Jump to content

Donald Trump 2020

Francisco 2.0

By Francisco 2.0
in Cloak Room

 Share

Recommended Posts

Horn Dog

Horn Dog 10158

Posted
Posted
6 hours ago, shnsajax said:

This needs to happen

 

And this will do what exactly??

 

4 hours ago, washparkhorn said:

Something is off in the description - is the leak from a SC Justice Clerk or someone else at the Supreme Court?  Has SC Clerk quality fallen that low? If it's a clerk, his or her days as a lawyer are over.  

 

EA25F6F4-1385-485A-A5BC-3749A6EA7E7A.gif

Link to comment
Share on other sites
  • Replies 43.7k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

  • Mrs Whiggins

    1391

  • Biff Tannen

    1374

  • 4th&Five

    1222

  • WhatTheBuck

    910

Popular Days

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Popular Posts

Thatguy
Thatguy

Let me be candid and honest here my man. I cannot be sympathetic to your comments because this is how adult life has always been. From the moment I stepped out of my home and headed off to college I h

Francisco 2.0
Francisco 2.0
henrygandorf
henrygandorf

it won't matter if his taxes ever come out.  it won't matter if his taxes don't ever come out.  you wanna know why?  because we already know what's in them. since early 2017 when people starting

Posted Images

RPM

RPM 26655

Posted
Posted
16 minutes ago, 'stache said:

This is the end of my block. I’m about two miles from the arena. This is normal when your city is “honored” with a presidential visit, right?

 

6DAB48E6-B1FC-4F97-A8F7-599E617C452B.jpeg

Shit, I'd be concerned living that close. I'd damn sure test the gun safe code a couple of times.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
TwiceHorn

TwiceHorn 32087

Posted
Posted (edited)
14 minutes ago, Degenerate Gardner said:

Do tell. How so?

I think it clearly implies that his attempted firing was in response/retaliation to an "undesireable" investigation.  And that Berman, therefore, is being independent and insubordinate.

Now, we probably all knew that was why, but Berman is basically confirming it.  To some extent, Berman can be expected to "fall in line" with Trump's wishes, so if this were other than retaliatory, one could expect silence on that particular issue.

 

Edited by TwiceHorn
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Guest Lobo

Guest Lobo

Posted
Posted
39 minutes ago, 'stache said:

This is the end of my block. I’m about two miles from the arena. This is normal when your city is “honored” with a presidential visit, right?

 

6DAB48E6-B1FC-4F97-A8F7-599E617C452B.jpeg

Hey cheer up, at least you live by the nice QuikTrip.  ;) 

Seriously though, is that consistent with the entire two-mile radius from the arena or was that just an outlier deal?  Does it go farther out beyond your neighborhood?  

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Francisco 2.0

Francisco 2.0 32605

Posted
  • Author
Posted

https://www.thedailybeast.com/ahead-of-tulsa-rally-trumpworld-fears-its-nightmare-scenario-is-coming-true?ref=home?ref=home

 

Quote

As Donald Trump returns to the campaign trail this Saturday night in Tulsa, Oklahoma, some of his top political advisers are growing increasingly concerned that the president won’t be able to dig himself out of the hole he’s made for himself.

Over the past two weeks, several of the president’s campaign lieutenants as well as individuals in his administration have reacted with mounting alarm as multiple polls have shown Trump dipping into the 30s against former Vice President Joe Biden, the presumptive 2020 Democratic presidential nominee. In weeks past, various aides in the White House and on the Trump re-election effort had privately expressed cold comfort in the fact that with everything going on—a bungled response to a deadly pandemic, a massively crippled U.S. economy, protests across the nation, and a number of Trump’s own former top officials coming out against him—it was practically a miracle that the president’s poll numbers hadn’t sunk even lower.

 

Quote

Early this month, one senior White House official told The Daily Beast that their “nightmare scenario” would be for the president to slip beneath 40 percent support in a sustained string of public and private surveys—thus signaling that a previously unshakable base was starting to grow a bit disillusioned. Trump’s consistent—though perhaps unenviable—standing in the low 40s had for years remained an illustration of his enduring base and iron Republican support. 

“Until then, I’m not a doomsayer,” this official said, referring to the nerve-racking 30s in national, and some state, polling.

 

 

Quote

In the time since that comment, multiple polls have shown Trump sliding into the 30s. Asked this week about the change, the same White House official simply responded, “This is not where any of us wanted to be at this point [in the election], but there is still time… to make up the difference.”

Some advisers lay the blame for recent poll numbers squarely at the weeks-long news coverage of the mass protests against institutional racism and police brutality following the killing of George Floyd, and how Trump has responded to it. “When race is in the news cycle and dominating the conversation, President Trump’s numbers always go down,” said a source close to the White House. “That’s just a fact.”

 

Spoiler

The source added that they hoped coverage of former National Security Adviser John Bolton’s tell-all book about Trump would actually lead to a poll bump for the president, if for no other reason than it would mean less talk of racism, COVID, and social unrest.

But Trump has had a knack for getting in the way of even the most well-crafted media plans, to say nothing of the ones his advisers hope play out. Even the announcement of the Tulsa rally was fraught with hiccups and missteps. His team had previously scheduled it for Friday, which meant it would have fallen on Juneteenth in a city that was the site of one of the country’s most savage massacres of Black people. Following a backlash, the president announced the date switch to Saturday. He subsequently claimed that he had made Juneteenth—which has long commemorated the end of slavery in the United States—“very famous” because “nobody had ever heard of it.” His White House press secretary, Kayleigh McEnany, defended those remarks on Friday by noting a spike in Google searches.

Trump has also attempted to portray the economic damage caused by the pandemic as fleeting. But Republican operatives have expressed concern that his talk of a rocket ship recovery may effectively portray him as out of touch to voters who still feel left behind. And even his own team is uncertain about whether it’s an effective campaign play. Two of the four aforementioned officials told The Daily Beast that they were unnerved by the fact that they’d seen no polling evidence, in internal data or in multiple different public polls, that the news of higher retail sales and the addition of 2.5 million jobs in May had given the president the bump they had wanted and expected.

“If the next [unemployment] reports get better and better, hopefully you’ll see a change then and noticeable impact,” one of these officials said, adding that right now far too many people are out of work and “hurting.”

Hoping to give himself an additional boost on the economic front, Trump has continuously expressed a desire for additional, big-ticket federal stimulus—which some Republican officials believe would improve his chances. Top Democrats on the Hill, however, say they have not yet had any formal discussions with Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin about such a package (House Democrats have passed one of their own) and there is wide antipathy among aides about working with the White House unless it provides more insight into how it is spending the hundreds of billions of dollars that was already appropriated.

“It is a top priority,” a senior House Democratic aide said of getting answers on where the Treasury Department’s funds have gone. 

Senate Republicans, meanwhile, have put off talk of another bill entirely. And even among Trump’s cadre of advisers, there is not much appetite for another stimulus bill.

“The economic damage done by the coronavirus is a lot less than what was predicted months ago… It’s awful, but it’s much better in states like California, Texas, and Florida than what experts thought it would be,” said Art Laffer, the notoriously conservative economist who informally advises Trump. “People are even hedging their bets on if there’s going to be a second wave of the virus… The stock market is telling us this ain’t going to be a big deal. It’s nothing compared to Y2K or 2008… Those were really big downs in the market, and this is nothing compared to that. It started off really big, with a big drop… but then it came right back. That’s not the way it went in 2008 and 2009.”

Absent a major economic measure or turnaround, Trump’s options for reversing his polling slide are slimmer. In an interview with Politico that was published on Friday, the president did express a degree of worry about his chances against Biden. But he couched his concern in baseless theories about the potential for rampant voter fraud in mail-in ballots. “My biggest risk is that we don’t win lawsuits [regarding mail-in voting],” the president said. “We have many lawsuits going all over. And if we don’t win those lawsuits, I think—I think it puts the election at risk.”

Increasingly, Trump seems content to try and re-run the playbook he used in 2016 in hopes that it works again. Elsewhere in that Politico interview, he warned other Republican candidates—including those running to help preserve the party’s Senate majority—not to tiptoe away from him, no matter what his poll numbers look like. And in recent days his team has made another aggressive effort to troll Biden (much as they did Hillary Clinton) as physically and mentally unwell. The president has brought back top aides from his last presidential run and is turning to one of his most prominent surrogates from that race to help, as well. 

On Thursday, Politico reported that the Trump campaign had enlisted former New York City mayor Rudy Giuliani—who as Trump’s personal lawyer launched a dirt-digging expedition into the Bidens that led directly to the president’s impeachment—to “spearhead a campaign to press for more debates this fall, starting earlier than usual and to have a say in choosing the moderators,” so that Trump can have more opportunities to publicly humiliate Biden, someone who the president seems convinced will crack under a one-on-one grilling.

Asked on Thursday if he now has an official title on Trump 2020, Giuliani told The Daily Beast, “No sir I am just helping out.”

