U.S. Politics megathread (merged)

[Sharpie]

Mueller has made his first public statement, very interesting, sort of puts all the Trumpites and Trump their gases in a peep. No charges were laid not because of lack of evidence but because as a DOJ employee, he was bound by that Deparments rules that you cannot indict a sitting President.

[Francis Albert]

3 hours ago, Maple Leaf said:

Andrew Scheer is the leader of the Conservative Party in Canada.  He has been compared, by many, to Donald Trump and white nationalists at Scheer's political rallies have been extremely prominent. Here's what he said to them at his rally yesterday:

 

“I believe that we are all children of God. And therefore there can be no inferiority amongst human beings. And that equal and infinite value exists in each and every one of us,” he said. “I find the notion that one’s race, religion, gender or sexual orientation would make anyone in any way superior or inferior to anyone else absolutely repugnant.

“And if there’s anyone who disagrees with that, there’s the door. You are not welcome here.”

 

What are the chances of Trump saying something similar?

I don't find it difficult to imagine Trump saying something similar before the right audience if scripted for him. Of course no-one least of all his core support would believe he meant it. I don't know enough about Scheer or Canadian politics to know whether he is any more credible. 

[Francis Albert]

18 minutes ago, bobsharp said:

Mueller has made his first public statement, very interesting, sort of puts all the Trumpites and Trump their gases in a peep. No charges were laid not because of lack of evidence but because as a DOJ employee, he was bound by that Deparments rules that you cannot indict a sitting President.

I read something similar a  few weeks ago, in the NY Review of Books. Can't remember if it was a direct quote by Mueller but it was a report of Mueller's view/excuse. And even so I suppose in as big a case as this he could always have resigned and recommended impeachment on the basis of his view of the evidence (please don't say that makes me a Trumpite).

Edited May 29, 2019 by Francis Albert

[Watt-Zeefuik]

15 hours ago, Stephen Muddie said:

I don't like all of his policies and I don't like the way he goes about things at times but I respect his bullishness. He's Donald Trump, he's always forged his own path... I'm hopin to catch up with Ann Coulter soon-ish to discuss how he has "betrayed" people like her who believed in his MAGA promise, which without the racist connotations I believed in too.

But what I DO like is that he does keep a lot of promises and is working on the others, even despite Israeli influence.

As a man, I like him. He shoots from the hip.

Precisely which promises has he kept?

[Maple Leaf]

8 minutes ago, Francis Albert said:

I read something similar a  few weeks ago, in the NY Review of Books. Can't remember if it was a direct quote by Mueller but it was a report of Mueller's view/excuse. And even so I suppose in as big a case as this he could always have resigned and recommended impeachment on the basis of his view of the evidence (please don't say that makes me a Trumpite).

 

https://www.thestar.com/news/world/us/2019/05/29/mueller-to-make-1st-public-statement-on-russia-probe.html

 

Mueller believed that he was constitutionally barred from charging Trump.  What you have suggested is a different approach he could have taken, and I think that would have been better than what he actually did.  What would have been even better, imo, is to have treated Trump as an ordinary citizen, then let the Supreme Court sort it out. They're the Constitutional experts.

[Maple Leaf]

24 minutes ago, Ugly American said:

Precisely which promises has he kept?

 

According to one site I've visited, Trump made about 100 election campaign promises.  He's kept 17 of them.  

 

The others are broken, stalled, in the works, or a compromise has been reached.

 

The "biggies" were repeal Obamacare, have Mexico pay for a border wall, suspend immigration from Muslim countries, provide better healthcare for everyone at lower prices, withdraw from NAFTA, withdraw from the Iran deal.

 

I've highlighted the one he's kept.

[Cade]

So the end of Mueller's probe is "not proven"

 

He's laid it squarely in the hands of Congress and other law enforcement agencies to gather more evidence.

[Sharpie]

Mueller seems to be saying in my humble oinion that he did not find enough to charge Trump criminally, but that there were enough components of criminal actions to do something other than the Court system, which DOJ policy would not allow him to do anyway. He does again in my opinion say that there is enough within his report to justify action elsewhere, and without actually saying so he is no doubt referring to Congress and Impeachment. He is basically saying to Pelosi et al, heres the ball, gather it and run with it and ac hieve a goal. He should have added and get the other falsehood person Trumps new defence attorney Barr and make it a two accused action.

[JackLadd]

Mueller basically said Trump is a criminal and indicated Barr outright lied under oath. I don't see any alternative to impeachment hearings. 

