The Trump Presidency (Act V - The One Where Everybody Dies)

Status
Not open for further replies.
Bob001 said:
What's the difference? If campaign donors know the money will go to Trump, and officials staying at Trump properties know the money will go to Trump, they are both trying to "curry favors." A bribe is a bribe, however you disguise it.
Click to expand...

I take your point, but not every campaign donation is a bribe.
 
phiwum said:
I take your point, but not every campaign donation is a bribe.
Click to expand...

Sure, when campaign donations go to established election committees and are maintained and disbursed according to applicable campaign finance laws. In this particular case, campaign "donations" are converted into income forTrump when they are used to pay for goods and services at his properties: "Hey, I'll donate 100 grand to your committee, and your committee will spend it to rent a ballroom at your house." That's what makes it look like a bribe, even if it's legal.
 
This week, President Trump is scheduled to head to the 2018 World Economic Forum in Davos, Switzerland. The U.S. leader may seem an unlikely guest — Davos brings together the world's political and economic elite for what is generally viewed as a celebration of globalization.

...

The paper, which was first reported by Reuters, does not mention Trump by name. It does, however, state that these narratives have emerged in “the United States as well as elsewhere” and that the current U.S. “administration is seeking to reduce the trade deficit by renegotiating U.S. trade agreements and adopting more protectionist U.S. policies.”

In all of Trump's foreign policy, his distaste for what he views as “bad trade deals” may be one of the most consistent positions. The president has criticized not only multilateral trade deals such as the North American Free Trade Agreement or the Trans-Pacific Partnership, but also bilateral deals with allies, such as the free-trade agreement with South Korea. Trade deficits, such as the sprawling gap that exists in trade with China, are a particular subject of ire for the Trump administration, too.

...


For example, the paper states that it is a misconception that bilateral trade between two nations should be balanced. “If a bilateral free trade agreement allows a country to meet more of its needs by importing at lower costs from a particular partner, it will benefit,” the authors write, “even if the value of these increased imports exceeds the value of the exports that it sells to that partner.”

The paper also takes aim at the idea that trade deficits result in job loss. “While in theory the relationship between imports, trade deficits, and employment and growth could be positive or negative, in practice in the United States, rapid import growth and larger trade deficits have been associated with faster employment growth,” the authors note.
Click to expand...

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news...gue-that-he-doesnt-understand-trade-deficits/

Don't worry though. Trump knows international trade and macroeconomics better than anyone else. Nobody knows it better than him.
 
Republicans and Dems are not accustomed to dealing with a master negotiator like Trump. 1024D chess.

This morning the Washington Post compared Trump to an amateur jazz musician -- moody and improvisational, but lacking the technical chops to keep the piece together.
 
Fast Eddie B said:
A female senator who was a combat veteran took Trump to task, calling him “Cadet Bonespurs” and pointing out his five deferments put him in a weak position to lecture her about the military.

Zing!
Click to expand...


Double zing. It was a female who called him out for the lying coward he is.

I'll bet she doesn't stay on his Christmas card list.
 
Is this the place to say that it's lunacy to tie DACA to a whole bunch of huge issues? This is not Trump's fault. I've seen the "Dream Act" get hosed again and again as it's conflated with other immigration issues. I know these people; I don't know who's a DACA type because I don't talk to youngsters about their immigration status. But I know many of the people affected. A clean DACA bill would pass, IMO. There are many upsides (such as a corps of young people eager to go into health care, which will be a burgeoning field); support for the Armed Services (which the Armed Services want) and legal status for a whole bunch of young people who will help defuse a demographic issue wherein we have too many oldish people vs. young people paying taxes. I'm sick about how it's been held hostage pending resolution of a whole bunch of other issues.

Just let the young people brought here as minors stay, unless they have earned expulsion by virtue of criminal records. It's that simple. And yet, long before Trump, they have been a "bargaining chip" that precludes a clean DACA bill. It's messed up, IMO. Leave chain migration and diversity lotteries and fences/walls alone, pass a clean DACA act. I'm pretty sure Lindsey Graham would support it and I know McCain would. (Also Flake). I'm less sure about the House. Please, anti-illegal-immigration activists, believe that billions have been spent for border security; the U.S. is not ignoring immigration laws; there are no de juris "open borders" and a lot of young people are being unfairly submitted to profound stress for no good reason.

