Trump runs for POTUS / Trumped Up! Part V

[Foolmewunz]

Criminals often put their differences aside in order to profit in joint "ventures."

I think it's more a part of his "Take the oil..." to the victor goes the spoils mentality. He thinks he's Genghis Khan. He's very big on regaling us with who he's beaten and how badly. I'm sure he regales them with it, too. Think of the huge overwhelming egos of Ben Carson and Chris Christie, having to sit around and take that kind of crap from him - and take it they do. Remember Christie standing well behind him on the podium while Donald spoke disparagingly? That's the price you pay when you lose. He gets your tent, your women, your belongings and your devotion. And if you deliver on all those, he'll let you sit near him at a royal banquet and maybe a province of your own to run. All you have to do is suborn your existence, your pride, your very soul.

He doesn't ask much considering what you get back in turn.... fake cufflinks, sloppy seconds on his previous trophy wives, free rounds of golf,....

 

[Skeptic Ginger]

I missed that Trump had clearly accused Christie of being complicit in Bridgegate.

How on earth is it not an issue that he picks that guy to head his transition team?

Transition team is invisible in the background. Notice Christie didn't make VP on the Donald's team.

 

[The Great Zaganza]

if you want a preview of his bipartisan goals, read what he said about Kim Jong Un:

"You have to give him credit," he said. "How many young guys — he was like 26 or 25 when his father died — take over these tough generals, and all of a sudden — you know, it's pretty amazing when you think of it. How does he do that? Even though it is a culture and it's a cultural thing, he goes in, he takes over, and he's the boss. It's incredible."

So if only US culture would be more open to executing political rivals...

 

[Puppycow]

[IMGw=640]http://i1070.photobucket.com/albums/u492/rfstack/000000_49.jpg[/IMGw]

17 months after the war started is the same as before?!

Plenty enough time for anyone who thought it would be easy to start having second thoughts.

 

[BobTheCoward]

I get that, but your analogy is stupid and that was my point.

I'm not.making an analogy. I am discussing specifically if a boss cannot issue the same statement as a subordinate.

 

[newyorkguy]

But the President has another role to play. He needs to reassure the American people in times of crisis. He needs to tell them, "I know you're outraged by what has happened. But we're on it. We got the guy. Don't think people can do this kind of thing with impunity. There are many many people out there who work very very hard to keep you safe. We can't guarantee absolute safety -- that would be unrealistic -- but we can and will keep you and your families safe."

And a big part of that message is, calm down, let the professional security people handle this. The president is our leader and there are times he needs to get out front and lead.

 

[marplots]

It's weird that in a month and a half we will know who the next president will be. The thousands of posts (and probably a million words total) will just be so much fish wrap. The new status will completely replace all my wonderings and guessings and whomever loses will drift away like Romney or Al Gore. All the importance in the question will evaporate.

Very strange.

 

[logger]

The second amendment was about the need for a militia. Heller broke new ground.

Ah I see, the government giving itself a right to form an army, got it.

 

[BobTheCoward]

But the President has another role to play. He needs to reassure the American people in times of crisis. He needs to tell them, "I know you're outraged by what has happened. But we're on it. We got the guy. Don't think people can do this kind of thing with impunity. There are many many people out there who work very very hard to keep you safe. We can't guarantee absolute safety -- that would be unrealistic -- but we can and will keep you and your families safe."

And a big part of that message is, calm down, let the professional security people handle this. The president is our leader and there are times he needs to get out front and lead.

I am an adult. I don't need a national mommy or daddy.

Also, the president doesn't lead me. He or she is there because someone has to provide direction to executive departments. But I'm not part of any group that takes directions from the president and I certainly don't listen to him or her.

 

[Tero]

Trump just wants to be president! Just once! Whatever it takes! He does not lie! (he just forgets what he promised, and it’s all policy detail)
Otherwise he is taking his toys and moving to a sandbox he has built for just himself.

1. Build a wall, deport all undocumented immigrants.
Trump's campaign began with a promise to build a wall across the United States' southern border and deport the country's 11 million undocumented immigrant.
2. Deport all undocumented immigrants but bring the 'good' ones back legally.
5. Trump might be flexible on actually deporting 11 million undocumented immigrants.

6. Deport undocumented immigrants, but don't call it "mass deportations."

7. "I'm gonna do the same" as past presidents.


9. "There's no amnesty" but "we work with them."

 

[phiwum]

Why should the president be more circumspect than subordinates? All executive authority is vested in them. The police are speaking for the office (if FBI).

Because the president is not intimately involved in the investigation. He doesn't know much.

