President Trump

[Craig B]

There's a quite delicious irony in that.

It was supported by the right down here, while the extreme left held massive protests against it. I bet they never saw Trump as an ally.

Was it the same thing they were protesting against? Here's War on Want.

The Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership (TTIP) is a major new deal being negotiated behind closed doors between the EU and USA.

It will cost at least 1 million jobs, undermine our most treasured public services, lead to a ‘race to the bottom’ in food, environmental and labour standards and, for the first time, allow US companies to sue the UK government in special courts.​

 

[Craig B]

How long is May going to put up with this sort of thing? From BBC news.

President-elect Donald Trump has said UKIP leader Nigel Farage would make a good British ambassador to the US.
Mr Trump said "many people" would like to see Mr Farage as ambassador and he would do a "great job".​

 

[sunmaster14]

By all accounts, what the markets fear most is uncertainty. With the election over, there's no reason to think the market wouldn't have responded similarly to a victory by Clinton, who certainly inspired no particular fear on Wall Street.

The markets fear bad news more than they fear uncertainty. In any case, there is certainly good reason to think the markets would have gone down if Clinton had won. If it was going to go up regardless, it would have gone up beforehand. The only explanation for it not doing so is that the markets feared a Gore-Bush election standoff, which would have resulted in the S&P 500 plunging, say, 10% or more. It's possible, but I doubt it.

I think the markets are responding to the fact that Republicans have control of the Presidency and Congress, and that the Senate filibuster is going bye-bye. Tax cuts are coming, especially a corporate income tax rate of 15%. And the elimination of the 3.8% Obamacare tax on investment income. They're also responding to the fact that Trump's transition is going extremely well. He's putting very solid people around himself and mending fences with previous critics (at least the Republican ones). So far, I'm very encouraged, and I don't think I'm too different from the typical investor.

 

[TofuFighter]

is it just coincidence that both Farage and Trump are both so closely related to the Pepe the frog meme or is that the lamestream lamey lames trying their best to be insulting?

 

[The Don]

is it just coincidence that both Farage and Trump are both so closely related to the Pepe the frog meme or is that the lamestream lamey lames trying their best to be insulting?

IMO Farage looks sufficiently like a frog for Pepe to be an attempt at an authentic likeness - but I've very biased and after the Brexit vote, very bitter.

IMO Farage and Trump share a number of characteristics:

• They try and cultivate an avuncular image when their actions are those of childish bullies
• They portray themselves as looking after the little guy when their actions seem to indicate otherwise
• They have appealed directly to poorly educated, older, white voters with a populist xenophobic, Islamophobic, misogynist message which has struck a chord
• Their recent electoral successes have relied on successfully exploiting the public's willingness to embrace the post-factual message
• They both hark back to some unspecified golden time when our countries were far "better" than they are now
• They both revel in controversy and see their insults as challenges to the modern PC world rather than the boorish insults I think they are
• They have both to demonstrate any legislative effectiveness

I can see how the same internet meme could be applied to both but then again it is painting with a pretty broad brush.

 

[TofuFighter]

Trump cancels NY Times meeting, tweeting (among other things) "I cancelled today's meeting with the failing @nytimes when the terms and conditions of the meeting were changed at the last moment. Not nice"

'Times senior VP responds, “We were unaware that the meeting was canceled until we saw the president-elect’s tweet this morning. We did not change the ground rules at all and made no attempt to. They tried to yesterday — asking for only a private meeting and no on-the-record segment, which we refused to agree to. In the end, we concluded with them that we would go back to the original plan of a small off-the-record session and a larger on-the-record session with reporters and columnists.”

Apparently another classic Trump mischaractarisation of events if you believe the Times, but I'm curious... if Trump becomes president, will it be acceptable for him to continue to tweet (often baseless) negative comments about institutions who criticise him? Does holding the office of POTUS restrict that kind of statement in any way on the basis of the influence he will wield?

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/11/22/us/politics/donald-trump-transition.html

 

[Belz...]

I love how Trump ends every tweet with words like "sad" or "not nice". It's so fitting for his temperament.

 

[Belz...]

if Trump becomes president, will it be acceptable for him to continue to tweet (often baseless) negative comments about institutions who criticise him?

All his press conferences will be held online via Twitter.

 

[Fast Eddie B]

NYT meeting apparently back on.

 

[Belz...]

Sad.

 

[Stacko]

NYT meeting apparently back on.

Hopefully he behaves better than yesterday's whine fest.

First came the obsessive Twitter rants directed at “Hamilton” and “Saturday Night Live.” Then came Monday’s astonishing aria of invective and resentment aimed at the media, delivered in a conference room on the twenty-fifth floor of Trump Tower. In the presence of television executives and anchors, Trump whined about everything from NBC News reporter Katy Tur’s coverage of him to a*photograph the news network has used that shows him with a double chin. Why didn’t they use “nicer” pictures?

For more than twenty minutes, Trump railed about “outrageous” and “dishonest” coverage. When he was asked about the sort of “fake news” that now clogs social media, Trump replied that it was the networks that were guilty of spreading fake news. The “worst,” he said, were CNN (“liars!”) and NBC.

This is where we are. The President-elect does not care who knows how unforgiving or vain or distracted he is. This is who he is, and this is who will be running the executive branch of the United States government for four years.

