Donald Trump 2020

[RomaVicta 29769]

48 minutes ago, tx 3 putt said:

They need to step up the attack ads. That one was much to tame 

Yea, it was just as cornball as the first one. Maybe that's what works, but there was nothing memorable about the sad visuals. I will reinforce the feelings of those of us who want it to be good.

The main thing is it's GOP on GOP.

[Gooby 633]

10 minutes ago, RomaVicta said:

Yea, it was just as cornball as the first one. Maybe that's what works, but there was nothing memorable about the sad visuals. I will reinforce the feelings of those of us who want it to be good.

The main thing is it's GOP on GOP.

Yes, and I guarantee they're watching his reaction to this one as they plan the next one.  That one might kill him.

[4th&Five 41457]

 

[Biff Tannen 45491]

Good god.  It's crazy how we've forgotten the dumbest shit he's done that would have sunk any other candidate or president in recent memory.

[Irwin F Fletcher 3550]

Good god.  It's crazy how we've forgotten the dumbest shit he's done that would have sunk any other candidate or president in recent memory.

Ah yes, the infamous photo of him with a drawer full of pills.

[tantric superman 4667]

24 minutes ago, 4th&Five said:

 

Racist mofo.

We hispanics don't just like tacos.  We invented the concept of zero.  Or cutting apples, in fractional pieces.

I forget which.

[Hugo Stiglitz 23356]

The Trump photo album is brutal.

[Red Five 40627]

I think it was Roma who said the other day, “it’s amazing to watch him commit what used to be political suicide every day.”

“Today Trump nuked the town of Hackensack, NJ because someone there said something mean about him. But first, video of Joe Biden using the wrong fork at dinner. Will this kill his chances in the election and can the Democratic Party ever recover?”.

[FondrenRoad 4378]

1 hour ago, Ghost of LL said:

I stand corrected.

But including members of Congress is still unconstitutional.

It is interesting, but it is more a cause of complications than it is clearly unconstutional.  Any break from the established line of succession without a new Succession Act will render the constitution and the nation as a whole null and void anyway.  There is really no scenario that installs Pompeo over Pelosi or Grassley.

But I do know what you are saying:

1) Are they "Officers?" "Officers" is, at times, used for various purposes within the Constitution itself, and even the Appointments Clause has a loophole which allows the courts to appoint "Officers of the United States".   I don't think there would be a problem in that regard.  The Executive branch, in its entire history, has never challenged, even in internal communications, the established order of succession.  It has always been explicitly and implicitly accepted.  The PPT has even been a designated survivor twice under Trump.

2) The primary Constitutional issue would be concurrent service in the legislative branch while "acting" as President.  The Speaker, or president pro tempore would have to resign from Congress completely even if assuming the duties of the office of the President only temporarily.  I'm not sure this will ever be ripe for challenge.  None of the people in the line of succession are forced to assume the role.  If both the Pres and VP were unconscious for an extended time, but expected to recover, it would likely be declined by the Speaker and the PPT, and fall to the Secy of State.  This isn't really a dealbreaker.

3) The real constitutional issue is that Pres/VP dual incapacity would certainly first be subject to a 25th amendment section 4 declaration which has also never happened.  And it allows for quite a bit of political wiggle room.  Its also possible that Pres/VP dual deaths would first be subject to a 25th amendment section 4 declaration.  Neither may actually be "dead" until the cabinet or another body appointed by Congress declare them dead.  And we really don't have any judicial review regarding this either because JFK was killed in office 4 years before the 25th amendment was ratified.  But JFK's death did play a role in getting the amendment written and ratified, and one of the primary issues was, specifically, that LBJ had health issues and could die soon also, and the Speaker and the PPT were too old to jump right in and may not have the mental capacity for it.  So even then, while drafting a Constitutional amendment, the drafters considered the Speaker and PPT as legitimate successors under the Constitution.  They had already concluded that they were constitutionally within the line of succession, so much so, that they didn't even feel the need to codify it further in the 25th amendment.

So, in theory, let's say Trump and Pence both have heart attacks and die on the same day.  The cabinet holds their 25th amendment meeting and sends a unanimous decision to Pelosi and Grassley 4 days after that decision.  The House also unanimously confirms the Cabinet's decision.  The Senate can't get a 2/3 vote through.  McConnell thinks a dead Trump is executing his duties better than the live one was.  Republic is over even if he is right for once.  However, if one or both are disabled, but alive, the current Senate would never confirm the decision.  We'd have a pseudo government until they died or woke back up.