 

[Ladewig]

Trump just wants to be president! Just once! Whatever it takes! He does not lie! (he just forgets what he promised, and it’s all policy detail)

As has already been discussed in this thread many times. Trump is less a liar and more a bull****er. He just says whatever is convenient for his overarching story (which is that he is a genius in all affairs and fields). If he is talking to people who like the wall, then he claims that the wall is number one priority. If he is talking to people who like amnesty, then amnesty is his number one priority. The same with jobs and terrorism and every issue. Trump has a dozen number one priorities.

But that, in and of itself is not necessarily an insurmountable problem. Previous candidates have made conflicting claims. The problem is that when someone points out that what he said yesterday is the opposite of what he is saying today, he goes nuts. He starts ranting about how unfair the press is and how he wants to change libel laws and how a true genius, like himself, shouldn't be questioned. The temperment is the insurmountable problem. That and the short attention span. Those two things. And the unwillingness to learn the facts surrounding an issue. So, those three things are the problem. And his complete lack of empathy. Amongst the problems associated with Trump are the temperment, the attention span, the willful ignorance, and the lack of empathy.

And the childish view that everyone who doesn't like him should be punished.

 

[sunmaster14]

Because the president is not intimately involved in the investigation. He doesn't know much.

That hasn't stopped Obama from weighing in on a number of incidents, ranging from the arrest of Professor Henry Louis Gates to the Zimmerman case to the Michael Brown case to the Hillary Clinton private email server case. I wonder how many people claiming that Trump's statement was not Presidential have complained about Obama's intervention in those other cases?

 

[Tero]

Well, that's it then! Untruths about the future is ******** and about the past is lies!

 

[Belz...]

As has already been discussed in this thread many times. Trump is less a liar and more a bull****er. He just says whatever is convenient for his overarching story

Isn't that covered by "liar"?

 

[TubbaBlubba]

Isn't that covered by "liar"?

There is a slight difference in connotation; "Trump is a liar" implies that he cares about the truth value of his statements (that is, he makes deliberately false propositions). A BS:er cares about how what he says sounds; the truth value is secondary or irrelevant.

When Trump says "We will build a wall!" the important thing is not whether a wall will in fact be constructed, but rather the reaction he gets from the crowd.

 

[Stacko]

Trump used $258,000 from his charity to settle legal problems

In one case, from 2007, Trump’s Mar-a-Lago Club faced $120,000 in unpaid fines from the town of Palm Beach, Fla., resulting from a dispute over the size of a flagpole.

In a settlement, Palm Beach agreed to waive those fines — if Trump’s club made a $100,000 donation to a specific charity for veterans. Instead, Trump sent a check from the Donald J. Trump Foundation, a charity funded almost entirely by other people’s money, according to tax records.

In another case, court papers say one of Trump’s golf courses in New York agreed to settle a lawsuit by making a donation to the plaintiff’s chosen charity. A $158,000 donation was made by the Trump Foundation, according to tax records.

The other expenditures involved smaller amounts. In 2013, Trump used $5,000 from the foundation to buy advertisements touting his chain of hotels in programs for three events organized by a D.C. preservation group. And in 2014, Trump spent $10,000 of the foundation’s money for a portrait of himself bought at a charity fundraiser.

Or, rather, another portrait of himself.

...

“I represent 700 nonprofits a year, and I’ve never encountered anything so brazen,” said Jeffrey Tenenbaum, who advises charities at the Venable law firm in Washington. After The Post described the details of these Trump Foundation gifts, Tenenbaum described them as “really shocking.”

“If he’s using other people’s money — run through his foundation — to satisfy his personal obligations, then that’s about as blatant an example of self-dealing [as] I’ve seen in a while,” Tenenbaum said.

 

[phiwum]

That hasn't stopped Obama from weighing in on a number of incidents, ranging from the arrest of Professor Henry Louis Gates to the Zimmerman case to the Michael Brown case to the Hillary Clinton private email server case. I wonder how many people claiming that Trump's statement was not Presidential have complained about Obama's intervention in those other cases?

Let's have a look at what he's said. You tell me if I miss a quote that you think is relevant.

On Gates:

Well, I should say at the outset that Skip Gates is a friend, so I may be a little biased here. I don’t know all the facts. What’s been reported, though, is that the guy forgot his keys. He jimmied his way to get into the house. There was a report called into the police station that there might be a burglary taking place. so far so good. Right? I mean, if I was trying to jigger in — well, I guess this is my house now so it probably wouldn’t happen. Let’s say my old house in Chicago. here I’d get shot. But so far so good. They’re reporting, the police are doing what they should. There’s a call. They go investigate what happens. My understanding is at that point Professor Gates is already in his house. The police officer comes in. I’m sure there’s some exchange of words but my understanding is that Professor Gates then shows his I.D. to show that this is his house. And at that point he gets arrested for disorderly conduct, charges which are later dropped. Now, I don’t know, not having been there and not seeing all the facts what role race played in that, but I think it’s fair to say, number one, any of us would be pretty angry. Number two, that the Cambridge police acted stupidly in arresting somebody when there was already proof that they were in their own home and, number three, what I think we know separate and apart from this incident is that there is a long history in this country of African-Americans and Latinos being stopped by law enforcement disproportionately. And that’s just a fact.​

On Zimmerman:

On Michael Brown:

The second thing I want to say is to reiterate what I said on Sunday, which is there are going to be a lot of arguments about the legal -- the legal issues in the case. I'll let all the legal analysts and talking heads address those issues.
The judge conducted the trial in a professional manner. The prosecution and the defense made their arguments. The juries (sic) were properly instructed that in a -- in a case such as this, reasonable doubt was relevant. And they rendered a verdict.
And once the jury's spoken, that's how our system works.
But I did want to just talk a little bit about context and how people have responded to it and how people are feeling.
You know, when Trayvon Martin was first shot, I said that this could have been my son. Another way of saying that is Trayvon Martin could have been me, 35 years ago.
And when you think about why, in the African-American community at least, there's a lot of pain around what happened here, I think it's important to recognize that the African-American community is looking at this issue through a set of experiences and a -- and a history that -- that doesn't go away.
There are very few African-American men in this country who haven't had the experience of being followed when they were shopping in a department store. That includes me.​

(The above is a lengthy transcript, which I merely skimmed. Feel free to point out anything I've missed.)

The death of Michael Brown is heartbreaking, and Michelle and I send our deepest condolences to his family and his community at this very difficult time. As Attorney General Holder has indicated, the Department of Justice is investigating the situation along with local officials, and they will continue to direct resources to the case as needed.

I know the events of the past few days have prompted strong passions, but as details unfold, I urge everyone in Ferguson, Missouri, and across the country, to remember this young man through reflection and understanding. We should comfort each other and talk with one another in a way that heals, not in a way that wounds. Along with our prayers, that’s what Michael and his family, and our broader American community, deserve.​

In not a single one of those examples did Obama claim that a suspect (or an acquitted defendant) is guilty of a crime. Not one. Yes, he gave some opinion, but it seems always couched in terms of uncertainty.

Compare that to Trump:

Today, we have caught this evil thug who planted the bombs.​

In what way is Trump's comment comparable to anything Obama said above (or elsewhere) about the guilt of this or that suspect?

ETA: I overlooked the Clinton example, sorry. Feel free to find the most damning comment Obama made on that case.​

 

[Belz...]

There is a slight difference in connotation; "Trump is a liar" implies that he cares about the truth value of his statements

I don't think that it does. He knows that it's false, and tries to convince people otherwise, and that's enough.

 

[sunmaster14]

Let's have a look at what he's said. You tell me if I miss a quote that you think is relevant.

He claimed the police acted stupidly in the Gates case. Actually they didn't act stupidly. Gates was arrested for disorderly conduct, which you can do anywhere, even in your own house.

Your Zimmerman quote is post-trial. Obama weighed in about how Trayvon Martin could have been his son (not literally) before Zimmerman was even charged. His statement almost certainly added to the sympathy factor for Trayvon Martin, and, correspondingly, to the antipathy factor for his killer.

As for the Michael Brown case, Obama (and his attorney general) said a lot more than just the official statements you've copied from the White House website. Here's one thing he said, which I think both prejudges the event and attacks the justice system as racist with no evidence to back it up.

In not a single one of those examples did Obama claim that a suspect (or an acquitted defendant) is guilty of a crime. Not one. Yes, he gave some opinion, but it seems always couched in terms of uncertainty.

I never claimed that he indicted a suspect before the evidence was in, unless you count the police I guess. I claimed that he made statements about investigations before the facts were in that could easily have prejudiced those investigations. The Hillary email thing was particularly egregious, where he claimed, while an FBI investigation was ongoing, that Hillary had not jeopardized national security. His claim wasn't even true. He also said the same thing about the investigation of the IRS targeting of conservative 401(c)(3)'s, saying that there was not even a "smidgen of corruption". Of course that was just a baldfaced lie.

Compare that to Trump:

Today, we have caught this evil thug who planted the bombs.​

In what way is Trump's comment comparable to anything Obama said above (or elsewhere) about the guilt of this or that suspect?

You're right. What Obama has said is much worse. Trump isn't even President yet, by the way. Also, there really isn't much doubt that the guy they caught is an evil thug, since he did shoot at police officers. Seems likely that he planted the bombs too. I can't imagine any jury being swayed by Trump's exclamations. It's obviously campaign rhetoric, not considered analysis by somebody who might have material non-public information.