Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
4 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,817 Year: 3,074/9,624 Month: 919/1,588 Week: 102/223 Day: 13/17 Hour: 0/0


EvC Forum Side Orders Coffee House The Trump Presidency

Summations Only

Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   The Trump Presidency
JonF
Member (Idle past 168 days)
Posts: 6174
Joined: 06-23-2003


Message 2941 of 4573 (855812)
06-23-2019 10:49 AM
Reply to: Message 2937 by marc9000
06-22-2019 10:03 PM


Re: Trump's Embrace of Foreign Interference Draws FEC Response
Your "understanding" of the law is risible.
Trump changed his answer as we've demonstrated.
All politicians on both sides lie. Trump and the extreme right wing have taken brazen lying to previously unheard of and dizzying heights.
As I explained above, her thoughts on running while Secretary of State are irrelevant because she was not a candidate at that time. If she did indeed receive information valuable to a campaign while SoS and used that information when she was a candidate, that might be illegal. Feel free to present evidence of such. Oh, you don't have any? Pity.
Russia wants the US run by an ignorant illiterate egomaniac who's easily manipulated, and that's what they got.
Edited by JonF, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 2937 by marc9000, posted 06-22-2019 10:03 PM marc9000 has not replied

  
JonF
Member (Idle past 168 days)
Posts: 6174
Joined: 06-23-2003


Message 2942 of 4573 (855813)
06-23-2019 10:55 AM


Guns trump human rights
Trump dismisses UN request for FBI to investigate Jamal Khashoggi's murder
quote:
Donald Trump has dismissed a United Nations request for the FBI to investigate the murder of the dissident journalist Jamal Khashoggi, suggesting it would jeopardise American weapons sales to Saudi Arabia.
...
The president then cited a drastically overinflated figure for Saudi spending on US weapons that fact-checkers have previously noted does not match the official record.
“I only say they spend $400bn to $450bn over a period of time, all money, all jobs, buying equipment,” Trump said.
In fact Saudi Arabia last year signed “letters of offer and acceptance” for $14.5bn in military purchases from the US.
Well, that makes it official.
Anyone remember the $100 billion in sales to Saudi Arabia Trump claimed to have secured?
Edited by JonF, : No reason given.
Edited by JonF, : No reason given.

Replies to this message:
 Message 2943 by Chiroptera, posted 06-23-2019 1:28 PM JonF has replied

  
Chiroptera
Inactive Member


(1)
Message 2943 of 4573 (855817)
06-23-2019 1:28 PM
Reply to: Message 2942 by JonF
06-23-2019 10:55 AM


Re: Guns trump human rights
And the reason - "We won't investigate them because they are good customers." - kind of makes it worse.
And "And they buy stuff from us that they use to kill other people" - that's even worse still.
Anyway, isn't the Republican controlled Senate now on record that Saudis buying weaponry is bad?

It says something about the qualities of our current president that the best argument anyone has made in his defense is that he didn’t know what he was talking about. -- Paul Krugman

This message is a reply to:
 Message 2942 by JonF, posted 06-23-2019 10:55 AM JonF has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 2944 by JonF, posted 06-23-2019 2:03 PM Chiroptera has not replied
 Message 2945 by jar, posted 06-23-2019 3:20 PM Chiroptera has not replied

  
JonF
Member (Idle past 168 days)
Posts: 6174
Joined: 06-23-2003


Message 2944 of 4573 (855819)
06-23-2019 2:03 PM
Reply to: Message 2943 by Chiroptera
06-23-2019 1:28 PM


Re: Guns trump human rights
Yah, but it's meaningless.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 2943 by Chiroptera, posted 06-23-2019 1:28 PM Chiroptera has not replied

  
jar
Member (Idle past 394 days)
Posts: 34026
From: Texas!!
Joined: 04-20-2004


Message 2945 of 4573 (855826)
06-23-2019 3:20 PM
Reply to: Message 2943 by Chiroptera
06-23-2019 1:28 PM


Re: Guns trump human rights
Chiroptera writes:
Anyway, isn't the Republican controlled Senate now on record that Saudis buying weaponry is bad?
That's just more Fake News. Remember the Record is controlled by the Main Stream Party.

My Sister's Website: Rose Hill Studios My Website: My Website

This message is a reply to:
 Message 2943 by Chiroptera, posted 06-23-2019 1:28 PM Chiroptera has not replied

  
JonF
Member (Idle past 168 days)
Posts: 6174
Joined: 06-23-2003


Message 2946 of 4573 (855835)
06-23-2019 8:05 PM


Corruption as a way of life
It's everywhere this administration has its fingers, and those fingers are everywhere. Thank God for the courts.
Court Nixes Federal Approval For Cadiz Pipeline To Suck Water Out Of The Mojave To Sell
quote:
A federal court has ruled that an environmental review exemption by the Trump administration for a pipeline to extract water from the Mojave Desert is illegal.
The 43-mile pipeline planned by Cadiz Inc. would cut through Mojave Trails National Monument and other public lands in Southern California to suck groundwater out of the desert aquifer and sell to cities. It would pump an estimated 16 billion gallons a year from the fragile desert ecosystem.
Judge George Wu of the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California ruled Thursday that the federal Bureau of Land Management failed to provide sufficient evidence for its 2017 decision to reverse its own 2015 decision requiring an environmental review for the pipeline. A full review could take at least a year and could open up Cadiz to even more litigation.
Cadiz, citing an obscure 1873 law, had argued it had a right to build the pipeline within a railroad right-of-way without environmental review as long as the water had a rail-related use. Cadiz claimed that some water would be used by another party to operate a steam-powered train.
Ready? Wait for it...
quote:
The Obama administration rejected the argument and ordered a full environmental review. That decision was reversed by the Trump administration following the appointment of David Bernhardt, a former lobbyist for Cadiz, as deputy interior secretary. He’s now secretary of the interior.
To get a high position in an agency you have to be implacably opposed to the mission of that agency.

  
JonF
Member (Idle past 168 days)
Posts: 6174
Joined: 06-23-2003


Message 2947 of 4573 (855836)
06-23-2019 8:13 PM


"Vetting" they call it.
Apropos of my last sentence above:
Exclusive: Leaked Trump vetting docs
quote:
Nearly 100 internal Trump transition vetting documents leaked to "Axios on HBO" identify a host of "red flags" about officials who went on to get some of the most powerful jobs in the U.S. government.
Why it matters: The massive trove, and the story behind it, sheds light on the slap-dash way President Trump filled his cabinet and administration, and foreshadowed future scandals that beset his government.

  
Percy
Member
Posts: 22392
From: New Hampshire
Joined: 12-23-2000
Member Rating: 5.3


(2)
Message 2948 of 4573 (855852)
06-24-2019 8:18 AM
Reply to: Message 2936 by marc9000
06-22-2019 9:11 PM


Re: Trump's Embrace of Foreign Interference Draws FEC Response
marc9000 writes:
You really can't learn that it is illegal for a campaign to accept a donation form a foreign entity. In those instances she was not a campaign.
I don't see any distinguishable difference in what Hillary's intentions could have been as Secretary of State as she was weighing her options in running for the presidency after Obama was through, versus Trump's intentions for possible re-election during the second year of his presidency.
You can't tell the difference between donations to a campaign and donations to a charity? Really? Does it truly have to be explained that donations to legitimate charities do not flow to the people running them? The Clinton Foundation is a legitimate charity still in operation. The Trump Foundation was forced to shut its doors when it was discovered that the Trumps were using it as a personal piggy bank.
quote:
The Senate panel called the overall assessment a “sound intelligence product,” saying evidence presented by the FBI, CIA and National Security Agency supported their collective conclusion that the Russian government had “developed a clear preference for Trump” over his opponent in the race, Hillary Clinton. Where the agencies disagreed, the Senate panel found those differences were “reasonable.”
So what are some details of this "sound intelligence product"? That Russia believes in an unarmed citizenry, and Hillary and the Democrats also believe in and unarmed citizenry?
This has absolutely nothing to do with Russian interference in the 2016 presidential election, but addressing it anyway:
  • Russia only allows hunting and sports firearms, and does not allow automatic weapons. During the 2010's Russia experienced 107 deaths in mass shootings. During the same period in the US there were 260 deaths in mass shootings.
  • Neither Hillary Clinton nor the Democrats advocate an unarmed citizenry. They advocate improved gun control laws, including improved backgrounds checks, registration, licensing and training.
That Russia believes in heavy government involvement in business, that Hillary and the Democrats also believe in heavy government involvement in business?
You have it backwards. It is the Republicans who get in bed with big business and vote them massive benefits from the public troughs. Democrats believe businesses should not be the beneficiaries of government largesse and that regulation should serve to rein in unrestrained capitalism with it's exploitation of workers and the environment.
There is so much similarity in Russian communism and U.S. Democrat socialism,...
Russians and Republicans believe government should be run for the benefit of business and government. Democrats believe government is for making people's lives better, which means a healthy business environment for full employment, a social safety net so that no one suffers for lack of food or shelter, and regulation to rein in capitalist tendencies toward monopolies, abuse of the environment, exploitation of the workforce, etc.
...when compared with Russian communism versus Trump's beliefs in smaller government involvement with business,...
Trump, the head of government, still owns his business, the Trump Organization, and is deeply involved. His nepotistic son, a member of the administration, supposedly works with Eric to run the business. Many of the Trump "friends" he calls on his cell at night are wealthy businessmen. David Pecker, a wealthy businessman who runs the National Enquirer among other publications, was involved in a "catch and kill" scheme with Trump to buy unfavorable stories about Trump and never publish them. So much for Trump believing in reduced involvement with business.
Trump's belief in and armed citizenry etc.
This is about the only thing you've said so far that is true, though it still has nothing to do anything JonF said. You're just running down your list of complaints. "Oh, somebody said something about something, time for me to enumerate a bunch of things that aren't true again."
Is that why he favors smaller government, an armed citizenry, fewer regulations, lower taxes?
Trump favors a smaller government that is impotent at holding back corporate malfeasance.
Trump favors an armed citizenry because he mistakenly believes that the answer to gun deaths is more guns.
Trump favors fewer regulations so that businesses can have fewer expenses while they pollute our water and air, and they can run up huge debts that eventually become too great and force government bailouts.
Trump favors lower taxes on businesses and the rich paid for by the government in the form of much higher deficits, nearly a trillion dollars in additional debt since the Trump tax cuts went into effect. This is another reason why Trump is not a conservative, since conservatives believe in low deficits or even balanced budgets. They also believe in free trade, not rampant and impulsively imposed tariffs.
For which they are ridiculously unsuited. I see you have no comment on the polls I posted, including one from Fox.
Those polls are laughable, I don't care where they come from. I'd bet they don't take the Electoral College into consideration at all.
First Trump claims his internal polls showing him way behind in many battleground states don't exist, then he fires four pollsters for leaking information about these non-existent polls.
--Percy

This message is a reply to:
 Message 2936 by marc9000, posted 06-22-2019 9:11 PM marc9000 has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 2950 by JonF, posted 06-24-2019 10:11 AM Percy has replied
 Message 2954 by Theodoric, posted 06-24-2019 10:32 AM Percy has seen this message but not replied
 Message 2974 by marc9000, posted 06-30-2019 5:46 PM Percy has seen this message but not replied

  
Percy
Member
Posts: 22392
From: New Hampshire
Joined: 12-23-2000
Member Rating: 5.3


(1)
Message 2949 of 4573 (855856)
06-24-2019 9:46 AM
Reply to: Message 2937 by marc9000
06-22-2019 10:03 PM