So instead let's say everyone confirms both deaths.  And after all of this, Pelosi steps down from Speaker and tries to move into the White House.  Pompeo challenges this even though he has in the past acknowledged that he is 4th in the line of succession, and Trump has also acted many times in acceptance of the line of succession.

a) SCOTUS rules for Pelosi so long as she resigns completely from the House under any reasoning, whether it be 200 years of implicit acceptance, or deciding that Congressional officeholders are "Officers", or acknowledging the ability of the court to appoint "Officers of the United States" and appointing her.  Doesn't really matter which way they choose to go.  Republic stands.

b) SCOTUS rules for Pompeo and installs him as President.  Among other things, this overturns executive and legislative history that has been in place since at least 1792.  But it will also be seen as an unconstitutional move toward fascism.  Republic is over.

Edited May 5, 2020 by FondrenRoad

[bolverk 29394]

1 hour ago, woohorn said:

Why "moonface" 4 Conway?

I think I've heard the expression as an Asian slur and, well, Conway is half-Filipino so...

[Red Five 40627]

Fuck Trump

[Jive Turkey 12567]

2 hours ago, tx 3 putt said:

They need to step up the attack ads. That one was much to tame 

Absolutely. It’s clear what sets Trump off.  Calling him weak is guaranteed to piss him off. Anything that challenges or questions his manhood gets the same reaction.  

Every ad should call him stupid, an idiot, “not smart,” a failure, a puppet, Putin’s bitch, a simpleton, less than a man, impotent, a loser, a scaredy-cat, a chicken, etc.  Keep attacking, and he will attack back.  And he will eventually say stuff that crosses the line and alienates his fringe supporters.  If Don Lemon or Maxine Waters called him stupid, Trump might drop an n-bomb in response. 

I don’t get why some Dems won’t stoop to his level.  Fuck this “when they go low, we fly high” bullshit.  Speak in terms that Trump and his cult members understand.  Any semi-intelligent Dem can run circles around Trump in a battle of wits on Twitter.  But nobody wants to directly engage.

Actually, nobody has really been able to successfully engage.  People like Ted Lieu try to bait Trump but there hasn’t been much success.  He needs to sling mud.

Edited May 5, 2020 by Jive Turkey

[tantric superman 4667]

1 minute ago, Jive Turkey said:

And he will eventually say stuff that crosses the line and alienates his fringe supporters.  If Don Lemon or Maxine Waters called him stupid, Trump might drop an n-bomb in respons

He doesn't have fringe supporters.  He has supporters who still enjoy interacting with normal people now and again and don't want to get banned from civil society.

[SameSame 1692]

40 minutes ago, Irwin F Fletcher said:

49 minutes ago, Biff Tannen said:

Good god.  It's crazy how we've forgotten the dumbest shit he's done that would have sunk any other candidate or president in recent memory.

Ah yes, the infamous photo of him with a drawer full of pills.

That's enough sudafed to get started on a good batch of bathtub crank.

[FondrenRoad 4378]

1 hour ago, Eskimohorn said:

I largely disagree with contention that the assassination “worked”. It was a disastrous blunder. And given their objective in their succession declarations, to keep slavery legal, by definition they did not win the War.

1) Lincoln’s Reconstruction plans were very lenient towards the South and had a better chance of being beneficial to as many people as possible - especially Southerners. However, he was not going to eliminate the ruling class through prolonged imprisonment or execution. He believed they were necessary to maintain order.

2) Johnson’s Reconstruction policy was hasty and ineffective and largely countermanded by Republicans who ended up impeaching him

3) Republicans later added more comprehensive policies and amendments with harsher consequences. So if Johnson was their man, the plan failed, because his term was not the end of Reconstruction but the beginning of Radical Reconstruction.

4) It took decades for the South to begin to recover financially.

5) Through terror and abuse of power, the ruling elite eroded Reconstruction reforms. Federal interest in Southern policies faded.

In any case, the conspirators were not suicidal. They believed they could topple the government and restart the war with better terms, possibly maintain it through guerrilla actions. They were not thinking of long game.