 

[Bob001]

.....
Apparently another classic Trump mischaractarisation of events if you believe the Times, but I'm curious... if Trump becomes president, will it be acceptable for him to continue to tweet (often baseless) negative comments about institutions who criticise him? Does holding the office of POTUS restrict that kind of statement in any way on the basis of the influence he will wield?

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/11/22/us/politics/donald-trump-transition.html

Most restrictions on POTUS are based on ordinary decency, not law. There is nothing to prevent him from criticizing or threatening anybody he wants anyway he wants, just as there is nothing to prevent him from using his office to promote his business interests.

 

[Fast Eddie B]

There is nothing to prevent him...from using his office to promote his business interests.

Are you sure?

I somehow imagined that somewhere in the Federal codes are regulations against the kind of "quid pro quo" that Hillary was accused of.

 

[The Don]

<snip>.... but I'm curious... if Trump becomes president, will it be acceptable for him to continue to tweet (often baseless) negative comments about institutions who criticise him?

The only people who will care will be people who don't support him - his base will view it as sticking it to the establishment and as long as his targets are not in the GOP the GOP will bravely look the other way too

Does holding the office of POTUS restrict that kind of statement in any way on the basis of the influence he will wield?

Even if it did, is there any indication that Trump would care ?

 

[Belz...]

Most restrictions on POTUS are based on ordinary decency, not law. There is nothing to prevent him from criticizing or threatening anybody he wants anyway he wants, just as there is nothing to prevent him from using his office to promote his business interests.

...and since Trump has no concept of decency...

 

[Stacko]

I somehow imagined that somewhere in the Federal codes are regulations against the kind of "quid pro quo" that Hillary was accused of.

Nope, the law doesn't apply to the POTUS. There's the emoluments clause of the constitution, that he'll be in perpetually violation of, but that just provides an avenue for impeachment. This is why I think the first piece of legislation Democrats should push is a reform making the conflict of interest rules that apply to every other elected official in DC apply to the POTUS.

 

[Fast Eddie B]

This is why I think the first piece of legislation Democrats should push is a reform making the conflict of interest rules that apply to every other elected official in DC apply to the POTUS.

I think I'd favor that.

He has a right to choose his cabinet, but the failure to release tax returns, combined with continued business involvement by both he and his family, really stretches propriety. IMHO, of course.

 

[marplots]

Nope, the law doesn't apply to the POTUS. There's the emoluments clause of the constitution, that he'll be in perpetually violation of, but that just provides an avenue for impeachment. This is why I think the first piece of legislation Democrats should push is a reform making the conflict of interest rules that apply to every other elected official in DC apply to the POTUS.

I thought the emoluments clause applied to titles and presents/gifts. Does it apply to business dealings as well? Arguably, I am trading value for value in a business transaction, not receiving anything as a direct gift.

 

[Stacko]

I thought the emoluments clause applied to titles and presents/gifts. Does it apply to business dealings as well? Arguably, I am trading value for value in a business transaction, not receiving anything as a direct gift.

Donald poised to violate Constitution his first day in office, George W. Bush’s ethics lawyer says

“Why wouldn’t I stay at his hotel blocks from the White House, so I can tell the new president, ‘I love your new hotel!’” said one diplomat from an Asian nation. “Isn’t it rude to come to his city and say, ‘I am staying at your competitor?’”

The incoming president, in other words, is actively soliciting business from agents of foreign governments. Many of these agents, in turn, said that they will accept the president-elect’s offer to do business because they want to win favor with the new leader of the United States.

...

The diplomats’ efforts in seek Trump’s favor by staying in his hotel “looks like a gift,” Painter told ThinkProgress in an email, and thus is the very kind of favor the Constitution seeks to prevent.

...

Painter responded that “the only good answer,” for the president-elect “is to sell the hotel or give it to his kids (and pay the gift tax) by January 20.”

...

Moreover, while it is conceivable that a rival hotel may have standing to sue Trump for taking away its business with foreign diplomats in violation of the Constitution, it’s far from clear that any hotel business will want to risk a feud with the notoriously vindictive president-elect.

There is, however, at least one remedy under the Constitution for such a violation of the public trust by the president: impeachment.

Impeachment is a purely political solution so it can be done. It's why things like conflict of interest are better served being handled by law by having the same rules apply to the POTUS as everyone else and not whenever enough members of congress decide the President is acting unconstitutionally.

 

[Craig B]

is it just coincidence that both Farage and Trump are both so closely related to the Pepe the frog meme or is that the lamestream lamey lames trying their best to be insulting?

Why would Trump want to cause problems for Theresa May, to do favours for Farage, of all people? Is Trump simply a fool?

Jon Sopel, BBC North America editor
By any measure this is an extraordinary intervention. The future head of state of one nation telling another country who they should appoint as their ambassador is unusual enough; when it is two nations that are meant to share a special relationship it is a breach of nearly every rule of diplomatic protocol. At a stroke it puts tension into the Trump/ May relationship before they have even met.
It also leaves the current holder of the post, Sir Kim Darroch, in an awkward position as he seeks to forge closer contacts with the new administration.

In Downing Street and diplomatic circles there is consternation. But for Nigel Farage - who has always delighted in tweaking the tail of the Conservative Party - there will be amusement, and it seems in the future leader of the most powerful nation on earth he has a willing partner.​