[Kalamazoo Jambo]

Words fail me...

 

 

[Watt-Zeefuik]

4 hours ago, bobsharp said:

Mueller seems to be saying in my humble oinion that he did not find enough to charge Trump criminally, but that there were enough components of criminal actions to do something other than the Court system, which DOJ policy would not allow him to do anyway. He does again in my opinion say that there is enough within his report to justify action elsewhere, and without actually saying so he is no doubt referring to Congress and Impeachment. He is basically saying to Pelosi et al, heres the ball, gather it and run with it and ac hieve a goal. He should have added and get the other falsehood person Trumps new defence attorney Barr and make it a two accused action.

 

Mueller has been somewhat inscrutable so there are a lot of valid interpretations at this point but I think the bit in bold is provably not quite correct. Mueller went to some length in the report and even more in his press conference to say that charging Trump with a federal crime was "not an option" and that he deemed such a charge to be "unconstitutional" by a DOJ employee.

 

Some constitutional scholars disagree on this but this has been longstanding DOJ policy, and Mueller very clearly was adhering to it.

 

I just found the text of his comments, and here's the key bit: https://www.vox.com/2019/5/29/18644237/robert-mueller-remarks-transcript

 

Quote

It explains that under long-standing Department policy, a President cannot be charged with a federal crime while he is in office. That is unconstitutional. Even if the charge is kept under seal and hidden from public view, that too is prohibited. The special counsel’s office is part of the Department of Justice and by regulation it was bound by that Department policy. Charging the president with a crime was, therefore, not an option we could consider.

 

So what does he think should be done?

 

Quote

 First, the opinion explicitly permits the investigation of a sitting President because it is important to preserve evidence while memories are fresh and documents available. Among other things, that evidence could be used if there were co-conspirators who could be charged now. And second, the opinion says that the Constitution requires a process other than the criminal justice system to formally accuse a sitting President of wrong doing.

 

There's one word for what he's talking about here: impeachment.

[ri Alban]

US recession imminent?

[Bindy Badgy]

5 hours ago, JackLadd said:

Mueller basically said Trump is a criminal and indicated Barr outright lied under oath. I don't see any alternative to impeachment hearings. 

 

There's that carpet in the spare room that they've swept everything else under.

[The Real Maroonblood]

Trump throwing the toys out of the Pram and spitting the dummy.

 

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-48461356

[Sharpie]

17 minutes ago, The Real Maroonblood said:

Trump throwing the toys out of the Pram and spitting the dummy.

 

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-48461356

 

To me the most relevant thing about that statement is "I got me elected". Nothing to do with the people who worked on his campaign, no acknowledgement of his family who supported him, only one person. "ME". Does anyone need any more proof of his absolute state of narcissism, his belief that only he a stable genius, got him elected.

[ri Alban]

Boris and Nigel are his best buds.

[The Real Maroonblood]

29 minutes ago, bobsharp said:

 

To me the most relevant thing about that statement is "I got me elected". Nothing to do with the people who worked on his campaign, no acknowledgement of his family who supported him, only one person. "ME". Does anyone need any more proof of his absolute state of narcissism, his belief that only he a stable genius, got him elected.

Exactly. 

He's a complete fruit loop.

 

[Sharpie]

When Trump was in Japan the White House directed that a U.S. Navy ship with the name John S McCain on it be moved and the name covered up so that the President could not see it. When this whole c ookie crumbles and it will, a lot of people who have been complicit in the protection of this President will rue the day.

Can you imagine having or being known to have a hate so deep for someone that you have to be protected from even seeing his name honoured by the service he so gallantly served. While you were at home in the deep suffering and trauma caused by bone spurs.

[Sidelight]

From the beginning, the trumped-up notion that DT or his entourage colluded with some Russians to pull the wool over the eyes of the electorate to gain the office was and as has been shown a fable from the start. A team of lawyers in hate, costing millions could find, not a sausage. It is a definite that any crumb or crust found would have been bent and twisted to suit their guilty agenda.

As for yesterdays diatribe, a without foundation vent to placate and cover the criminal fraternity on their journey to blindside and deceive the gullible.

 

[Bindy Badgy]

1 hour ago, The Real Maroonblood said:

Trump throwing the toys out of the Pram and spitting the dummy.

 

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-48461356

 

Insulting a man that the Democrats want to get to testify doesn't appear to be the best strategy.