I have some disagreements about point 1, but Lincoln died before the war was over.  He didn't get to implement anything, so its kind of moot.

I agree with points 2 and 3.  Johnson wasn't a dictator.  He couldn't completely throw out Republican Reconstruction plans even though he gave it some effort. 

4, the South has never been economically viable in its history.  Where Reconstruction failed is that many Republicans believe that economic or financial "recovery" would be beneficial to the South as a goal even though Southerners didn't care much about economics.  The same holds true today.

5, I completely disagree.  The entire current GOP, and Southern Democrats before them, are still interested in pre-Civil War Southern policies.  While they do, at times, try to implement discriminatory policy at the federal level, mostly they are trying to undo federal controls and allow states to discriminate, or not discriminate, as they see fit.

As for conspirators, sure, they never see the long game.  They could have killed everyone in DC and that would have only made it worse for the South.  Slavery also would not have lasted more than 20 or 30 years longer even if the South had won military victory.  They'd have no trading partners and would have been at near constant war with European powers, not to mention the fact that the North would also switch to sanctions, embargoes, and economic pressure.  But the conspirators did get the next best thing.  They got a milder Reconstruction.  They got to maintain discriminatory laws for another century, and they still continue to get to disenfranchise minorities.

Edited May 5, 2020 by FondrenRoad

[Francisco 2.0 32313]

2 hours ago, woohorn said:

Why "moonface" 4 Conway?

 

1 hour ago, DigglerontheHoof said:

Because he has the wit of a stupid 10 year old?

 

1 hour ago, henrygandorf said:

are we really at the point in the simulation where we're trying to make sense of trump's nicknames?

 

1 hour ago, woohorn said:

 

 

Nah, just hoping he was back to criticising physical traits again, like acne or accident scars, but I can't remember G Conways appearance enough to know.

 

 

23 minutes ago, bolverk said:

I think I've heard the expression as an Asian slur and, well, Conway is half-Filipino so...

 

It''s medical related:

Quote

A Moon face[2] is a medical sign in which the face develops a rounded appearance due to fat deposits on the sides of the face.[3] It is often associated with Cushing's syndrome[4] or steroid treatment (especially corticosteroids), which has led to it being known as Cushingoid facies.[5]

 

or as a slur to someone who is overweight and their face is a roundish shape:

 

[DixonHur 11154]

2 hours ago, woohorn said:

Why "moonface" 4 Conway?

I think it was a threat...he was clearly referring to the 1902 film Le Voyage dans la Lune 

[wildcat09 29213]

1 hour ago, Jive Turkey said:

Absolutely. It’s clear what sets Trump off.  Calling him weak is guaranteed to piss him off. Anything that challenges or questions his manhood gets the same reaction.  

Every ad should call him stupid, an idiot, “not smart,” a failure, a puppet, Putin’s bitch, a simpleton, less than a man, impotent, a loser, a scaredy-cat, a chicken, etc.  Keep attacking, and he will attack back.  And he will eventually say stuff that crosses the line and alienates his fringe supporters.  If Don Lemon or Maxine Waters called him stupid, Trump might drop an n-bomb in response. 

I don’t get why some Dems won’t stoop to his level.  Fuck this “when they go low, we fly high” bullshit.  Speak in terms that Trump and his cult members understand.  Any semi-intelligent Dem can run circles around Trump in a battle of wits on Twitter.  But nobody wants to directly engage.

Actually, nobody has really been able to successfully engage.  People like Ted Lieu try to bait Trump but there hasn’t been much success.  He needs to sling mud.

He’ll never alienate his fringe supporters. They’re cultists. This approach is still obviously the correct one to take though, because his responses will alienate potential swing voters and hopefully force some people who consider voting 3rd party to vote Dem.

[Queen Bitch 1692]

He’s calling Conway fat.

[Grade of D as in David 13253]

12 minutes ago, Queen Bitch said:

He’s calling Conway fat.

They've obviously removed all of the mirrors in the White House then

[Jack Straw 2953]

2 hours ago, tantric superman said:

He doesn't have fringe supporters.  He has supporters who still enjoy interacting with normal people now and again and don't want to get banned from civil society.

 Republicans are dishonest.  Plenty of them are going to lie and publicly say they don't support Trump in order to try to avoid being treated as they should be treated.

Edited May 5, 2020 by Jack Straw

[Jive Turkey 12567]

The fun has started in Arizona. 

 

[Jive Turkey 12567]

Fuck yeah. 

 

[4th&Five 41457]

Just now, Jive Turkey said:

The fun has started in Arizona. 

 

did he just have a root canal?  he sounds awful.

[hayden_horn 11360]

2 minutes ago, 4th&Five said:

did he just have a root canal?  he sounds awful.

i think he takes all the drugs. wake up pills for pep and anger, and chillout pills for calming. i suspect most of his slurring is after the chill out pills.

[Mapache 1117]

WTH is this all about? Is Trump behind it ?

 

[Mrs Whiggins 13049]

16 minutes ago, Jive Turkey said:

The fun has started in Arizona.

"I've had doctors say, 'why don't we close it for a couple of years?' ...(airing of grievances about the economy) and then one day they said, "we have to close our country..."

So, sounds like he's done with Fauci (probably keeping Birx around) and the doctor becomes one of his stories, like the nameless faceless burly generals. If he starts name calling Fauci, he better understand that Fauci is not John Bolton and probably has a better tale to tell anyway.

[Message Board User 12389]

 

[Irwin F Fletcher 3550]

1 minute ago, Mrs Whiggins said:

"I've had doctors say, 'why don't we close it for a couple of years?' ...(airing of grievances about the economy) and then one day they said, "we have to close our country..."

So, sounds like he's done with Fauci (probably keeping Birx around) and the doctor becomes one of his stories, like the nameless faceless burly generals. If he starts name calling Fauci, he better understand that Fauci is not John Bolton and probably has a better tale to tell anyway.

I can guarantee that there has not been a single doctor saying we should close the country for a couple of years. I would like the media to ask for more specifics. "Which doctor said this?" Put the him on the spot every time he gets in front of a non-Fox News microphone from now until the election. 

[Mrs Whiggins 13049]

That is not how one (the guy in the hat) should wear a mask. Just saying.

[Mrs Whiggins 13049]

1 minute ago, Irwin F Fletcher said:

I can guarantee that there has not been a single doctor saying we should close the country for a couple of years. I would like the media to ask for more specifics. "Which doctor said this?" Put the him on the spot every time he gets in front of a non-Fox News microphone from now until the election. 

I would like for the media to ask a lot of things, including more specifics but there seem to only be a handful capable of doing so and they keep being called 'NASTY.' At least, for now, they aren't being thrown in a cell or pushed out of a window.

[Walser 1104]

17 minutes ago, Mapache said:

WTH is this all about? Is Trump behind it ?

 

Probably not. My (I finally get to say this!) "source" says they are a third-party of ex-green berets looking to cash in on a bounty. One of the guys is from Austin and a Texas DL is shown in one of the clips. 

[RPM 26209]

20 minutes ago, Mapache said:

WTH is this all about? Is Trump behind it ?

 

No Trump rallies, no security gig. What's a little coup in South America during lean times?

[Upgrayedd 5804]

On 4/29/2020 at 9:26 AM, SubliminalHorn said:

This feels like a million years ago. Having a president that actually gave a fuck, who was eloquent, empathetic, intelligent. Seems like we are stuck in the middle of a nightmare. This country better stand the fuck up in November. 

If we can't do coups in South America, then the virus has won.

[WhatTheBuck 28703]

12 minutes ago, Irwin F Fletcher said:

I can guarantee that there has not been a single doctor saying we should close the country for a couple of years. I would like the media to ask for more specifics. "Which doctor said this?" Put the him on the spot every time he gets in front of a non-Fox News microphone from now until the election. 

I think Dr. Stephen Miller said it. 

[Mrs Whiggins 13049]

14 minutes ago, Irwin F Fletcher said:

I can guarantee that there has not been a single doctor saying we should close the country for a couple of years. I would like the media to ask for more specifics. "Which doctor said this?" Put the him on the spot every time he gets in front of a non-Fox News microphone from now until the election. 

I'm sure you're right, but once Trump gets something locked in his brain it gets difficult to dislodge it and becomes his replay tape.

 

[Francisco 2.0 32313]

26 minutes ago, Message Board User said:

 

Nice symbolic "wall" behind the President, while in Arizona.

[tx 3 putt 76296]

If non whites show up to vote in az, its a blue wave 

[jimmyjazz 45538]

It's a loser's game to try to get Trump to justify something that just came out of his mouth.  He'll just call the person asking the question "nasty" and move on.

You have to hit him in the teeth from the jump.  It's the same thing the great philosopher Mike Tyson said:  "Everybody has a plan until they get punched in the mouth."  Trump can't take the hit -- he reels into incomprehensible gibberish, which exposes his weakness.  If you try to followup on a previous point, he's already recovered and he just calls you a bitch and moves on.  I don't know why the media continues to soft-peddle around this.  It doesn't have to be a partisan thing -- it's a matter of professionalism.  The media has a job to do and by constantly setting up questions long form with expanded uninteresting preambles, they fuck themselves.  Every time.  Cut it out.

[Eskimohorn 5610]

"I've had doctors say, 'why don't we close it for a couple of years?' ...(airing of grievances about the economy) and then one day they said, "we have to close our country..."
So, sounds like he's done with Fauci (probably keeping Birx around) and the doctor becomes one of his stories, like the nameless faceless burly generals. If he starts name calling Fauci, he better understand that Fauci is not John Bolton and probably has a better tale to tell anyway.

Who’s Birx? Oh, you mean Deborah?

[TheStoicPaisano 9904]

I expect him to golf by Sun May 17. McAnany will frame it as “Getting America Back to Exercise”.

[Mrs Whiggins 13049]

If that Leaning Tower of Lard golfs (and I'm not sure he still can) then you know the WH is recycling that old photo they have of him for the Twitter account like they did for his "I Love The Hispanics" tweet today.

[Ghost of LL 15469]

4 hours ago, FondrenRoad said:

It is interesting, but it is more a cause of complications than it is clearly unconstutional.  Any break from the established line of succession without a new Succession Act will render the constitution and the nation as a whole null and void anyway.  There is really no scenario that installs Pompeo over Pelosi or Grassley.

But I do know what you are saying:

1) Are they "Officers?" "Officers" is, at times, used for various purposes within the Constitution itself, and even the Appointments Clause has a loophole which allows the courts to appoint "Officers of the United States".   I don't think there would be a problem in that regard.  The Executive branch, in its entire history, has never challenged, even in internal communications, the established order of succession.  It has always been explicitly and implicitly accepted.  The PPT has even been a designated survivor twice under Trump.

2) The primary Constitutional issue would be concurrent service in the legislative branch while "acting" as President.  The Speaker, or president pro tempore would have to resign from Congress completely even if assuming the duties of the office of the President only temporarily.  I'm not sure this will ever be ripe for challenge.  None of the people in the line of succession are forced to assume the role.  If both the Pres and VP were unconscious for an extended time, but expected to recover, it would likely be declined by the Speaker and the PPT, and fall to the Secy of State.  This isn't really a dealbreaker.

3) The real constitutional issue is that Pres/VP dual incapacity would certainly first be subject to a 25th amendment section 4 declaration which has also never happened.  And it allows for quite a bit of political wiggle room.  Its also possible that Pres/VP dual deaths would first be subject to a 25th amendment section 4 declaration.  Neither may actually be "dead" until the cabinet or another body appointed by Congress declare them dead.  And we really don't have any judicial review regarding this either because JFK was killed in office 4 years before the 25th amendment was ratified.  But JFK's death did play a role in getting the amendment written and ratified, and one of the primary issues was, specifically, that LBJ had health issues and could die soon also, and the Speaker and the PPT were too old to jump right in and may not have the mental capacity for it.  So even then, while drafting a Constitutional amendment, the drafters considered the Speaker and PPT as legitimate successors under the Constitution.  They had already concluded that they were constitutionally within the line of succession, so much so, that they didn't even feel the need to codify it further in the 25th amendment.

So, in theory, let's say Trump and Pence both have heart attacks and die on the same day.  The cabinet holds their 25th amendment meeting and sends a unanimous decision to Pelosi and Grassley 4 days after that decision.  The House also unanimously confirms the Cabinet's decision.  The Senate can't get a 2/3 vote through.  McConnell thinks a dead Trump is executing his duties better than the live one was.  Republic is over even if he is right for once.  However, if one or both are disabled, but alive, the current Senate would never confirm the decision.  We'd have a pseudo government until they died or woke back up.