Re: Trump's Embrace of Foreign Interference Draws FEC Response
marc9000 writes:
There's no difference. Once you say "I'm listening" you've stated that you're accepting the information provided. Once you've heard the information you can't unhear it. The acceptance of information from foreign agents creates vulnerabilities in the form of blackmail and extortion, and the agents will have hidden agendas.
If that were true, then there would have to be laws prohibiting a lot of former cabinet members, including Secretaries of State, from ever running for the presidency. Maybe if Mike Pompeo decides to run in 2024, the Democrats will work to get that done.
You are terribly confused. Any foreign assistance Mike Pompeo accepts for a future presidential run would be illegal, whether they occurred while he's Secretary of State or serving in any other role, including private citizen. He of course will exchange much information with foreigners in his role as Secretary of State, and as long as it isn't about helping him run for president it's fine.
If the press criticism was wrong then why was Trump also criticized by Republicans, some of them prominent like Senators Lindsey Graham (R-SC) and John Kennedy (R-LA), and why did Trump later change his answer to say that of course he'd notify the FBI?
He didn't "change" his answer, he only expounded on it. There have always been ~business as usual~ Republicans who enjoy playing "moderate" when Trump says some things.
Trump allies calling Trump out when he declares he will break the law isn't "playing moderate." It's daring to tell the truth when Trump is so far out of line that to do anything else would be politically worse than crossing Trump.
Trump isn't focused on only doing things that please Republicans.
Trump isn't focused on anything but pleasing himself. He's neither a Republican nor a conservative.
That's what a lot of voters like about him, myself included.
You like that Trump is just out for himself? Why? One of the great ironies of the Trump phenomena is that his policies treat his supporters worse than anyone else. This is finally beginning to dawn on some people, farmers suffering due to Trump tariffs, for example.
Every single president in recent history is always accused of lying.
Trump isn't just accused of lying, he's been shown to be lying or misleading 10,800 times so far according to the Washington Post.
The big difference today is all the lies that the supposed free press, the ones who are supposed to give unbiased information, are filling the airwaves with. People are getting wise to them - mainly because of the constant stream of lies for the past 2+ years that Trump colluded with Russia to win the election, something that the Mueller report disproved.
If you find a lie or misrepresentation in the Washington Post database that you think they got wrong, you let us know. My most memorable Trump lie is when he said he had no knowledge of the Cohen payoffs to purchase silence about his affairs, then was caught on tape talking about them, and then watched as his court jester Rudy Giuliani said on TV that of course Trump knew about the payoffs.
The big problem that Trump is creating is that little of what he says can be trusted. Whether domestically or internationally, if it's information then it is often viewed suspiciously, and if it's declarations of what he'll do, such as deporting millions of immigrants or attacking Iran, then people just wait until he changes his mind, because they know it's coming.
You continue to have trouble distinguishing between a government official and a candidate for office. The Secretary of State is not an elected position, and Hillary Clinton was not running for office while she was Secretary of State, resigning in 2013 well before the 2016 election.
Do you think there was a chance that she had a run for president in mind for her future?
Of course Hillary Clinton had presidential aspirations. That was no secret.
Trump is in the second year of his presidency. Is the second year of a presidency now defined as a "campaign"?
Trump filed his papers for the 2020 election the day after his inauguration. He's been holding campaign rallies all across the country ever since he took office. He never stopped running.
That Russia greatly preferred Trump over Clinton has been proven and verified nine ways from Sunday.
Lay it on me, you could start by explaining how Russian society benefits from a Trump presidency more than it would a socialist Democrat presidency. Does Russia want a second amendment now? More free markets?
That Russia interfered in the 2016 presidential campaign was an unambiguous conclusion of The Mueller Report:
quote:
The Russian government interfered in the 2016 presidential election in sweeping and systematic fashion.
...
...the investigation established that the Russian government perceived it would benefit from a Trump presidency and worked to secure that outcome, and that the Campaign expected it would benefit electorally from information stolen and released through Russian efforts,...
The CIA and FBI reached similar conclusions and have said so publicly. Where have you been?
Don't get me wrong, I know this has all been carefully dreamed up.
And you know this how? You seem to "know" a great many things that are not true.
But I suspect it's only really intended to amuse Trump haters, I don't know that it would hold up to some common sense questioning.
I think we'll call you a truth hater.
I grew up in the New York metropolitan area where Trump was a known scumbag real estate developer from the early 1970's on. If you name some things he's done that you think are good I'll let you know what I think.
How about a 3.2 GDP, lowest unemployment in 50 years, 500K new manufacturing jobs?
The economy began growing way back in 2010. Obama managed to maintain a growing economy for 6 years. Trump took that growing economy and gave it a massive and very stimulative tax cut, so of course the economy began growing slightly faster, plus there are all the regulations about the environment that businesses don't have to follow anymore, leaving a legacy of dirtier air and water for our children, and all the bank reserve requirements that are lower now, leaving us vulnerable to another financial crash like the one in 2008.
Now I know the early talking point is that all this is due to the actions of Barrack what-magic-wand-do-you-have Obama, but after 2 + years, it's getting a little bit old.
Since when does the truth ever get old? Again, the economy began growing under Obama back in 2010. Here's a graph. You can see the downturn from the financial crash in 2009, and after that GDP was positive year after year, including the Trump years:
What the future holds may be analogous to when Trump took his father's money and bankrupted it several times. Right now he's taken a growing US economy and if he keeps on as he is he could well bankrupt it (i.e., recession). Trump has already given us the largest budget deficits in history.
Getting taxes and regulations off the back of risk takers and job creators is what makes good economic things happen, everyone knows that, though some still stubbornly refuse to admit it.
I think everyone agrees the government should maintain a healthy business environment. But we used to have stronger regulations for protecting our environment, preventing monopolies, encouraging fair business practices, and maintaining financial stability. Trump's cutting back of those regulations while at the same time politicizing the Fed is not a good thing.
A "scumbag"? You have an unchangeable personal hatred?
I wasn't expressing any personal feelings toward Trump. I was merely describing him. He's a scumbag real estate developer from New York City who lied and cheated and exploited and discriminated, sort of the definition of a scumbag.
He's 73 now, you can't accept that maybe he's learned from a few actions of his past, and just might have a desire to do what's best for the country where his children and grandchildren live?
Trump's actions indicate he does not care about the country. His family effectively lives in a different country, insulated and isolated from the problems everyone else has to deal with, from salaries too low to afford the rents near where they work, to decaying infrastructure, to poor water quality, to poor air quality, to rising sea levels, to changing and more unpredictable and more violent climatic events.
He's recently done charitable things and admirable private things that go completely unreported by the press.
And yet you somehow know about these completely unreported "admirable private things." What are they, pray tell, and how did you find out about them?
Carlson is a very small part of Fox News, and I agree, his talk isn't white supremacy...
Uh, we don't agree. Tucker Carlson talks white supremacy all the time.
--Percy
Edited by Percy, : Grammar cleanup.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 2937 by marc9000, posted 06-22-2019 10:03 PM marc9000 has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 2951 by JonF, posted 06-24-2019 10:14 AM Percy has seen this message but not replied
 Message 2956 by marc9000, posted 06-24-2019 8:10 PM Percy has replied
 Message 2975 by marc9000, posted 06-30-2019 6:27 PM Percy has replied

