Donald Trump presidency discussion thread V

Itssoeasy · 24-05-2019 4:25pm

That video of trump asking his aides to confirm he was calm would be funny if it wasn’t the president of the United States doing it.

everlast75 · 24-05-2019 4:28pm

After the President has multiple incidents of slurring words and misspelling in tweets, he decides to retweet a doctored video of NP which purportedly shows her slurring her speech which is of course an outright lie and projection of the worst kind and can't get any ironic.

Rudy - hold my wine.

https://twitter.com/RudyGiuliani/status/1131911083801960448?s=20

Igotadose · 24-05-2019 10:34pm

Trump (following the lead of previous GOP Presidents like Reagan and the Bushes), is using an emergency declaration to sell weapons to the Saudis despite objections from Congress.

https://www.huffpost.com/entry/trump-congress-emergency-arms-saudi-arabia_n_5ce83d44e4b05837a4539069

Pacifist Trump, I wonder if asked whether he'll blatter on about how much the sale will be like he did the last time he was confronted by the media when the Khashoggi murder by the Saudis broke.

PropJoe10 · 24-05-2019 11:23pm

Stallingrad wrote: »

Has he criticised Biden yet for being affectionate with women?

Not sure, but he called Rex Tillerson "dumb as a rock" yesterday and also called him supremely unqualified to be Secretary of State.

Who appointed Tillerson to the role again?

Manic Moran · 25-05-2019 12:11am

Igotadose wrote: »

And, Trump the pacifist (/sarcasm) has become the first president to pardon murderers. Note that others have commuted sentences, if no one died in the crimes for which the perpetrators were convicted. Not Trump. So, even if US Military tribunals actually find soldiers guilty of war crimes, if POTUS45 thinks his campaign can benefit from it, he'll pardon them. He knows more than Military Tribunals, based on his lengthy career in the military I guess.

https://edition.cnn.com/2019/05/23/politics/war-crimes-pardons-trump/index.html

There are a couple of minor details here.

The first is that few presidents have suitable candidates to commute or pardon in the first place, as murder is not normally a federal offence. Saying that "most Presidents haven't pardoned murderers" is a pretty small sample size. State Governors, however, can do so more frequently, as murder is more normally a State offence. Yes, like with Presidents, commutation is more common (Gerry Brown tried to commute the sentences of scores of convicted killers in his last couple of months, but the California Supreme Court declared a number of them as an abuse of his powers https://www.sacbee.com/news/politics-government/capitol-alert/article224206960.html ), but Governors completely pardoning murderers is not unheard of either.

Secondly

Note that others have commuted sentences, if no one died in the crimes for which the perpetrators were convicted.

Obama commuted the sentence of PFC Dwight Loving, convicted by court-martial of a pre-meditated murder spree in the vicinty of Fort Hood, Texas. There is little controversy over the events or conviction, the reason for the commutation is unknown. At least the other person he commuted the sentence for on the same day, Abelardo Ortiz, convicted of only one murder in federal court due to the inter-state drug trafficking nature of the crime, had some legitimate questions as to the conviction due to procedural issues relating to prosecution actions. But either way, people very certainly died.

Which brings us to Trump's pardon of Behanna. A commutation for Behanna would have been a bit pointless, as he was already out of jail for the last five years. His was another case of a conviction which may have been a bit questionable as a result of prosecutorial conduct, and in the end the Army's Clemency Board released him at the first opportunity for parole, five years into the sentence. I am not entirely comfortable with the pardon myself (I'm not comfortable with many pardons, honestly), but I do acknowledge that the case was sufficiently flawed as to attract the attention of a number of prosecutors and attorneys general in Behanna's defence (Not necessarily of him, but of the quality of the conviction). This is overall a somewhat different situation to the one you imply in the post.

mcmoustache · 25-05-2019 12:27am

Manic Moran wrote: »

There are a couple of minor details here.

Given that Eddie Gallagher is up for one of these pardons, would you consider that to be something that doesn't undermine military discipline?

The stuff that was reported by his colleagues was somewhat awful. I can't see any good reason for such a pardon.

Manic Moran · 25-05-2019 1:40am

Neither can I, and as I said, i’m not a huge fan of them to begin with. However, Gallagher hasn’t been convicted of anything yet, let alone pardoned, so it seems a bit presumptuous for me to form any sort of conclusions as to the merits of one.

TomOnBoard · 25-05-2019 2:34am

mcmoustache wrote: »

Manic Moran wrote: »

There are a couple of minor details here.

Given that Eddie Gallagher is up for one of these pardons, would you consider that to be something that doesn't undermine military discipline?

The stuff that was reported by his colleagues was somewhat awful. I can't see any good reason for such a pardon.

That's going to be a loaded case whichever way it goes. Among other charges, Gallagher is facing 'war crimes' charges in respect of alleged killing of a prisoner. His defense disputes that a killing took place and that the prisoner was already dead when Gallagher stabbed him.

The reason why this is particularly important is that the US refuses to grant access to the ICC to investigate alleged war crimes in Iraq and Afghanistan. Because of this, other countries would be quite correct in pressuring the US to prosecute war crimes by its troops most diligently, given that the ICC process with which other countries work can't be applied.

TomOnBoard · 25-05-2019 7:24am

A Federal Judge has blocked the start of new Border Wall construction in Arizona and Texas, scheduled to start as soon as today, that the Administration was trying to fund using the National Emergency pretext.

https://www.independent.ie/world-news/north-america/president-trump/judge-blocks-trump-from-building-sections-of-longsought-border-wall-38147162.html

This is a blow to that pretext, and results from a legal action taken by the ACLU and others, independently of the other actions already taken by the House.

Expect lots of Twitter activity shortly!

Brian? · 25-05-2019 8:28am

TomOnBoard wrote: »

A Federal Judge has blocked the start of new Border Wall construction in Arizona and Texas, scheduled to start as soon as today, that the Administration was trying to fund using the National Emergency pretext.

https://www.independent.ie/world-news/north-america/president-trump/judge-blocks-trump-from-building-sections-of-longsought-border-wall-38147162.html

This is a blow to that pretext, and results from a legal action taken by the ACLU and others, independently of the other actions already taken by the House.

Expect lots of Twitter activity shortly!

My prediction “Angry democrat judge, Hillary lover, doesn’t want to keep this country safe. WE WILL APPEAL AND WIN! Make America great again”

TomOnBoard · 26-05-2019 1:10am

Brian? wrote: »

TomOnBoard wrote: »

A Federal Judge has blocked the start of new Border Wall construction in Arizona and Texas, scheduled to start as soon as today, that the Administration was trying to fund using the National Emergency pretext.

https://www.independent.ie/world-news/north-america/president-trump/judge-blocks-trump-from-building-sections-of-longsought-border-wall-38147162.html

This is a blow to that pretext, and results from a legal action taken by the ACLU and others, independently of the other actions already taken by the House.

Expect lots of Twitter activity shortly!

My prediction “Angry democrat judge, Hillary lover, doesn’t want to keep this country safe. WE WILL APPEAL AND WIN! Make America great again”

I'd say you pretty much nailed it. Here's the actual response from Japan:

“Another activist Obama appointed judge has just ruled against us on a section of the Southern Wall that is already under construction. This is a ruling against Border Security and in favor of crime, drugs and human trafficking. We are asking for an expedited appeal!”

;-)

MadYaker · 26-05-2019 5:58pm

TomOnBoard wrote: »

I'd say you pretty much nailed it. Here's the actual response from Japan:

“Another activist Obama appointed judge has just ruled against us on a section of the Southern Wall that is already under construction. This is a ruling against Border Security and in favor of crime, drugs and human trafficking. We are asking for an expedited appeal!”

;-)

This was 100% expected by all sides im pretty sure. Trump said months ago that to get the wall via a national emergency he'd have to go all the way to the supreme court which will likely rule in his favor so I'm not sure why he's having a go on twitter.

Igotadose · 27-05-2019 7:18pm

3 modelers predicting Trump victory in 2020. One of them has historically been very accurate. Time will tell.

https://thehill.com/homenews/campaign/445668-3-modelers-predict-trump-reelection

Christy42 · 27-05-2019 7:22pm

Igotadose wrote: »

3 modelers predicting Trump victory in 2020. One of them has historically been very accurate. Time will tell.

https://thehill.com/homenews/campaign/445668-3-modelers-predict-trump-reelection

No one in this accurate this far ahead of time. You can have indications. I imagine all the modellers would admit that.

Eric Cartman · 27-05-2019 7:22pm

Igotadose wrote: »

3 modelers predicting Trump victory in 2020. One of them has historically been very accurate. Time will tell.

https://thehill.com/homenews/campaign/445668-3-modelers-predict-trump-reelection

he's the incumbent, the democrats are less than 18 months out with no clear strategy or superstar everyone can get behind and the teflon don actually seems to be holding through the scandals. It would be hard enough to shake him at this point, plus once the economy doesn't tank , many americans will relish the continued tax savings without considering mounting national debt.

TomOnBoard · 27-05-2019 8:16pm

Christy42 wrote: »

No one in this accurate this far ahead of time. You can have indications. I imagine all the modellers would admit that.

It's not about being 100% accurate at this stage. It's about getting an indication of likely win/loss by the incumbent, if only to inform discussion. I find this report interesting but understand that it's very early days yet. Clearly, at least a continuation of good growth and other economic metrics is crucial to the model proving to be a valid predictor.

I look forward to further iterations.

pixelburp · 27-05-2019 9:38pm

That's all fair and fine, but the reality is the Democratic field is horrendously saturated at the moment, so even the loosest of estimations feel utterly redundant in the face of a crowded field. I believe there are currently 24 candidates for the Democrat ticket, and while only about 4 or 5 will likely become "serious" candidates, current polls are only able to focus on the sole national figure among them - Joe Biden. However, Obama was realtively unknown in the 2008 Primaries, yet we know that story; so until the first Primary swings around and the likes of Harris, Warren, Sanders et al get to address the wider public, 2020 predictions are just filler for publications IMO.

TomOnBoard · 27-05-2019 10:41pm

pixelburp wrote: »

2020 predictions are just filler for publications IMO.

And that's fine... The point is, predictions at this stage are simply as reliable as they are, no more and no less!

What the reports of the models suggest is that, if the incumbent can campaign in an environment that shows s/he has 'reigned' over very good economic growth /indicators, that is HUGELY SIGNIFICANT, regardless of the competition.

Of course, when there are currently 24 candidates in the field against you, only one of whom will finally contest you, it is almost impossible to see how you can be ousted unless you're a non- performing amoeba!

On the other hand, if Einstein himself stood up against an amoeba who had presided over perceived excellent economic performance, the amoeba would be very hard to beat!

That's all the models are saying.. Whether you like amoebas (or amoebae) or not!

jobbridge4life · 28-05-2019 12:22am

Eric Cartman wrote: »

he's the incumbent,

His incumbency is an encumbrance. It's weird that's not plainly obvious to you.

Eric Cartman wrote: »

the democrats are less than 18 months out with no clear strategy or superstar everyone can get behind

So pretty much well ahead of the Republicans the last time. As for no clear strategy, it's worth noting the formation of a much more cohesive Democratic caucus, on many issues, than previously; also the many bills passed by large majorities in the House, perhaps contrasting that to the utter failure of 'unified Republican government'.

Eric Cartman wrote: »

and the teflon don actually seems to be holding through the scandals. It would be hard enough to shake him at this point, plus once the economy doesn't tank , many americans will relish the continued tax savings without considering mounting national debt.

You are right there. It is sickening how low politics in America has become that this is the result, and the Republicans in particular seem to be stuck. But as for the idea that Americans are relishing the tax cut? LoL

everlast75 · 28-05-2019 7:13am

The fact that he is still there is nothing to do with his popularity with the general public. It's to do with the Senate make up.

26000 Elephants · 28-05-2019 1:47pm

everlast75 wrote: »

The fact that he is still there is nothing to do with his popularity with the general public. It's to do with the Senate make up.

And a convention that sitting Presidents are not indicted.

He's undeniably on very shaky ground. But we have under estimated the gullibility of the US electorate before, so it will be interesting.

everlast75 · 28-05-2019 2:05pm

It was suggested before that a number of the Democrat Presidential candidates should drop out of the race and run for the senate instead.

Quin_Dub · 28-05-2019 2:21pm

everlast75 wrote: »

It was suggested before that a number of the Democrat Presidential candidates should drop out of the race and run for the senate instead.

To be honest, they'd likely have a much greater impact by winning the senate than a failed Pres candidate campaign.

People like Buttigieg could help swing the senate and then run again in 4/8 years

serfboard · 28-05-2019 2:29pm

prinzeugen wrote: »

Jared and Don Snr were allegedly laundering millions for Russians through the Trump group. Thats why the bank staff flagged it.

everlast75 wrote: »

With news breaking overnight of Deutsche bank failing to investigate SARs (suspicious activity reports involving Russia and Kushner), the plot thickens.

Itssoeasy wrote: »

If the stories are true about the management of Deutse bank being told about issues regarding Trump and Kushner and money moving between them and Russian people then handing over documents to congress may be the Least of the upper managements problems.

We know that Deutsche Bank laundered Russian money. We also know that Deutsche:

was the only bank willing to lend to [Donald Trump] for 20 years because of his pattern of defaults

Eric Trump reportedly said:

Eric Trump wrote:

we don’t rely on American banks. We have all the funding we need out of Russia.

And Donald Trump Jr. said:

Donald Trump Jr wrote:

Russians make up a pretty disproportionate cross-section of a lot of our assets. We see a lot of money pouring in from Russia.

Further:

Newsweek wrote:

In November 2008, Steven Molo, an attorney for Deutsche Bank, wrote a letter to the Supreme Court of New York about one of the company’s most troublesome clients. At issue was $640 million that client had borrowed in 2005 to fund construction of a new hotel in Chicago. The client had personally guaranteed the loan, but a few years later, the Great Recession devastated the economy, and he defaulted on his payment, with $330 million outstanding. Deutsche was seeking an immediate $40 million from the client, plus interest, legal fees and costs.
...
Two years after Molo wrote his letter to the court, Trump settled his feud with the German bank. How he did it was bizarre: He paid back Deutsche with a massive lifeline - from Deutsche. Only this time he eschewed its real estate team - which wanted nothing to do with him - and got a loan from its private wealth division. This group typically deals with high-net-worth individuals, not real estate transactions, but in 2010 it not only lent him the money he owed its real estate team but also reportedly gave Trump another $25 million to $50 million in credit.
....
Around the same time he received his new line of credit, the bank was laundering money, according to the New York State Department of Financial Services (DFS). Russian money. Billions of dollars that flowed from Moscow to London, then from London to New York - part of a scheme for which European and American regulators eventually punished the bank.

Just like Watergate, the key advice is to "follow the money".

pixelburp · 28-05-2019 2:35pm

everlast75 wrote: »

It was suggested before that a number of the Democrat Presidential candidates should drop out of the race and run for the senate instead.

I'm inclined to agree: for some of these candidates this is nothing short of a vanity project for some extra exposure (O'Rourke, Buttigieg etc.), while arguably putting at risk the party's safer seats.

Though someone clarify as I'm too lazy to research: if someone runs for President and fails, can they return to their previous political seat, or do they need to run for re-election?

rossie1977 · 28-05-2019 3:05pm

pixelburp wrote: »

I'm inclined to agree: for some of these candidates this is nothing short of a vanity project for some extra exposure (O'Rourke, Buttigieg etc.), while arguably putting at risk the party's safer seats.

Though someone clarify as I'm too lazy to research: if someone runs for President and fails, can they return to their previous political seat, or do they need to run for re-election?

Return to previous seat. You only need to give up seat if you win.

I would expect the Dem field to narrow considerably after first results in February. Many will probably drop out after Iowa but most will be gone after Super Tuesday in early March leaving probably top 2-3 after that.

Water John · 28-05-2019 5:47pm

Doubt if the field will narrow that quick. I would expect six to be still standing at that point. It's then the voters may coalesce around 2/3.

rossie1977 · 28-05-2019 7:19pm

Water John wrote: »

Doubt if the field will narrow that quick. I would expect six to be still standing at that point. It's then the voters may coalesce around 2/3.

Republican field went from 17 to 6 after second primary in New Hampshire in 2016. I doubt we see someone like Kasich hanging on this campaign.

Water John · 28-05-2019 8:19pm

Depends how fractured the different groupings become. Running out of funds often solves a lot of it.

RocketRaccoon · 28-05-2019 9:00pm

Are there protests planned for Shannon next week?

Donald Trump presidency discussion thread V

Comments