 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Francisco 2.0

Francisco 2.0 32605

Posted
  • Author
Posted

https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2020/06/why-trump-keeps-losing-at-the-supreme-court/613315/?utm_term=2020-06-20T10%3A31%3A00&utm_campaign=the-atlantic&utm_medium=social&utm_source=twitter&utm_content=edit-promo

 

Quote

Donald Trump has been having a rough go of it in the nation’s highest court. A year ago, he lost the biggest case of last year’s Supreme Court term—a challenge to his addition of a citizenship question to the census. This week, Trump lost what is so far the biggest case of this Court term—a challenge to his termination of the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals program, which allows Dreamers to remain, study, and work in America on renewable permits. Both rulings found that the president had violated a law called the Administrative Procedure Act.

 

Quote

This sounds technical, and Trump’s defenders are trying to paint it that way. It isn’t. Trump keeps losing not because of something obscure, but because of something fundamental: his abuse of the executive branch. Much of his administration’s approach to governance rests on attempting executive actions that lack any meaningful justification rooted in expertise, or even rational thought.

 

Spoiler

Trump lost the citizenship-question case last year in an opinion written by Chief Justice John Roberts. The secretary of commerce, who oversees the census, had claimed, preposterously, that the question was added to enforce the Voting Rights Act (despite the fact that the Trump administration, unlike its predecessors, had never enforced the Voting Rights Act). In the Supreme Court, it was ultimately revealed that this chronology was backwards, and that the Justice Department had never asked for such help until the commerce secretary pressured it into making such a request. Moreover, Commerce Department experts had warned that adding the citizenship question wouldn’t help to enforce the Voting Rights Act, and would actually harm the accuracy of the census results. The chief justice concluded: “Altogether, the evidence tells a story that does not match the explanation the [Commerce] Secretary gave for his decision.” Allowing that pretext to stand, the chief justice explained, would defeat a fundamental legal principle, namely that courts should peer past phony reasons and demand the real impetus for agency action: “Accepting contrived reasons would defeat the purpose of the enterprise.”

Taken out of the rarified, genteel world of the Supreme Court, that language translates roughly to “Pants on fire.” The Court was saying that the Trump administration had cooked the books. It pretended that the Justice Department had wanted help, and it claimed to have consulted Commerce Department experts when in fact it had disregarded their expertise. For the Supreme Court to allow the citizenship question would be to allow itself to be duped—and it refused. In a superficial sense, the ruling was technical. But at its core, the decision was a full-throated rejection of the Trump administration’s tendency to make policy decisions at odds with expert analysis, or really any analysis at all.

When Trump lost the DACA case this past week, Chief Justice Roberts again wrote the Court’s opinion, now rejecting Trump’s attempt to terminate the DACA program’s forbearance of enforcing certain immigration laws against many who arrived in the U.S. as children. This time, it was the Department of Homeland Security that relied on the Justice Department to attempt to justify a major policy change. The attorney general had provided a memo arguing that the provision of certain benefits to DACA recipients was unlawful, and Homeland Security used that memo as its sole reason for terminating the whole DACA program. But, as Roberts explained, that was a complete non sequitur: It “treated the Attorney General’s conclusion regarding the illegality of benefits as sufficient to rescind both benefits and forbearance, without explanation.”

Again, the translation is that the Trump administration wasn’t on the level. It had used a legal conclusion about one aspect of DACA to jettison not just that part of the program, but a different one too. It just didn’t make sense. So although the Court again technically ruled narrowly that the process yielding DACA’s termination was inadequate, the Court reaffirmed a more fundamental principle: The executive branch must have legitimate and nonarbitrary reasons for its actions.

Trump’s abuse of the executive branch is one of the most damaging aspects of his presidency, because it rejects a reasoned approach to making government policy. Trump has made clear—most notably during the impeachment process—that he disdains the civil servants who bring deep expertise and valuable experience to important policy questions. So it’s not surprising he blew off their advice that adding a citizenship question to the census would not help in any meaningful way and would harm the core enterprise of the census itself. Trump doesn’t care what they have to say, and his Cabinet members—like the commerce secretary—seem not to care, either. Such disregard is not merely some technical violation—it’s a body blow in Trump’s assault on civil servants.

This is part of Trump’s bigger disregard for law and process. Trump has made clear time and again that he doesn’t really care what the law says, especially about immigration. That’s why he urged shooting rock-throwing immigrants and retaliating against immigrant-friendly sanctuary cities by sending detained immigrants to such cities, and why he fired his own Homeland Security general counsel, who had pushed back on various questionable Trump initiatives. Trump doesn’t see law as a constraint, but something to be manipulated—and that’s clearly a message his Cabinet seems to have received. Consequently, they play fast and loose with the law. The Court, in this decision and last year’s, is essentially saying that the law still matters.

Ultimately, that’s precisely what’s at stake as long as Trump is president. If all that matters is a president’s policy preferences, then law—including judicial review—is basically a facade: Dress it up enough, and it’ll pass muster. But if law matters—if building a record and considering facts and providing honest reasons matter—then Trump is sure to keep losing.

 

 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Guest Lobo

Guest Lobo

Posted
Posted (edited)
9 minutes ago, tx 3 putt said:

I guess all the non white trump supporters are showing up later ?

Don't people of Color usually run late?  I dunno, it's what Stephen Miller told me.  $50 says they called J.C. Watts to come down and give some remarks but he was conveniently out of town on Black News Channel business.  

Pos rep up top who said this looks like the cabinet meeting in Idiocracy.  #broughtoyoubycarlsjr

Edited by Lobo
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Francisco 2.0

Francisco 2.0 32605

Posted
  • Author
Posted (edited)
6 minutes ago, BehoId, The Underminer! said:

Does anyone have the whole order?

https://pacer-documents.s3.amazonaws.com/36/219024/04517891261.pdf

 

Here's the money shot:

Quote

IV . CONCLUSION

Defendant Bolton has gambled with the national security of the United States. He has exposed his country to harm and himself to civil (and potentially criminal) liability. But these facts do not control the motion before the Court. The government has failed to establish that an injunction will prevent irreparable harm. Its motion is accordingly DENIED.

It is SO ORDERED.

 

Edited by Francisco 2.0
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
TwiceHorn

TwiceHorn 32087

Posted
Posted (edited)
19 minutes ago, BehoId, The Underminer! said:

Does anyone have the whole order?

Contained in this article. https://thehill.com/regulation/court-battles/503695-judge-denies-request-to-block-bolton-book

Very notable at pp. 2-3, where Lamberth (a twicehorn himself) finds that Bolton had concluded the review process with the professionals at the NSC, but was hung up with the White House.

He also found a likelihood that the book contains classified information.

But the ultimate decision point is that the cat was out of the bag.

 

Edited by TwiceHorn
Link to comment
Share on other sites
burntorangebongos

burntorangebongos 10826

Posted
Posted
16 minutes ago, BehoId, The Underminer! said:

That order actually makes me want to read the book, which was inconceivable yesterday. 

Go ahead, the very best part is that this bites Bolten in the ass too:

Per Judge Lamberth, the government *can’t* stop release of Bolton’s book (no kidding), but it probably *will* be able to stop him from making any money off of it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
'stache

'stache 22145

Posted
Posted
1 hour ago, Lobo said:

Hey cheer up, at least you live by the nice QuikTrip.  ;) 

Seriously though, is that consistent with the entire two-mile radius from the arena or was that just an outlier deal?  Does it go farther out beyond your neighborhood?  

I read that there’s one 2 miles further out that also boarded. Shits serious. Also, I tried to avoid it but I caught my first maga family. No door muddy Jeep with a fat white trash couple inside and a little girl probably 5-6 years old not buckled just walking around in the back. And a big ol Trump flag waving in back. No fucking joke. That poor kid doesn’t have a chance.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Guest Lobo

Guest Lobo

Posted
Posted

She looks good for her age, but she doesn't really do it for me.

I'l say this for the rally crowd, let's all take some solace in that at least there aren't that any kids there.  Most Trumpers have teenage/grown children who are hopefully already formulating their own opinions on political and social issues.  Because Trump does so poorly with people under 35, there's not a lot of Trumpers in their prime child-rearing years.  So thankfully that girl in the back of that Jeep is an outlier and not the norm for our nation. 

But yeah, if I'm honest...15-20 years from now if I'm interviewing a recent college graduate from the Deep South or Great Plains, I'm doing the math and realizing that were truly Trump babies.  They were born and raised during his ascension, they were spoon-fed his shit literally from the days they were spoon-fed.  And then they grew up in the post-Trump America where 30mm of their neighbors just couldn't let the movement die so they became hardened against a country their parents and grandparents were once so very proud of.  I don't hire on politics, truthfully most of ours are Republicans because we hire highly educated/affluent pools in Texas in two right-leaning business sectors, but I'm lying if I say that this won't at least cross my mind.  Being born and raised into such an archaic and twisted environment.  Everybody is different but the children of the 30mm diehard Trumpers who will never let this movement die, they're gonna have a different worldview, or lack of one.  Anywhoddles...

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
 Share
Go to topic listing


Football ... Basketball ... Baseball ... Other Sports ... Futbol ... 🤫995🤫 ... Gambling ... Movies & TV ... Music ... Hobbies ... Lulz ... Food & Travel ... Daily Texan ... Business and Markets ... Cloak Room ... Help ... For Sale ... Board Discussion ... Subscribe!... Donate!... Advertise... COOKIE MONSTER!

×
×
  • Create New...