  
JonF
Member (Idle past 168 days)
Posts: 6174
Joined: 06-23-2003


Message 2950 of 4573 (855859)
06-24-2019 10:11 AM
Reply to: Message 2948 by Percy
06-24-2019 8:18 AM


Re: Trump's Embrace of Foreign Interference Draws FEC Response
I don't see any distinguishable difference in what Hillary's intentions could have been as Secretary of State as she was weighing her options in running for the presidency after Obama was through, versus Trump's intentions for possible re-election during the second year of his presidency.
You can't tell the difference between donations to a campaign and donations to a charity? Really? Does it truly have to be explained that donations to legitimate charities do not flow to the people running them? The Clinton Foundation is a legitimate charity still in operation. The Trump Foundation was forced to shut its doors when it was discovered that the Trumps were using it as a personal piggy bank.
I think Marc's jumping around so it's difficult to follow. That claim refers not to donations to the Foundation, rather it's unspecified (of course) valuable campaign information she might have received from foreigners, since thinking about running for office is the same as running an active campaign as a registered candidate.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 2948 by Percy, posted 06-24-2019 8:18 AM Percy has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 2952 by Percy, posted 06-24-2019 10:19 AM JonF has not replied

  
JonF
Member (Idle past 168 days)
Posts: 6174
Joined: 06-23-2003


Message 2951 of 4573 (855861)
06-24-2019 10:14 AM
Reply to: Message 2949 by Percy
06-24-2019 9:46 AM