The U.S. will gain by passing DACA. If nothing else, have Trump issue another executive order. One of the sickest things I've ever heard was Jeff Sessions' gloating remark that DACA has been "rescinded." Trump IMO actually has heart enough to understand the issue here but he's an ineffective advocate for such a policy. I know these kids/young people. Most want nothing more than a job in health care or to join the military. Mexican teenagers are some of the sweetest people you'll ever meet. Not all of them, of course; but statistically they are much more likely to be an asset than a liability. Pass this bill. It's the right thing to do. There's a significant upside; minimal downside.

[/screed]
 
Last edited:
phiwum said:
I take your point, but not every campaign donation is a bribe.
Click to expand...
I'm no expert on federal election law, but in my state, at least informally, a candidate's "war chest" essentially belonged to the candidate, regardless of whether he or she even ran for office. There might be more regulation now. I just don't know. If someone here does, I'd like to hear the status of federal law on the issue.
 
I think you misunderstand the issues, Minoosh.

You're falling for the GOP talking points which are getting a lot of play on the MSM.

DACA could have been addressed at any point. McConnell refuses to let bills come to the floor.

It's just like McConnell refusing to let anything come to the floor like Duckworth's bill to fund the military until the other budget issues are resolved.

McConnell, IMO, thinks he has a 2018 campaign issue here: make the Democrats look bad. It's a desperate attempt to counter the upcoming 'blue wave'.

And what would you have the Democrats do? Once again let the GOP walk all over them?


On top of that, all the negotiations with Trump really have been like trying to nail jello to the wall. Between Trump being inconsistent and McConnell still prioritizing making the Democrats look bad over anything else, you end up with this result.
 
Last edited:
According to Stormy Daniels, Trump is obsessively afraid of sharks.

Trump per Stormy said:
I donate to all these charities and I would never donate to any charity that helps sharks. I hope all the sharks die.
Click to expand...

While this is absurd on several levels, of course the most absurd part is...
"I donate to all these charities"
 
Minoosh said:
Is this the place to say that it's lunacy to tie DACA to a whole bunch of huge issues? This is not Trump's fault. I've seen the "Dream Act" get hosed again and again as it's conflated with other immigration issues. I know these people; I don't know who's a DACA type because I don't talk to youngsters about their immigration status. But I know many of the people affected. A clean DACA bill would pass, IMO. There are many upsides (such as a corps of young people eager to go into health care, which will be a burgeoning field); support for the Armed Services (which the Armed Services want) and legal status for a whole bunch of young people who will help defuse a demographic issue wherein we have too many oldish people vs. young people paying taxes. I'm sick about how it's been held hostage pending resolution of a whole bunch of other issues.

Just let the young people brought here as minors stay, unless they have earned expulsion by virtue of criminal records. It's that simple. And yet, long before Trump, they have been a "bargaining chip" that precludes a clean DACA bill. It's messed up, IMO. Leave chain migration and diversity lotteries and fences/walls alone, pass a clean DACA act. I'm pretty sure Lindsey Graham would support it and I know McCain would. (Also Flake). I'm less sure about the House. Please, anti-illegal-immigration activists, believe that billions have been spent for border security; the U.S. is not ignoring immigration laws; there are no de juris "open borders" and a lot of young people are being unfairly submitted to profound stress for no good reason.

The U.S. will gain by passing DACA. If nothing else, have Trump issue another executive order. One of the sickest things I've ever heard was Jeff Sessions' gloating remark that DACA has been "rescinded." Trump IMO actually has heart enough to understand the issue here but he's an ineffective advocate for such a policy. I know these kids/young people. Most want nothing more than a job in health care or to join the military. Mexican teenagers are some of the sweetest people you'll ever meet. Not all of them, of course; but statistically they are much more likely to be an asset than a liability. Pass this bill. It's the right thing to do. There's a significant upside; minimal downside.

[/screed]
Click to expand...

Trump will simply veto any bill containing DACA.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom