• 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.
This was how Al Gore reacted when the Supreme Court, in a 5-4 decision, halted the Florida recount:
In a televised speech from his ceremonial office next to the White House, Gore said that while he was deeply disappointed and sharply disagreed with the Supreme Court verdict that ended his campaign, ”partisan rancor must now be put aside. I accept the finality of the outcome, which will be ratified next Monday in the Electoral College” he said. “And tonight, for the sake of our unity as a people and the strength of our democracy, I offer my concession.” Link
Click to expand...

Now we have:

Trump Tweets Oct. 17, 2016
Of course there is large scale voter fraud happening on and before election day. Why do Republican leaders deny what is going on? So naive!
Click to expand...
 

Attachments

  • Bozo Trump.jpg
    Bozo Trump.jpg
    26.2 KB · Views: 8
SezMe said:
While reading that link, I also noticed and read a related article. Very, very sobering.
Click to expand...

Excellent article and, indeed, very sobering.

Regime cleavages, by contrast, focus the electorate’s attention on the political system as a whole. Instead of seeking office to change the laws to obtain preferred policies, politicians who oppose the democratic order ignore the laws when necessary to achieve their political goals, and their supporters stand by or even endorse those means to their desired ends. Today, when Trump refuses to comply with the House impeachment inquiry, he makes plain his indifference to the Constitution and to the separation of powers. When Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell argues that impeachment overturns an election result, he is doing the same. In the minds of Trump, his allies and, increasingly, his supporters, it’s not just Democrats but American democracy that is the obstacle.
Click to expand...

This is what we're seeing in the behavior of the WH and Trump's Congressional supporters: they are refusing to cooperate with a legal and legitimate impeachment inquiry. Instead, they attack it as being illegitimate, . If you can't attack the argument, attack the process. But I've yet to hear them present a valid reason as to why it's illegitimate. On the other hand, a federal judge has explicitly ruled it is legitimate.

District Judge Beryl A. Howell officially declared that Democrats are conducting a legitimate impeachment inquiry. While Republicans have argued that the House probe is illegitimate because the full House did not vote on a resolution authorizing it, Howell ruled that no such resolution is needed for an impeachment inquiry to start. “Even in cases of presidential impeachment, a House resolution has never, in fact, been required to begin an impeachment inquiry,” Howell writes in her 75-page opinion, calling the Trump administration's arguments “fatally flawed.” “The precedential support cited for the ‘House resolution’ test is cherry-picked and incomplete, and more significantly, this test has no textual support in the U.S. Constitution, the governing rules of the House, or Rule (e), as interpreted in binding decisions,” Howell writes.
Click to expand...
https://www.vanityfair.com/news/2019/10/impeachment-inquiry-legitimate-ruling-republicans-trump
 
Trump Tweets

The Whistleblower must come forward to explain why his account of the phone call with the Ukrainian President was so inaccurate (fraudulent?). Why did the Whistleblower deal with corrupt politician Shifty Adam Schiff and/or his committee?
 
Captain_Swoop said:
Trump Tweets

The Whistleblower must come forward to explain why his account of the phone call with the Ukrainian President was so inaccurate (fraudulent?). Why did the Whistleblower deal with corrupt politician Shifty Adam Schiff and/or his committee?
Click to expand...

This is one of those gaslights that says, "who you gonna believe, me or your lying eyes?"
 
Captain_Swoop said:
Trump Tweets

The Whistleblower must come forward to explain why his account of the phone call with the Ukrainian President was so inaccurate (fraudulent?). Why did the Whistleblower deal with corrupt politician Shifty Adam Schiff and/or his committee?
Click to expand...

I don't get how Tump can say this? When the whistleblower admittedly received his information second hand . Not to mention that the substance has been pretty much confirmed by not only a half a dozen witnesses but the released transcript.

We get it Don. You think it was a perfect call. You think it is just fine to extort a foreign country for your own political purpose.
 
Note in 2016 Republican leaders were arguing there was no large scale voter fraud, or at least Trump claimed they were.
"Of course there is large scale voter fraud happening on and before election day. Why do Republican leaders deny what is going on?" - Donald Trump
Click to expand...

But to show how far we have fallen in three short years, if Trump tries refusing to concede in 2020 by claiming the outcome is fraudulent -- as many people expect he may if he loses -- I don't think it is by any means certain the Republican leadership will then urge Trump to accept the result, if there is little evidence of voter fraud.
 
acbytesla said:
I don't get how Tump can say this? When the whistleblower admittedly received his information second hand . Not to mention that the substance has been pretty much confirmed by not only a half a dozen witnesses but the released transcript.

We get it Don. You think it was a perfect call. You think it is just fine to extort a foreign country for your own political purpose.
Click to expand...

You have to remember how Trump ran his business. He thinks that you can run a Government in the same manner and doesn't get that leveraging those powers for his own benefit instead of the Country's is an abuse of power and will get him Impeached.
 
newyorkguy said:
Note in 2016 Republican leaders were arguing there was no large scale voter fraud, or at least Trump claimed they were.


But to show how far we have fallen in three short years, if Trump tries refusing to concede in 2020 by claiming the outcome is fraudulent -- as many people expect he may if he loses -- I don't think it is by any means certain the Republican leadership will then urge Trump to accept the result, if there is little evidence of voter fraud.
Click to expand...

I'm pretty sure that if Trump loses, then the Republicans will turn on him.
 
I saw a report tonight that GOP Senators running for re-election have to vow to toe the Trump-party line of Illegitimate Witchhunt for Trump to share campaign funds with them.

In other words, he is bribing Senators to promise to vote against impeachment before any hearings have even begun.
 
newyorkguy said:
Note in 2016 Republican leaders were arguing there was no large scale voter fraud, or at least Trump claimed they were.


But to show how far we have fallen in three short years, if Trump tries refusing to concede in 2020 by claiming the outcome is fraudulent -- as many people expect he may if he loses -- I don't think it is by any means certain the Republican leadership will then urge Trump to accept the result, if there is little evidence of voter fraud.
Click to expand...
Perhaps ironically, could he not remain in office even if there is evidence of fraud in his favor?

If there is evidence of election fraud of any kind, would it not be easily argued that the sitting president should remain until the fraud is completely uncovered and new elections can be held without the possibility of the fraud recurring?
That argument could give the Republicans cover to get behind a refusal to step down by Trump.
 
Last edited:
PhantomWolf said:
I'm pretty sure that if Trump loses, then the Republicans will turn on him.
Click to expand...

I agree most of them will with the exception of a handful of True Believers like Mark Meadows and Nunes. I suspect many of them dislike Trump but are afraid of publicly opposing him. Once he's out of office and rendered powerless, they will turn on him like a disgruntled ex-boyfriend.
 
pgwenthold said:
I saw a report tonight that GOP Senators running for re-election have to vow to toe the Trump-party line of Illegitimate Witchhunt for Trump to share campaign funds with them.

In other words, he is bribing Senators to promise to vote against impeachment before any hearings have even begun.
Click to expand...

That's not bribery; it's extortion. It's what he tried to do to Ukraine.
 
Stacyhs said:
That's not bribery; it's extortion. It's what he tried to do to Ukraine.
Click to expand...

Not really, because he doesn't have to give them anything. He's just going to give them the money if they promise to predetermine their vote.

It's a bribe
 
Once he is out of office, everyone will be talking about how he didn't represent "true conservatism" just like after Bush. "He was really tax and spend, big government, etc." It will fit well when they need to switch back to making apocalyptic claims about the deficit in order to hamstring any Democratic social spending.
 
Tsukasa Buddha said:
Once he is out of office, everyone will be talking about how he didn't represent "true conservatism" just like after Bush. "He was really tax and spend, big government, etc." It will fit well when they need to switch back to making apocalyptic claims about the deficit in order to hamstring any Democratic social spending.
Click to expand...

It will be difficult for his biggest supporters, like Nunes and McCarthy, to say that with a straight face. Maybe Graham can get away with that, but just barely.
 
pgwenthold said:
I saw a report tonight that GOP Senators running for re-election have to vow to toe the Trump-party line of Illegitimate Witchhunt for Trump to share campaign funds with them.

In other words, he is bribing Senators to promise to vote against impeachment before any hearings have even begun.
Click to expand...

It's an interesting racket. Republican Senators will also refuse to answer questions from the press citing a need to appear unbiased since they could be jurors in a trial. I wonder if they'll give the money back ahead of the proceedings.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom