Jump to content

Donald Trump 2018

TheFlyingBoat

By TheFlyingBoat
in Cloak Room

 Share

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 44.5k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

  • Hugo Stiglitz

    3593

  • retread

    1324

  • Brisketexan

    1195

  • jimmyjazz

    1186

Popular Days

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Popular Posts

M12BH
M12BH

SInce y'all seem to be my clearinghouse for all things political, let me tell a story.  A couple of them, actually.  Three, if you want to be specific. When I was 14 I went with a family frien

ConferenceRoom
ConferenceRoom
brown water
brown water

Slocum’s Razor

texas08

texas08 1,599

Posted
Posted

How awesome would it be if the Department of Justice amended the memos that were written in regards to “a sitting president cannot be indicted”.

“A president can be indicted” memo would be a nice fuck you from Elf Sessions...and the end of the world. Lolz.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Hugo Stiglitz

Hugo Stiglitz 23,367

Posted
Posted
5 minutes ago, texas08 said:

How awesome would it be if the Department of Justice amended the memos that were written in regards to “a sitting president cannot be indicted”.

“A president can be indicted” memo would be a nice fuck you from Elf Sessions...and the end of the world. Lolz.

Abrahamson was on Twitter yesterday say Mueller should just indict Trump and let the courts sort it out.  There’s really nothing stopping Mueller from going down that road other than an unwritten norm.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
SmokeyTheBear

SmokeyTheBear 5,562

Posted
Posted
2 minutes ago, Hugo Stiglitz said:

Abrahamson was on Twitter yesterday say Mueller should just indict Trump and let the courts sort it out.  There’s really nothing stopping Mueller from going down that road other than an unwritten norm.

But the issue would be that it would go to the Supreme Court and currently, that might not be a win for Mueller. And even as a lefty Trump hater, I think we need to rely on Congress to impeach before allowing indictments. I feel this tool could be used as a weapon in a way we wouldn't want post-trump. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
MaybeACoordinator

MaybeACoordinator 8,349

Posted
Posted
52 minutes ago, Mdhorn said:

Once everything comes down and Trump is removed, impeached, or his brand becomes radioactive, a Republican led Congress when questioned why they never did anything will respond that they did, by allowing the investigation to continue.  It's cowardly but it's the only response they will have, despite having investigative committees in both houses.  They are caught between their rabid cultivated base and donors.  Ethics?  Those went out the window a long time ago and we're reminded every time they mention how long and difficult it is to continuously campaign and raise money.  Great, find another job but don't take shortcuts and line your wallets.  

Which is scary because I imagine the donors will find a way to neuter the voters before they give up their accustomed role of having them dance to their tune. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Hugo Stiglitz

Hugo Stiglitz 23,367

Posted
Posted
3 minutes ago, SmokeyTheBear said:

But the issue would be that it would go to the Supreme Court and currently, that might not be a win for Mueller. And even as a lefty Trump hater, I think we need to rely on Congress to impeach before allowing indictments. I feel this tool could be used as a weapon in a way we wouldn't want post-trump. 

If there was ever a “break glass in case of emergency” moment, this is it.

The political consequences of Mueller indicting Trump would be worth it.  The whole rationale behind not indicting a sitting president is it would distract the president from his duties to the country.

Well, that reasoning rings hollow when the president spends most of his time focused on the investigation into himself.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
jimmyjazz

jimmyjazz 45,925

Posted
Posted
31 minutes ago, texas08 said:

How awesome would it be if the Department of Justice amended the memos that were written in regards to “a sitting president cannot be indicted”.

The irony here is that it's a typo -- the original intent was "a shitting President cannot be indicted".

So, it turns out that's pretty much the same thing for Trump, but maybe the next guy?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Brisketexan

Brisketexan 105,127

Posted
Posted
10 hours ago, TornACL said:

Who, other than criminals, has "a lot of friends" who have flipped to the feds? 

Fucking THIS.  Seriously.  For fuck's sake, we have a guy with a new york accent bitching about people who flip.

My whole life, we called that guy a fucking criminal, and popped him with a RICO prosecution.  Now, he gets to fly on Air Force One.  What the everloving fuck?

3 hours ago, HenryJames said:

Is is possible to just book one of Diamond and Silk?

Posted like a man who don't know shit about accessorizing.

1 hour ago, Hugo Stiglitz said:

It got killed because Trump (cough Putin) didn’t want to sign it.

Just another McConnell treachery.

I presume that it's clear to everyone paying any sort of attention that our country is currently run by a criminal syndicate (the GOP) that is in league with a foreign power.  Every move they make is calculated to preserve power in the syndicate, at the expense of the country.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
ChiTownDoc

ChiTownDoc 21,154

Posted
Posted
6 minutes ago, jimmyjazz said:

You know, if you get your ass kicked in a debate with Chris Cuomo, you should really consider some serious introspection.  

I feel like Cuomo represents us Bro's out there very well.  Keep your fucking mouth shut.  Just wait til he needs to bench press in the middle of a heated interview.  Who's gonna be laughing then?  Yeah, exactly.  

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Mdhorn

Mdhorn 5,949

Posted
Posted
1 hour ago, MaybeACoordinator said:

Which is scary because I imagine the donors will find a way to neuter the voters before they give up their accustomed role of having them dance to their tune. 

They already have by trying to make their tax cuts permanent amidst other permanent non-regulatory bs. Hey we'll take your ss and medicare.  Wut?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
SuingToGetAMessageBoard?

SuingToGetAMessageBoard? 3,861

Posted
Posted
1 minute ago, Jive Turkey said:

Can’t wait for the Trump tweets about how John is weak and a quitter.

There’s one Kavanaugh vote that is gone.  Collins and Murkowski and Flake could really fuck things up.  But they won’t.

AZ gov will appoint a stand in virtually immediately.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Eskimohorn

Eskimohorn 5,635

Posted
Posted

People keep saying that a President couldn’t be tried for a crime, but I think that is false. VP Aaron Burr had a warrant out for his arrest in both New York and New Jersey.

A President has no clear constitutional immunity from criminal prosecution. I think the framer’s intent was that a President was not above the law and was just a citizen who would be availed of their rights, same as anyone else. To remove them from power, they’d need the votes.

The scenarios of a coup by abuse of the criminal justice system could be done regardless of a justice department memo.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Ghost of LL

Ghost of LL 15,531

Posted
Posted
1 hour ago, Hugo Stiglitz said:

 

We have a protocol for that eventuality in my house.  Mrs.LL will promptly run (not walk) to Twin Liquors and buy every bottle of champagne in the store.  By the time it's iced down, I'll be home--at which point we're opening the house to the neighborhood. 

  • Like 8
Link to comment
Share on other sites
conVINCEd

conVINCEd 21,469

Posted
Posted
1 minute ago, Ghost of LL said:

We have a protocol for that eventuality in my house.  Mrs.LL will promptly run (not walk) to Twin Liquors and buy every bottle of champagne in the store.  By the time it's iced down, I'll be home--at which point we're opening the house to the neighborhood. 

That will be a Pappy day.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Aqua Buddha

Aqua Buddha 14,596

Posted
Posted
18 minutes ago, Ghost of LL said:

We have a protocol for that eventuality in my house.  Mrs.LL will promptly run (not walk) to Twin Liquors and buy every bottle of champagne in the store.  By the time it's iced down, I'll be home--at which point we're opening the house to the neighborhood. 

Like this?

 

Last New Year's Eve Mr Panetta struck a wager with his friend of 40 years Ted Balestreri at a gathering in his home town of Monterey, California. 

During the party in the cellar of Mr Balestreri's eatery the host showed two dozen guests his oldest bottle of wine, a Chateau Lafite Rothschild from 1870. 

He refused to open it but said: "If Leon catches Osama bin Laden, we'll open that bottle." 

Mr Panetta, who was at the time head of the CIA, reportedly replied: "You're on." 

Four months later, when the al-Qaeda leader was shot dead by US Navy Seals in Abbottabad, Pakistan, Mr Panetta immediately called in the bet.

Shortly before President Barack Obama announced bin Laden's capture to the world Mr Panetta telephoned his wife Sylvia. 

Mrs Panetta told the Monterey County Herald: "Leon called me about 7:15 on a Sunday evening and told me to turn on CNN because the president was going to make an announcement, and by the way, to call Ted and tell him to get ready to open that bottle of wine."

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/al-qaeda/8856224/Leon-Panetta-to-toast-Osama-bin-Ladens-death-with-10000-bottle-of-wine.html

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Native Horn

Native Horn 3,504

Posted
Posted
28 minutes ago, Ghost of LL said:

We have a protocol for that eventuality in my house.  Mrs.LL will promptly run (not walk) to Twin Liquors and buy every bottle of champagne in the store.  By the time it's iced down, I'll be home--at which point we're opening the house to the neighborhood. 

