• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

The Trump Presidency: Part 17

Status
Not open for further replies.
The Great Zaganza said:
Skeptic Ginger said:
OMG can you imagine Kellyanne as chief of staff?
Click to expand...

she would be a good fit for the job - the job being to babysit Trump and stopping him from doing something insane by assuring him that others are doing insane things for him.
Click to expand...


I'm not seeing it. Her skills have been to abet Trump, cheer him on, and make transparent excuses for his excesses.

None of that is going to prepare her as a moderating influence on Trump.

Much less prepare Trump for receiving that sort of behavior from him.

They'd feed off each other. Encourage each other. Positive reinforcement. Harmonic resonance, like the Tacoma Narrows bridge.

...

Hmmm.

...

Okay. I like the idea.
 
Last edited:
quadraginta said:
I'm not seeing it. Her skills have been to abet Trump, cheer him on, and make transparent excuses for his excesses.

None of that is going to prepare her as a moderating influence on Trump.

Much less prepare Trump for receiving that sort of behavior from him.

They'd feed off each other. Encourage each other. Positive reinforcement
Harmonic resonance, like the Tacoma Narrows bridge.

...

Hmmm.

...

Okay. I like the idea.
Click to expand...
:sdl:
 
acbytesla said:
That is the beauty of the Senate. The 6 year term with election cycles that are staggered. The founders wanted the Senate not to be too heavily influenced by the momentary whims of the electorate.
Click to expand...

....and yet there's still no meaningful push back on President Trump from the Senate.

Sure there may have been a few words of criticism about his treatment of the Kurds but within a couple of days all the dissenters were back on side praising the President and defending his every action. They're either true believers, are willing to sacrifice the country's wellbeing for their own purposes or a combination of the two.

Senators may not be influenced by the momentary whim of the electorate, but they know that they'll be primaried if they alienate President Trump's base.
 
I think the reason trumpp keeps repeating "no quid quo pro" is because he is not really aware of what it actually means and since he is too lazy to look it up and too much of an arrogant doofus to ask what it means he would rather wallow in this ignorance. And how can he have done something when he has no idea what that thing is? This is also why in the very same breath he will imply that he did ask Ukraine for help. Because that is how he does business and "people have always said" what a great business man he is.
 
Trump Tweets

(Kiddingly) We’re building a Wall in Colorado”(then stated, “we’re not building a Wall in Kansas but they get the benefit of the Wall we’re building on the Border”) refered to people in the very packed auditorium, from Colorado & Kansas, getting the benefit of the Border Wall!
 
Trump Retweeted

Steve Scalise
@SteveScalise
If people scatter out of a room when you walk in & turn on the light, it begs the question: What are they hiding in there?
That's exactly what happened when my colleagues & I entered the backroom Schiff is trying to impeach @realDonaldTrump from to get the truth.
Unacceptable!
 
quadraginta said:
I'm not seeing it. Her skills have been to abet Trump, cheer him on, and make transparent excuses for his excesses.

None of that is going to prepare her as a moderating influence on Trump.

Much less prepare Trump for receiving that sort of behavior from him.

They'd feed off each other. Encourage each other. Positive reinforcement. Harmonic resonance, like the Tacoma Narrows bridge.

...

Hmmm.

...

Okay. I like the idea.
Click to expand...

Damn. You are digging deep in the cultural literacy files.
 
Captain_Swoop said:
Trump Tweets

(Kiddingly) We’re building a Wall in Colorado”(then stated, “we’re not building a Wall in Kansas but they get the benefit of the Wall we’re building on the Border”) refered to people in the very packed auditorium, from Colorado & Kansas, getting the benefit of the Border Wall!
Click to expand...

He is getting worse.
His explanations make less sense than the error he is trying to explain.
 
Susheel said:
I think the reason trumpp keeps repeating "no quid quo pro" is because he is not really aware of what it actually means and since he is too lazy to look it up and too much of an arrogant doofus to ask what it means he would rather wallow in this ignorance. And how can he have done something when he has no idea what that thing is? This is also why in the very same breath he will imply that he did ask Ukraine for help. Because that is how he does business and "people have always said" what a great business man he is.
Click to expand...

As I understand the reports of congressional testimony, in dealing with Sondland, trump specifically said 'this is not quid pro quo', even though it was.

It's much more likely that a WH adviser or Guilianni said to trump 'look, you can't make it look like this is a quid pro quo arrangement' when discussing leveraging aid to Ukraine for an investigation into the Bidens and the mythical DNC server, and trump just latched onto the term.

