Open Side Menu Go to the Top
Register
The Presidency of Donald J. Trump: No smocking guns. The Presidency of Donald J. Trump: No smocking guns.

02-15-2017 , 01:02 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by bobman0330
It's a bit early for a victory lap. Trump CAN fire whoever he wants until he gets impeached or forced to resign. The Russia stuff gives ample grounds to impeach him, but it doesn't create the votes for it.
He can't really though because there needs to be people to do the actual work.

He would focus primarily on appointed leaders which is meaningless. The Whitehouse still doesn't have a Director of Communications because nobody is dumb enough to take that job.

It's not like Trump is going to outsmart individual intelligence agents to catch and fire them.
02-15-2017 , 01:03 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by dlk9s
Is it dumb of me to both a) want Trump to GTFO out of the oval office and b) be scared that whoever replaces him (Pence) and the Republicans can just go ahead and do all the horrible **** they want because people will breathe a sigh of relief and see the new POTUS as "normal" and "reasonable?"
This is perfectly rational. If you're on the left, you might as well get used to the fact that a lot of **** you don't like is going to happen regardless of whether or not cheeto is President. Elections have consequences. That doesn't mean the incompetent cheeto isn't exponentially worse than the alternative.
02-15-2017 , 01:04 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Trolly McTrollson
IIRC Nixon was at 24% right before he resigned. Doubt Trump will ever break his high score.
Back when people trusted Walter Cronkite, and didn't have an alternate news source to turn to which focused exclusively on squirrels and scandals of the previous administration.
02-15-2017 , 01:09 PM
I didn't realize Chuck Woolery was one of them





His feed is full of this type of spew, inane, citing fake news on the reg

Washed-up game show hosts love the right for some reason
02-15-2017 , 01:10 PM
i just want to watch trump experience a total mental and emotional breakdown, live on tv and internet. is that so much to ask?
02-15-2017 , 01:10 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Namath12
This is perfectly rational. If you're on the left, you might as well get used to the fact that a lot of **** you don't like is going to happen regardless of whether or not cheeto is President. Elections have consequences. That doesn't mean the incompetent cheeto isn't exponentially worse than the alternative.
Yeah, I guess I've accepted that some ****ty laws are going to be passed or repealed or whatever, but at least if Trump and some of his cronies are booted, we won't have an actively belligerent imbecile running the show.

We'd still have guys like Chaffetz in positions of power, though, so I guess win some, lose some.
02-15-2017 , 01:11 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by CalledDownLight
correct. While I can't imagine a single person on the left wants a repeal and no replace of the ACA from an ideological standpoint, that would absolutely be one of the most politically expedient way to hurt Trump's broad appeal. It won't take many doctor or hospital visits worth weeks/months/years of pay to these people for them to realize that it was a bad bad idea.
People are very very dumb and have goldfish memories. In 4 years they may forget the ACA even existed. Or think it died on its own. Etc.
02-15-2017 , 01:11 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by ScreaminAsian
kelleyanne wasn't on any news shows this morning. she's still unfollowed by trump and his inner circle on twitter. and yesterday when she WAS on tv it looked like she was up all night crying.

lol
Do we know for sure she ever was followed?
02-15-2017 , 01:15 PM
This joint Netanyahu newser could be interesting. I can see Netanyahu speaking after Trump and trying to clean up his mistakes.
02-15-2017 , 01:16 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by suitedjustice
As for impeachment....
As constituted, the GOP will never impeach him. Never. It's not going to happen. We would be very lucky to get a formal reprimand of him from them.
Even if there were massive Dem voter interest going into the 2018 mid-terms, the district gerrymandering will still be in place. It's going to be hard enough to get a majority in the House to get the impeachment going.

Then you need 2/3 of the Senate to convict, and typically only 1/3 of the Senate is up for grabs in any given election year.
Sadly the bolded is true. The GOP lapped the Dems a long time ago in ability to GOTV in midterms. We will need to see both the "massive Dem voter interest" you cited AND depressed GOP turnout in 2018 to flip Congress.

That said, it happened in 2006 which isn't ancient history and W, while unpopular and bad, was observably better than cheeto so it's not entirely out of the realm of possibility. I remain cautiously optimistic fwiw
02-15-2017 , 01:16 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by ScreaminAsian
i just want to watch trump experience a total mental and emotional breakdown, live on tv and internet. is that so much to ask?
Probably. I don't think things weigh on him much.
02-15-2017 , 01:16 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by CalledDownLight
Yes, you are naive. With $4B there are definite limits to what you can buy. With $100B those limits don't apply to things anymore, but rather only large corporations.

If you only want a life that $20mm well invested can buy then you don't really need over $5mm as there isn't much that gets bought with those incremental dollars other than slightly bigger/nicer versions of the same thing.

There are different tiers of wealth that are definitely at least orders of magnitude apart. A few billion dollars is much different than $100B in what it allows for in a similar way to how a few thousand dollars in a bank account is a lot different from $100k in how it allows you to live.

Absent the actual purchasing power of those dollars there are a variety of other reasons that people want to accrue wealth and it is important to understand that these are circumstantial. For many people there is no such thing than too much and while that is often tied explicitly to greed that is not always the right attribution.
I was talking to a Russian co-worker the other day. He said the primary way Putin killed the free press was to just have his buddies buy them up one by one. One day the Russian CNN is doing actual reporting, the next day it's owned by Putin's buddy and becomes a mouthpiece. So yeah - $100B goes a long way towards that. Look at Adelson and the Las Vegas Sun.
02-15-2017 , 01:16 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Paul McSwizzle
This. And I know everyone hates her, but I think Lena Dunham is a good example of this. She's a funny, good natured person who is chubby. There are literally tens of thousands of male comedians/actors/writers who fit that description and most ppl either love them or are relatively ambivalent about them.

But Dunham? ****ing HATE. Endless, endless hate. Worth thinking about imo.
I kind of liked the first two seasons of girls. Didn't hate tiny furniture. But the thing she said about odell was maybe the dumbest thing anyone said last year.
02-15-2017 , 01:17 PM
I know it's not really THAT important, but I really wish Trump could read speeches in a way that didn't SOUND like he was reading. We were spoiled by Obama.
02-15-2017 , 01:17 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by suzzer99
Do we know for sure she ever was followed?
i'm reading conflicting reports on this from buzzfeed and dailymail. unfortunately none of the real papers are bothering to cover this twitter drama
02-15-2017 , 01:18 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by dlk9s
I know it's not really THAT important, but I really wish Trump could read speeches in a way that didn't SOUND like he was reading. We were spoiled by Obama.
i am glad to welcome you


to the white house
02-15-2017 , 01:19 PM
Let's hope someone asks about why Jewish people were not mentioned in Holocaust Remembrance Day statement.
02-15-2017 , 01:19 PM
questions incoming from infowars, brietbart and stormfront
02-15-2017 , 01:20 PM
trump is literally moving his finger on the page so he doesn't lose his place
02-15-2017 , 01:21 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by dlk9s
Is it dumb of me to both a) want Trump to GTFO out of the oval office and b) be scared that whoever replaces him (Pence) and the Republicans can just go ahead and do all the horrible **** they want because people will breathe a sigh of relief and see the new POTUS as "normal" and "reasonable?"
I kind of like the idea of a completely neutered Trump with Bannon and Miller out of the picture - more than any other options.
02-15-2017 , 01:21 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by markksman
He can't really though because there needs to be people to do the actual work.

He would focus primarily on appointed leaders which is meaningless. The Whitehouse still doesn't have a Director of Communications because nobody is dumb enough to take that job.

It's not like Trump is going to outsmart individual intelligence agents to catch and fire them.
Trump still hasn't resigned from his companies, lol at him resigning from the presidency.
02-15-2017 , 01:22 PM
https://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs...=.9a215a8174e7

Spoiler:
Quote:
To call this past weekend in the Trump administration a garbage fire would be a disservice to garbage fires, which at least shed light and get rid of garbage.
02-15-2017 , 01:22 PM
Benji knows how to kiss some ass.
02-15-2017 , 01:23 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Namath12
This is perfectly rational. If you're on the left, you might as well get used to the fact that a lot of **** you don't like is going to happen regardless of whether or not cheeto is President. Elections have consequences. That doesn't mean the incompetent cheeto isn't exponentially worse than the alternative.
Why is it that I can accept that "elections have consequences" but it's some kind of massive aggrieved rallying cry for the right when Obama said it? Do they think elections shouldn't have consequences?
02-15-2017 , 01:23 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by ElMastermind
Any Law scholars in this thread?

Is there a nonzero possibility for a national referendum to nullify the results of the 2016 Presidential election? Obviously not given what we know at this point, but lets say for example the whole of the administration was in cahoots with the Russian government/intelligence agencies, is on the take from the Rosneft sale, and throughout the campaign sought to undermine opponents via illegal means?

I know I'm grasping at straws, but drawing dead?
No, we're drawing dead. All that can happen is that the whole lot of them get removed from office and presidential line of succession happens. If Trump & Pence go then it's speaker of the house (Ryan) and after him president pro tempore of the senate.

      
m