭✭Quin_Dub


    Celticfire wrote: »
    Perhaps Senator Leahy could join his colleague and have a Spartacus moment of his own. It's plainly obvious that Sen Booker thought that he had the silver bullet and dramatically wished to deliver it. He was sure that he had Kavanaugh guilty of agreeing with racial profiling. Too bad that he in his rush to have his Spartacus moment he didn't actually realize that he was opposed to it. I wonder how much Bookers odds dropped for the 2020 run after his massive swing and miss?

    As others have said , you're kind of missing the point on the Booker actions.

    But in regards to Leahy, It's there in Black & White - Kavanaugh lied , under oath to the Senate on at least two and arguably 3 separate occasions about several different issues.

    The GOP hid that information behind a spurious "executive privilege" claim to get their man over the line..

    And actually when you look at how the last few days have panned out , the Democrats have played a very smart game.


    They get a few questions in there early asking if Kavanaugh had had conversations about Trump and other issues ,
    which he either denied or obfuscated on.

    Booker then finds some fairly innocuous documents that they'd claimed privilege on , showing people that the reasons for hiding the documents has nothing to do with National security etc. but also publicly forcing William Burcks hand where he said "We've released any document we've been asked for so far.

    Which then tees up Leahy to play for the more important documents that show that Kavanaugh perjured himself before the Senate.

    It will ultimately come to nothing though as the GOP do not care about the rule of law or ethics or anything other than them getting their man into the Supreme court and setting the Conservative agenda for decades when the actual percentage of the population that support that agenda is dwindling rapidly.


  • #2813
    Celticfire
    Registered Users Posts: 1,701 ✭✭✭Celticfire


    Leroy42 wrote: »
    How else should he have done it? I mean the guy was trying to make a point. Had he just released them without saying anything Trump would probably call him out for treason.

    HE is trying to highlight the nature of the process that the GOP is running in order to get their man in before the mid-terms.

    Should he have maybe written a strongly worded e-mail? Maybe appeared on CNN, where Trump and his supporters would simply dismiss it as Fake News.

    It is telling that you seem more interested in his PR than the issue itself.

    I'm very interested in how a US Senator gets a free pass by lying about the release of the documents. All he had to do was release them without his dramatic Spartacus spiel. These document's were approved for release before his outburst and he was well aware of that fact. If a Republican Senator pulled that same stunt they would be lambasted on this forum.


  • #2814
    Stallingrad
    Registered Users Posts: 4,138 ✭✭✭Stallingrad


    Celticfire wrote: »
    If a Republican Senator pulled that same stunt they would be lambasted on this forum.

    I'm so sick of this Dems v Reps BS. If the democrats where rushing through a conservative SCOTUS with all sorts of question marks surrounding them I'd applaud anyone who spoke out. Have people lost the ability to simply see what is right v wrong anymore and can only see their party?

    What's happening with Kavanaugh is just another septic episode in modern American politics.


  • #2815
    Rjd2
    Registered Users Posts: 11,992 ✭✭✭✭Rjd2


    Celticfire wrote: »
    I'm very interested in how a US Senator gets a free pass by lying about the release of the documents. All he had to do was release them without his dramatic Spartacus spiel. These document's were approved for release before his outburst and he was well aware of that fact. If a Republican Senator pulled that same stunt they would be lambasted on this forum.


    He gets a pass because he is a left winger. The Republicans **** up on the hourly and get hammered and so often they deserve it, but ultimately the same standards don't apply for the Dems.
    Leroy42 wrote: »
    How else should he have done it? I mean the guy was trying to make a point. Had he just released them without saying anything Trump would probably call him out for treason.

    HE is trying to highlight the nature of the process that the GOP is running in order to get their man in before the mid-terms.

    Should he have maybe written a strongly worded e-mail? Maybe appeared on CNN, where Trump and his supporters would simply dismiss it as Fake News.

    It is telling that you seem more interested in his PR than the issue itself.

    Firstly there is no need for digs at me.

    Secondly I have called out how the Republicans have handled it which I stand by. I appreciate nobody likes to criticise the Dems here no matter the scenario, but we are still allowed to and I stand by the criticism of Booker.


  • #2816
    Leroy42
    Registered Users Posts: 15,472 ✭✭✭✭Leroy42


    Celticfire wrote: »
    I'm very interested in how a US Senator gets a free pass by lying about the release of the documents. All he had to do was release them without his dramatic Spartacus spiel. These document's were approved for release before his outburst and he was well aware of that fact. If a Republican Senator pulled that same stunt they would be lambasted on this forum.

    So you think, and I already asked you this, that he should have just released them quietly. You seem to think it is fine that these documents were withheld and only released when requested.

    I find it hard to take seriously that you really have an issue for a person trying to garner the most PR attention for themselves, when the current POTUS uses press conferences as the latest episode of his TV show and has carried out monthly campaign rallies where the sole purpose his to grand stand.