'Sure, we'll give Ukraine the aid, probably the best aid anyone has ever given them, but get Zekowski or whatever to publicly announce that he's investigating the server/biden stuff first, then he'll get it, but it's not quid pro quo, you hear me? It's not quid pro quo. Tell him we've done him huge favours, more than any other president and we have the best military'.

I read the transcript of the call between trump and Zelensky. Man... he positively buried himself up trump's clenching sphincter. No wonder he didn't want people knowing what was in the call. At first i was like... :gasp: but then i realised that this is just what people do to placate trump because trump will swallow it right up.
 
Ladewig said:
He is getting worse.
His explanations make less sense than the error he is trying to explain.
Click to expand...

People on twitter are non-jokingly speculating/predicting that he's feeling the squeeze and going for an insanity defense.
 
The Republican antics yesterday, storming a lawful congressional deposition, sicken and alarm me.

They say history does not repeat itself, but sometimes it rhymes. I knew very little of the “Beer Hall Putsch”, but it sprung into my mind and I looked up the Wikipedia entry. Lord knows there are HUGE differences, but the thuggish, bald-faced actions yesterday still have echoes of a prior time.

“This was not the first time Hitler had been in trouble with the law. In an incident in September 1921, he and some men of the SA had disrupted a meeting of the Bayernbund ('Bavaria Union') which Otto Ballerstedt, a Bavarian federalist, was to have addressed, and the Nazis troublemakers were arrested as a result.”

I’m kind of in dread awaiting what happens next, especially if these select Republicans decide the tactic was effective, both strategically and politically. It seems the next step is the Democrat majority providing armed security to protect their oversight and impeachment investigatory mandate. Followed by the “troublemakers” being arrested and removed.

Interesting times, indeed. Or maybe I just woke up in a mood.
 
Last edited:
Fast Eddie B said:
The Republican antics yesterday, storming a lawful congressional deposition, sicken and alarm me.

They say history does not repeat itself, but sometimes it rhymes. I knew very little of the “Beer Hall Putsch”, but it sprung into my mind and I looked up the Wikipedia entry. Lord knows there are HUGE differences, but the thuggish, bald-faced actions yesterday still have echoes of a prior time.

“This was not the first time Hitler had been in trouble with the law. In an incident in September 1921, he and some men of the SA had disrupted a meeting of the Bayernbund ('Bavaria Union') which Otto Ballerstedt, a Bavarian federalist, was to have addressed, and the Nazis troublemakers were arrested as a result.”

I’m kind of in dread awaiting what happens next, especially if these select Republicans decide the tactic was effective, both strategically and politically. It seems the next step is the Democrat majority providing armed security to protect their oversight and impeachment investigatory mandate. Followed by the “troublemakers” being arrested and removed.

Interesting times, indeed. Or maybe I just woke up in a mood.
Click to expand...

Matt Gaetz is an r/donald troll making noises in order to ingratiate himself and style himself as the next trump.
 
This is from an interview on Salon with Brian Klaas:
The American people appear to be numb to Trump’s behavior. Trump has recently suggested that Joe Biden should be put in the electric chair. He's called Adam Schiff treasonous, implying, therefore, that he should be executed. Trump has threatened Nancy Pelosi the same way. It's not even a news story. Trump’s threats of murder and violence are objectively the most insane behavior of any U.S. president in history, at least in modern history, and it's just a blip on the radar. Link
Click to expand...

I continue to believe, and I think his defenders have made this obvious, to Trump supporters nothing matters. It's all about and only about payback.
 
We should all be pleased that a republican lawmaker has spoken out against one of trump's latest tweets:
"To call anybody human scum is beneath the office of the presidency. You can't say that, right? You're the president. You have different standards," said Rep. Adam Kinzinger, an Illinois Republican.

That said, I think some posters on the forum have probably used this term before and no one got upset about it...
 
acbytesla said:
Like what? They had other arguments as well. They argued since it involves POTUS it belongs in Federal court. Otherwise POTUS would see a deluge of state prosecutors potentially going after Presidents. One of the judges pointed out there were lots of federal courts that could do the same anyway and it hasn't happened. They argued that this was all subterfuge in an attempto to obtain his financial records.

But basically the main theme of Trump's argument is that as Potus he should be immune from any investigation.
Click to expand...

By pointing out the consequences of their arguments, they have actually harmed their case.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom