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

[Skeptic Ginger]

Trump is now [Russian puppet] dictator of the USA. The Republicans gave up all their power to him [Russian oligarchs funding the GOP campaigns and making the legislators rich].

ftfy

 

[Skeptic Ginger]

That's because the only aim he and his tacky family have is to line their own pockets rather than run the country. I'd imagine they've been quite effective at cashing in.

This ^ I'm pretty sure there is a money trail here.

 

[Skeptic Ginger]

Paul Ryan is telling Republicans to be careful not to overstate what is in the memo, and to ensure that it's made clear that it has nothing to do with Mueller's investigation, which should continue unimpeded. He's also saying that he sees no reason for Rosenstein to be attacked or fired.

A milquetoast response at best.

Unless Ryan is eyeing the POTUS position and he's purposefully not acting to stop Trump from digging his own grave, I can only think Ryan is in on the Russian gravy-train too and he knows it.

 

[Andy_Ross]

Or so many supporters named I.P. Freeley?

Dick Splash

 

[dudalb]

Trump said putting the new sanctions against Russia into effect is "Not Necessary".

Putin says jump, Trump says "How High?".

 

[DetectedMotion]

Something I would Love to see (after the STOTU) is a brief Democratic response of "Lock him up, lock him up, lock him up..." Not that the Dems will do that, but it would make My day.

 

[blutoski]

Something I would Love to see (after the STOTU) is a brief Democratic response of "Lock him up, lock him up, lock him up..." Not that the Dems will do that, but it would make My day.

I'd be satisfied with just one "You Lie!"

 

[DetectedMotion]

I suppose that would be a decent start, especially if the Dems have Tammy Duckworth saying it.

 

[TheSupermeerkat]

Dick Splash

P Nesshead.

 

[Skeptic Ginger]

Trump said putting the new sanctions against Russia into effect is "Not Necessary".....

Checks and balances, not necessary.

I do hope the Democrats file suit. I don't see that you need a majority to do that but I could be wrong.

 

[Skeptic Ginger]

I'd be satisfied with just one "You Lie!"

 

[Cl1mh4224rd]

For a $35 campaign contribution to Trump you can have your name shown on the screen during the livestream of the SOTU speech on his website.

He found a way to make money out of it!

Sheesh... Apparently they've lowered it to $1.

I'd be satisfied with just one "You Lie!"

I do wonder how easy it would be to derail Trump during the speech.

 

[alfaniner]

P Nesshead.

Don't forget the Russians!

Pyotr Jakov

 

[BobTheCoward]

Checks and balances, not necessary.

I do hope the Democrats file suit. I don't see that you need a majority to do that but I could be wrong.

Did he comply with the law or not? People like noahfence said no one was arguing that he broke that law.

 

[Andy_Ross]

Mrs trump not accompanying the President to the SOTU speech.

She has 'gone on ahead' to greet people at her Reception, the Pres will go straight in and speak without seeing her.

 

[Craig4]

Mrs trump not accompanying the President to the SOTU speech.

She has 'gone on ahead' to greet people at her Reception, the Pres will go straight in and speak without seeing her.

It's good he can afford a first class blanket for the couch in the East Wing.

 

[Puppycow]

Would-be South Korea ambassador sidelined over disagreements with Trump

Victor Cha, the White House's choice for U.S. ambassador to South Korea, "is no longer expected to be nominated" after he raised concerns about parts of President Trump's North Korea policy, the Washington Post reports.

Why it matters: Cha objected to the administration's suggestion "of a limited strike on the North aimed at sending a message." He also opposed Trump's threats to "tear up a bilateral trade deal with Seoul." He was favored by South Korean diplomats, who had encouraged the White House to finalize the nomination.

I can think of good reasons to be against both of those things.

Anyway, it seems that now they have to start over again from scratch. There has not been much urgency in filling the position. For many countries I suppose it isn't really urgent to fill that position, but South Korea would seem to be pretty high up the list of priorities given the situation with North Korea.

This profile of Dr. Cha was published in December when he was first tapped for the position:
Trump Finally Taps Ambassador to South Korea

Cha is a scholar-practitioner, moving back and forth between the academic and policy world. He received his Ph.D. in political science from Columbia University in 1994, and has spent most of his academic career as a professor at Georgetown University’s School of Foreign Service. He has written a number of books and academic journal articles focused on North Korea, U.S.-Asia relations, and Japan-South Korea relations within an asymmetric, U.S.-led alliance system. In 2004, he was appointed as director of Asian Affairs on the National Security Council under George W. Bush, and also later served as the deputy head of delegation for the United States at the Six Party Talks in Beijing. If his appointment is confirmed, Cha will leave his current positions at Georgetown and as senior advisor and Korea Chair at the Center for Strategic and International Studies.

The fact that the Trump administration is moving forward with the ambassadorial appointment is surely welcome news in Seoul and other regional capitals. Nevertheless, coming nearly a year into Trump’s term, it also highlights the administration’s lack of awareness of even the most basic foreign policy needs. The crisis surrounding North Korea’s nuclear and missile program arguably has been the most pressing issue the new administration has faced. Yet it has done so without the constant presence of the official representative of the president, the ambassador, in South Korea. Although Cha’s potential appointment was first reported in late August, it is only now moving forward.

According to one official source, the Trump administration’s erratic and dissonant signals toward not only Pyongyang, but also longtime U.S. ally South Korea, have left Seoul’s foreign policy establishment scrambling to make sense of things. The lack of a U.S. ambassador (or any sense of urgency in appointing a new one) has surely contributed to the sentiment.

According to The Hill, it's highly unusual for a nomination to be scratched this far into the process.

A White House official speaking on condition of anonymity confirmed to the Post that the administration is now considering other candidates.

“We have yet to nominate anyone for the post, but it is our intention to do so as soon as we can find the appropriate candidate,” the official told the newspaper.

According to the Post, Cha’s nomination was relatively far along in the process, as the White House had formally notified Seoul of the nomination. The South Korean government had reportedly accepted it.

 

[fishbob]

If they wanted to impose sanctions, they would have voted to impose sanctions. Instead, they voted for a law that doesn't impose sanctions to impose sanctions? Is this like the Iraq vote again?


I sure haven't seen many arguments for impeaching presidents for complying with the law. I may have jumped the gun in thinking people calling for impeachment thought he broke the law.

The job of the executive is to enforce the law.
Failure to enforce is not 'breaking the law'.
Failure to enforce is 'not doing his damn job'.
Failure to enforce due to placing obligations to the Russians above his duty to the US is against the law.
Clear enough?

 

[BobTheCoward]

The job of the executive is to enforce the law.
Failure to enforce is not 'breaking the law'.
Failure to enforce is 'not doing his damn job'.
Failure to enforce due to placing obligations to the Russians above his duty to the US is against the law.
Clear enough?

Actually, that seems much less clear. "Did not comply with the law" seems like measurable goal. Going with something that requires insight into state of mind seems like inserting a near impossibility.

 

[NoahFence]

Actually, that seems much less clear. "Did not comply with the law" seems like measurable goal. Going with something that requires insight into state of mind seems like inserting a near impossibility.

He is doing nothing to preserve, protect, or defend the constitution. That's his oath, and not only is he breaking that oath, he is actively going against it

He is fighting for RUSSIA for **** sake.