I'll bring a sixer of Natty Lite.  I can share it if need be.  Thanks!

Link to comment
Share on other sites
lemonlime

lemonlime 5,503

Posted
Posted
2 minutes ago, Hiphopopotamos said:

'Warmest regards and respect' to a murderous dictator openly defying the 'agreement' Trump negotiated.  This fucking guy...

He's not defying the agreement.   He is complying entirely with this agreement which has completely denuclearized the entire Korean Peninsula. 

 Trump made the best deal ever.  The perfect deal.  No one in history has ever  made such a good deal.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Chad Fuck

Chad Fuck 17,677

Posted
Posted
4 minutes ago, MidTexHorn said:

Had dinner with some Chinese national clients last night. Asked them about how Trump is viewed in China. Their response: “everyone just thinks he’s a crazy person.”

So not much different from here.  Can't argue with that.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Jive Turkey

Jive Turkey 12,596

Posted
Posted
33 minutes ago, Aqua Buddha said:

Like this?

 

Last New Year's Eve Mr Panetta struck a wager with his friend of 40 years Ted Balestreri at a gathering in his home town of Monterey, California. 

During the party in the cellar of Mr Balestreri's eatery the host showed two dozen guests his oldest bottle of wine, a Chateau Lafite Rothschild from 1870. 

He refused to open it but said: "If Leon catches Osama bin Laden, we'll open that bottle." 

Mr Panetta, who was at the time head of the CIA, reportedly replied: "You're on." 

Four months later, when the al-Qaeda leader was shot dead by US Navy Seals in Abbottabad, Pakistan, Mr Panetta immediately called in the bet.

Shortly before President Barack Obama announced bin Laden's capture to the world Mr Panetta telephoned his wife Sylvia. 

Mrs Panetta told the Monterey County Herald: "Leon called me about 7:15 on a Sunday evening and told me to turn on CNN because the president was going to make an announcement, and by the way, to call Ted and tell him to get ready to open that bottle of wine."

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/al-qaeda/8856224/Leon-Panetta-to-toast-Osama-bin-Ladens-death-with-10000-bottle-of-wine.html

I’ve got some OG Four Loko in the fridge.  They will be consumed on the appropriate day.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
pyrohornIII

pyrohornIII 4,814

Posted
Posted

This is a good read into what I feel Trump has been hitting on to get his base so strongly supportive.  It's a bit of psychology behind what is fueling the white supremacist movement that is coming out of the woodwork now.  Trump not only has unleashed it, but is fanning the flames. 

Quote

...But ordinary people’s well-being depends mainly on their immediate surroundings. If you are an autoworker who loses your job in Massena, N.Y., when G.M. closes its local plant (moving some jobs to Mexico) and who spends years out of work and who watches as schools shut down and shops go dark and young people flee — for you, the fact that America’s big coastal cities are doing great, or that more than half a billion Chinese have been lifted out of extreme poverty, merely rubs salt in your wounds.

 
Second, all happiness is relative. Although moral philosophers may wish Homo sapiens were wired more rationally, we humans are walking, talking status meters, constantly judging our worth and social standing by comparing ourselves with others today and with our own prior selves.

According to the Brookings Institution economist Carol Graham, poor whites are far more unhappy and pessimistic than poor blacks, even though, in absolute terms, they are better off. That would not make sense if absolute standing determined subjective well-being. It does make sense, however, when we look at relative standing. Less-educated whites (especially men) have seen their relative standing decline sharply, both compared with their parents and with rising nonwhites. Blacks, by contrast, have seen themselves doing better than expected and closing the economic and social gap.

Absolute standing is not irrelevant, and people will tolerate and sometimes even embrace inequality if they believe the system is fair and lets them get ahead. Still, the witticism (frequently attributed to Gore Vidal) that “it is not enough for me to succeed; others must fail” is uncomfortably accurate. In a striking experiment, certain households in Kenyan villages were randomly chosen to receive large financial windfalls. The lucky beneficiaries were pleased, of course, but their increased happiness was much more than offset by the increased unhappiness of other households, which lost nothing in absolute terms but suddenly saw themselves falling behind. Pondering the accumulated evidence, the British happiness economist Richard Layard concluded, “These studies provide clear evidence that a rise in other people’s income hurts your happiness.”...

https://www.nytimes.com/2018/08/21/opinion/happiness-inequality-prosperity-.html

What it doesn't point out very well is how much our society pushes this competition, to get people to buy more things in order to look better than someone else. 

  • Like 3
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...