So instead let's say everyone confirms both deaths.  And after all of this, Pelosi steps down from Speaker and tries to move into the White House.  Pompeo challenges this even though he has in the past acknowledged that he is 4th in the line of succession, and Trump has also acted many times in acceptance of the line of succession.

a) SCOTUS rules for Pelosi so long as she resigns completely from the House under any reasoning, whether it be 200 years of implicit acceptance, or deciding that Congressional officeholders are "Officers", or acknowledging the ability of the court to appoint "Officers of the United States" and appointing her.  Doesn't really matter which way they choose to go.  Republic stands.

b) SCOTUS rules for Pompeo and installs him as President.  Among other things, this overturns executive and legislative history that has been in place since at least 1792.  But it will also be seen as an unconstitutional move toward fascism.  Republic is over.

"Officers" is only ever used in the Constitution to refer to members of the executive branch.  They are people who are appointed by the president with the advice and consent of the Senate (only "inferior Officers" can be appointed in any other manner).  I think it's clear that (1) members of the legislative branch are not "Officers," (2) making members of the legislative branch "Officers" would violate separation of powers, and (3) including non-Officers (including members of the legislative branch) in the line of succession violates separation of powers and the Vacancy Clause.

So yeah--in the event of the death of Trump and Pence, I have no doubt that Pompeo would file a quo warranto suit directly with the Supreme Court.  And I have no doubt that he would win (although, I have to tell you, that Thomas vote would be a tough one with the original Presidential Succession Act going back to 1792).  And the Court would probably be right.

And yeah--it would be very bad for the Republic.

Bottom Line--maybe Congress shouldn't make unconstitutional laws.

[Blotto 23424]

I actually stumbled across that AP article on Silvercorp when it was released last week, and was thinking what a fucked up deal Just a few days later , he's back at it. I always assumed that when you were trying to overthrow a government, it would be a benefit to keep it on the down-low. This fuckstick tweets about it and tags Trump. This simulation will never end. Strange shit. 

This guy is a fucking loon. You can tell he's a perfect Trumptard. His twitter feed is full of stupid shit like this, bragging about what a baddass he is. 

Oh and obligatory...

 

[HenryJames 65884]

 

[HenryJames 65884]

 

[Message Board User 12389]

Not a single empathic bone in his body. To be fair, it's probably best for him to not even try to fake compassion or empathy as well all know better.

[Gil Bang 25894]

You fucking guys don't get "moonface"?  

 

Of course, it's intended as a racist insult.  Conway's mom is from the Philippines.   "Big, moon, asian face".

[Guest Lobo]

He hit below Mendoza (the statistic and the Puerto Rican) in a third-rate athletic high school league against other bone-spur ridden doughy white kids.  

Trump?  Now there's just a 5-tool shooter with upper-division leagues written all over him.  

Even with donation help, you couldn't play Div. III with that unless you were some absolutely sick up-the-middle fielder with incredible speed and good eye to get on base.  

"I didn't hit much for power, or average, or at all.  But I could get walks.  I could get the best walks.  I would negotiate each pitch.  They'd come back and tell me it was a strike, and I'll let them know, or my dad would let them know, that these were not, uh...good pitches.  These were questionable pitches.  And I had a tremendous eye.  For women, for real estate, and for pitches.  I knew what to pass on.  And so I would, and I'd get the umpires to see it my way.  And so I'd get many walks.  Still hurt to head down to first with the bone spurs.  But I played through the pain, much like I do know with Fauci and Pelosi and others with functioning cerebral cortexes.  So you know, I was tremendous.  Probably not with the Yankees given all my other interests in New York, but certainly through uh Double-D ball.  I mean Double-A ball, the league not the breasts.  But I know breasts.  I have great breasts.  What were we talking about?  Oh yeah, me and baseball.  Look, I'm as American as Apple Pie and Baseball.  All three of us filled with crap in the middle and only made better by the Dominican Republic.  So in conclusion, baseball.  You throw the ball, you hit the ball, you catch the ball.  Sometimes you win, sometimes you lose, and sometimes you die in office.  Thank you."  

[Message Board User 12389]