[The Real Maroonblood]

4 hours ago, bobsharp said:

When Trump was in Japan the White House directed that a U.S. Navy ship with the name John S McCain on it be moved and the name covered up so that the President could not see it. When this whole c ookie crumbles and it will, a lot of people who have been complicit in the protection of this President will rue the day.

Can you imagine having or being known to have a hate so deep for someone that you have to be protected from even seeing his name honoured by the service he so gallantly served. While you were at home in the deep suffering and trauma caused by bone spurs.

He has no shame. 

[SectionDJambo]

I really hope that “The Donald” meets Farage, publicly, during his trip here.

Could be the first really negative event for Farage before he has to promote positive politics instead of negative.

Easy to say what you don’t want. Harder to say how you would improve things for the people if you had the power to do it.

In my opinion, the man is a complete fraud.

[Watt-Zeefuik]

5% tariffs on all products from Mexico until they do something or other about undocumented migration, escalating to 25% over time.

 

Meanwhile the midwest is way, way behind on getting corn planted.

 

This is somewhere between "invade Iraq" and "no-deal Brexit" levels of bad idea.

 

Of course he'll probably fold like a cheap metal chair in a couple of weeks . . .

[Maple Leaf]

8 hours ago, Ugly American said:

5% tariffs on all products from Mexico until they do something or other about undocumented migration, escalating to 25% over time.

 

Meanwhile the midwest is way, way behind on getting corn planted.

 

This is somewhere between "invade Iraq" and "no-deal Brexit" levels of bad idea.

 

Of course he'll probably fold like a cheap metal chair in a couple of weeks . . .

 

Where's the logic in negotiating a new-NAFTA with Mexico, then imposing an arbitrary 5% tax on all Mexican goods? I hope that  Trump doesn't expect the new NAFTA to get ratified soon by the Mexican government.

 

No doubt he'll also soon claim that the new 5% tax will mean that Mexico is paying for the wall.

[Watt-Zeefuik]

1 hour ago, Maple Leaf said:

 

Where's the logic in negotiating a new-NAFTA with Mexico, then imposing an arbitrary 5% tax on all Mexican goods? I hope that  Trump doesn't expect the new NAFTA to get ratified soon by the Mexican government.

 

No doubt he'll also soon claim that the new 5% tax will mean that Mexico is paying for the wall.

 

The logic they're presenting is that new NAFTA (or whatever he's decided to rename it -- USMCTA or something?) is all about trade, but these tariffs (on trade) are actually all about limiting immigration, so it's irrelevant.

 

If you think that's contorted and nonsensical, that makes two of us.

[Sidelight]

On 30/05/2019 at 02:06, Ugly American said:

So what does he think should be done?

 

 

There's one word for what he's talking about here: impeachment.

Impeachment on what grounds?

Impeach a president for the sole reason – that the establishment doesn’t like him?

Plan A came up torn and tattered, as most knew (apart from the partisan brigade and perhaps the misled low information viewer) from the start that it would.

The desperate implementation of plan B will also most likely be rendered a failure.

I forecast another 4 years in the wilderness for the deranged opposition - with TDS becoming even more acute.

Perhaps then, from 2024 onwards the full fat anti-christ system which is coming will prevail - time will tell.

 

 

Edited May 31, 2019 by alfajambo

[JackLadd]

Tariffs on American importers (consumers and businesses) of Mexican produce. That'll show these Mex's who's boss! The Extremely Stable Genius strikes again! Migrant problem solved, 

[Maple Leaf]

5 hours ago, alfajambo said:

Impeachment on what grounds?

Impeach a president for the sole reason – that the establishment doesn’t like him?

Plan A came up torn and tattered, as most knew (apart from the partisan brigade and perhaps the misled low information viewer) from the start that it would.

The desperate implementation of plan B will also most likely be rendered a failure.

I forecast another 4 years in the wilderness for the deranged opposition - with TDS becoming even more acute.

Perhaps then, from 2024 onwards the full fat anti-christ system which is coming will prevail - time will tell.

 

 

 

Nope, for high crimes and misdemeanors, as per the U.S. constitution.  

 

Obstruction of justice falls into that category, and there is copious amounts of evidence to support that charge. 

 

Whether the House Democrats will grow enough backbone to pursue that course remains to be seen, especially when the Senate is dominated by grovelling Republicans, so what the House does won't mean much.. 

 

One thing is for sure, the pussy-grabbing, adulterous, lying President will retain the support of the hypocritical evangelical right. He has appointed right-wing judges to the SCOTUS, so he is a hero.