    What was the reason for withholding them in the first place if they were happy to release them if asked?

    So effectively they tried to hide it until they were called up on it. So what other docs are there that we don't know what is in them and therefore don't know to ask for?


  • #2817
    everlast75
    Registered Users Posts: 18,955 ✭✭✭✭everlast75


    Celticfire wrote: »
    I'm very interested in how a US Senator gets a free pass by lying about the release of the documents. All he had to do was release them without his dramatic Spartacus spiel. These document's were approved for release before his outburst and he was well aware of that fact. If a Republican Senator pulled that same stunt they would be lambasted on this forum.

    From what I have read online, I believe the Reps claimed that they let Booker know the docs would be released. However, a Rep senator on the floor told Booker not to discuss them, or what the ramifications would be (or words to that effect).

    So if the docs were cleared, why would the Rep Senator say that?


  • #2818
    Celticfire
    Registered Users Posts: 1,701 ✭✭✭Celticfire


    Leroy42 wrote: »
    So you think, and I already asked you this, that he should have just released them quietly. You seem to think it is fine that these documents were withheld and only released when requested.

    I find it hard to take seriously that you really have an issue for a person trying to garner the most PR attention for themselves, when the current POTUS uses press conferences as the latest episode of his TV show and has carried out monthly campaign rallies where the sole purpose his to grand stand.

    What was the reason for withholding them in the first place if they were happy to release them if asked?

    So effectively they tried to hide it until they were called up on it. So what other docs are there that we don't know what is in them and therefore don't know to ask for?

    Fact is they were released. Their release was requested and that that request was granted. You seem quite fine with his lying. Why is ok for the honorable Senator to lie to the committee and the public to garner attention? Does this not make a mockery of his position as Senator. All he had to do was announce that he was publishing them and give his reason why. He get's his airtime just like everyone else at the hearings.


  • #2819
    everlast75
    Registered Users Posts: 18,955 ✭✭✭✭everlast75


    And to hammer the legal issue home..

    In 2016 Trump gave a list of nominees for the SC, should one appear.

    Gorsuch got the first nod.

    Mueller is appointed. Kavanaugh's name appears on the list all of a sudden, he being one of the most outspoken defenders of a President and their right to avoid legal jeopardy.

    Despite McConnell adv that Kavanaugh would be the toughest to vet because of the extensive paper trail, Trump picks him.

    The reps hold a significant portion of papers back.

    They appoint a lawyer who represents 6 people in the Mueller probe matter to determine what docs are to be released and what are not.

    Kavanaugh skirts any issue put to him about whether he spoke to other lawyers in a firm which reps the president about the Mueller probe.

    The reps are pushing the appointment through at lightening speed.

    The whole appointment absolutely stinks, but sure - go after a democrat who may (or may very well not) be guilty of some theatrics on a sound point.


  • #2820
    Leroy42
    Registered Users Posts: 15,472 ✭✭✭✭Leroy42


    OK, Booker is a populist attention seeker, that wants to increase his profile to make a run at POTUS in the coming years. Not sure why you have a beef with that, that is what all of them are at.

    So, why are the GOP withholding the docs in the 1st place, only releasing them when asked directly? It makes no sense. Are they really saying that everything is classified until such time as the DNC ask for it? And if the DNC don't ask for a specific doc can it simply be ignored? That is not how this is supposed to work. The senate is supposed to get access to all documents, not simply they ones the GOP want them to see or the ones the DNC already know about. What a strange process you seem to think this should be.

    As for lying, well you really are stepping into a minefield with that one. Kavannagh is being accused of lying under oath. We know Sessions has, and Trump has told 4500+ an counting since he became POTUS.

    And the above highlights one of the biggest issues that Trump supporters have, They cannot expect to be taken seriously on any point they raise when on that very issues they continue to stand fully behind a person and party so completely involved in it themselves. Hypocrisy of the highest order.


  • Advertisement
  • #2821
    everlast75
    Registered Users Posts: 18,955 ✭✭✭✭everlast75


    Celticfire wrote: »
    I'm very interested in how a US Senator gets a free pass by lying about the release of the documents. All he had to do was release them without his dramatic Spartacus spiel. These document's were approved for release before his outburst and he was well aware of that fact. If a Republican Senator pulled that same stunt they would be lambasted on this forum.
    everlast75 wrote: »
    From what I have read online, I believe the Reps claimed that they let Booker know the docs would be released. However, a Rep senator on the floor told Booker not to discuss them, or what the ramifications would be (or words to that effect).

    So if the docs were cleared, why would the Rep Senator say that?

    https://twitter.com/mkraju/status/1038062874369896451

    So which is it? Were the docs authorised to be released, or were they not?


This discussion has been closed.
Advertisement