Re: Trump's Embrace of Foreign Interference Draws FEC Response
Any foreign assistance Mike Pompeo accepts for a future presidential run would be illegal, whether they occurred while he's Secretary of State or serving in any other role, including private citizen.
Might be true, but not yet established in court.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 2949 by Percy, posted 06-24-2019 9:46 AM Percy has seen this message but not replied

  
Percy
Member
Posts: 22392
From: New Hampshire
Joined: 12-23-2000
Member Rating: 5.3


Message 2952 of 4573 (855863)
06-24-2019 10:19 AM
Reply to: Message 2950 by JonF
06-24-2019 10:11 AM


Re: Trump's Embrace of Foreign Interference Draws FEC Response
Okay. And I agree with your earlier statement that receiving assistance and/or conspiring about campaigns with foreigners even while not engaged in a campaign may possibly be illegal. Certainly it's unethical. I raised the same point when Marc mentioned Pompeo.
I agree about Marc jumping around. He has pet talking points that he raises whenever the mood strikes him, without regard to what anyone actually said.
--Percy

This message is a reply to:
 Message 2950 by JonF, posted 06-24-2019 10:11 AM JonF has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 2976 by marc9000, posted 06-30-2019 6:31 PM Percy has replied

  
JonF
Member (Idle past 168 days)
Posts: 6174
Joined: 06-23-2003


(1)
Message 2953 of 4573 (855864)
06-24-2019 10:30 AM
Reply to: Message 2937 by marc9000
06-22-2019 10:03 PM


Re: Trump's Embrace of Foreign Interference Draws FEC Response
He's recently done charitable things and admirable private things that go completely unreported by the press.
Name six.
Carlson is a very small part of Fox News, and I agree, his talk isn't white supremacy ...
White supremacists hail him as a white supremacist. They should know. Former Ku Klux Klan leader David Duke declared last year that Carlson is one of “the voices we have in the media on our side.”
Ever hear of the Daily Stormer? The most well known neo-Nazi white supremacist site on the Internet?
Neo-Nazi Tucker Carlson Sends Zionist Neocon Bastard Ralph Peters to a Lampshade Manufacturing Facility
Tucker Carlson RUTHLESSLY RAMS Atheist Whore Into an INDUSTRIAL WOODCHIPER Over Disagreement on Benches
RACE WAR: Tucker BTFOs Little Benji With FACTS, LAWGIC and NATIONALISM!
Ugh. I need a shower.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 2937 by marc9000, posted 06-22-2019 10:03 PM marc9000 has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 2977 by marc9000, posted 06-30-2019 6:40 PM JonF has replied

  
Theodoric
Member
Posts: 9076
From: Northwest, WI, USA
Joined: 08-15-2005
Member Rating: 3.7


(2)
Message 2954 of 4573 (855865)
06-24-2019 10:32 AM
Reply to: Message 2948 by Percy
06-24-2019 8:18 AM


Re: Trump's Embrace of Foreign Interference Draws FEC Response
So does marc9000 think Russia is a communist state? He can't be that clueless can he? I mean I thought everyone knew of the fall of the USSR, which wasn't actually communist in the first place.

Facts don't lie or have an agenda. Facts are just facts
"God did it" is not an argument. It is an excuse for intellectual laziness.
If your viewpoint has merits and facts to back it up why would you have to lie?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 2948 by Percy, posted 06-24-2019 8:18 AM Percy has seen this message but not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 2955 by Chiroptera, posted 06-24-2019 10:39 AM Theodoric has not replied

  
Chiroptera
Inactive Member


(4)
Message 2955 of 4573 (855869)
06-24-2019 10:39 AM
Reply to: Message 2954 by Theodoric
06-24-2019 10:32 AM


Re: Trump's Embrace of Foreign Interference Draws FEC Response
Worship words.
Communist = "Stuff I don't like."

It says something about the qualities of our current president that the best argument anyone has made in his defense is that he didn’t know what he was talking about. -- Paul Krugman

This message is a reply to:
 Message 2954 by Theodoric, posted 06-24-2019 10:32 AM Theodoric has not replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024