 

In the meantime, the White House staff is concerned about Trump seeing a warship with a name that might upset President Ding-Dong.  You couldn't make it up.

[The Real Maroonblood]

3 hours ago, Maple Leaf said:

 

Nope, for high crimes and misdemeanors, as per the U.S. constitution.  

 

Obstruction of justice falls into that category, and there is copious amounts of evidence to support that charge. 

 

Whether the House Democrats will grow enough backbone to pursue that course remains to be seen, especially when the Senate is dominated by grovelling Republicans, so what the House does won't mean much.. 

 

One thing is for sure, the pussy-grabbing, adulterous, lying President will retain the support of the hypocritical evangelical right. He has appointed right-wing judges to the SCOTUS, so he is a hero.

 

In the meantime, the White House staff is concerned about Trump seeing a warship with a name that might upset President Ding-Dong.  You couldn't make it up.

I await alfajambo’s response this.

[The Real Maroonblood]

Boris is the man according to Trump.

Speaks volumes of Trump’s mental state.

[jake]

9 hours ago, Maple Leaf said:

 

Nope, for high crimes and misdemeanors, as per the U.S. constitution.  

 

Obstruction of justice falls into that category, and there is copious amounts of evidence to support that charge. 

 

Whether the House Democrats will grow enough backbone to pursue that course remains to be seen, especially when the Senate is dominated by grovelling Republicans, so what the House does won't mean much.. 

 

One thing is for sure, the pussy-grabbing, adulterous, lying President will retain the support of the hypocritical evangelical right. He has appointed right-wing judges to the SCOTUS, so he is a hero.

 

In the meantime, the White House staff is concerned about Trump seeing a warship with a name that might upset President Ding-Dong.  You couldn't make it up.

I have a problem when people cite hypocrisy .

 

[Maple Leaf]

16 minutes ago, jake said:

I have a problem when people cite hypocrisy .

 

 

I didn't use the word lightly.

 

By my reckoning, Trump has violated at least four of the Ten Commandments.  Those Commandments are the bedrock on which the Evangelicals build their faith.  They're of extreme importance.

 

Trump violates the Commandments, yet the Evangelicals continue to support him. That's hypocrisy in my view. 

[Sidelight]

9 hours ago, Maple Leaf said:

 

Nope, for high crimes and misdemeanors, as per the U.S. constitution.  

 

Obstruction of justice falls into that category, and there is copious amounts of evidence to support that charge. 

 

Please inform me, what are the detailed derivation of ‘high crimes and misdemeanours’ to which you refer?

And where was the obstruction of justice?

 

An investigation engineered by Comey and crew based on a fake dossier created by a British agent from unsubstantiated Russian sources and financially facilitated by Clinton Inc. Indeed.

 

 In his last statement, Robert Mueller said this -

“If we had confidence that the president clearly did not commit a crime, we would have said so.” He also said that, because of Office of Legal Counsel guidance, his team did not have the option of charging a sitting president with a crime.

 

However, this is in direct contrast to the message he gave to AG William Barr and other DOJ officials at a meeting which took place on March 5th.

 

Barr was asked about why Mueller had failed to come to a conclusion on the question of obstruction of justice during his testimony before the Senate Judiciary Committee on May 1st.

 

He said, “We were frankly surprised that they were not going to reach a decision on obstruction and we asked them a lot about the reasoning behind this. Mueller stated three times to us in that meeting, in response to our questioning, that he emphatically was not saying that but for the OLC opinion he would have found obstruction.”

 

Barr made a similar remark at the press conference he held prior to the public release of the redacted Mueller Report. He told reporters this -

 

 “We specifically asked him about the OLC opinion and whether or not he was taking a position that he would have found a crime but for the existence of the OLC opinion. And he made it very clear several times that was not his position.”

 

Mueller can now retreat to his grand palace in in the Cote d'Azur or wherever. No Congress embarrassing testifying commission for him. His posse of Democratic lawyers, one from Clinton Inc and his funster deputy who was also a fully paid up Clinton partisan will no doubt be invited for regular vacations.

 

You couldn’t make it up. It seems the only person obstructing justice is the old fixer himself, RM.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Justin Z]

[Justin Z]

I left America primarily because there are literal millions of people like alfajambo there. The capacity for pure fantasism starts with the poison that is American Evangelical Christianity and then explodes into shit like this. "You couldn't make it up" indeed.

[Joey J J Jr Shabadoo]

2 minutes ago, Justin Z said:

I left America primarily because there are literal millions of people like alfajambo there. The capacity for pure fantasism starts with the poison that is American Evangelical Christianity and then explodes into shit like this. "You couldn't make it up" indeed.

It's one of the reasons I'm glad my mum demanded that me & my brother were brought up in Scotland & not the US.

[Sidelight]

26 minutes ago, Maple Leaf said:

 

I didn't use the word lightly.

 

By my reckoning, Trump has violated at least four of the Ten Commandments.  Those Commandments are the bedrock on which the Evangelicals build their faith.  They're of extreme importance.

 

Trump violates the Commandments, yet the Evangelicals continue to support him. That's hypocrisy in my view. 

I am struggling to bring to mind a single person alive today who doesn’t dip-in and dip- out from the Idiots Guide on How to be a Hypocrite.

 

[Sidelight]

35 minutes ago, Joey J J Jr Shabadoo said:

It's one of the reasons I'm glad my mum demanded that me & my brother were brought up in Scotland & not the US.

Are you sure it wasn’t because American chocolate tastes like sick?

[Maple Leaf]

40 minutes ago, alfajambo said:

I am struggling to bring to mind a single person alive today who doesn’t dip-in and dip- out from the Idiots Guide on How to be a Hypocrite.

 

 

The Evangelicals do it with such panache though, don't you agree?

[Francis Albert]

12 hours ago, Maple Leaf said:

 

Nope, for high crimes and misdemeanors, as per the U.S. constitution.  

 

Obstruction of justice falls into that category, and there is copious amounts of evidence to support that charge. 

 

Whether the House Democrats will grow enough backbone to pursue that course remains to be seen, especially when the Senate is dominated by grovelling Republicans, so what the House does won't mean much.. 

 

One thing is for sure, the pussy-grabbing, adulterous, lying President will retain the support of the hypocritical evangelical right. He has appointed right-wing judges to the SCOTUS, so he is a hero.

 

In the meantime, the White House staff is concerned about Trump seeing a warship with a name that might upset President Ding-Dong.  You couldn't make it up.

Trump is a unique President in many ways, hard to think any of any in a good way. But being pussy grabbing, adulterous and a liar are not examples of his uniqueness. As for hypocrisy, being a serial adulterer, prostitute user and abuser of vulnerable women did not (as one example) stop JFK successfully playing the devout Catholic and family man to his, fortunately for him,  blessedly ignorant Catholic and wider constituency. Not to mention lying about intervention and collusion in foreign adventures that led ultimately to hundreds of thousands of deaths. 

 

Impeachment, certainly on the basis of anything yet proven, is a dead end and  the competition among the potential candidates in next year's election to be more anti-Trump than anyone else  just distracts from finding a candidate and a credible set of policies  to challenge Trump next year. Trump is eminently beatable but his opponents are in danger of  giving him a chance of winning again.   

 

(There are parallels in the UK and the divisive beauty contest to Replace May which gives Johnson a good chance ow winning)

 

Edited June 1, 2019 by Francis Albert

[The Real Maroonblood]

3 hours ago, Justin Z said:

I left America primarily because there are literal millions of people like alfajambo there. The capacity for pure fantasism starts with the poison that is American Evangelical Christianity and then explodes into shit like this. "You couldn't make it up" indeed.

There loss is Scotland's gain.

[ri Alban]

3 hours ago, Justin Z said:

I left America primarily because there are literal millions of people like alfajambo there. The capacity for pure fantasism starts with the poison that is American Evangelical Christianity and then explodes into shit like this. "You couldn't make it up" indeed.

I thought it was because you loved the JTs.

 

The dumb brexiters thought they put a stop to this. Immigrants!

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Edited June 1, 2019 by ri Alban

[trotter]

3 hours ago, alfajambo said:

Are you sure it wasn’t because American chocolate tastes like sick?

Hershey's is ******* shite

[Maple Leaf]

1 hour ago, Francis Albert said:

Trump is a unique President in many ways, hard to think any of any in a good way. But being pussy grabbing, adulterous and a liar are not examples of his uniqueness. As for hypocrisy, being a serial adulterer, prostitute user and abuser of vulnerable women did not (as one example) stop JFK successfully playing the devout Catholic and family man to his, fortunately for him,  blessedly ignorant Catholic and wider constituency. Not to mention lying about intervention and collusion in foreign adventures that led ultimately to hundreds of thousands of deaths. 

 

Impeachment, certainly on the basis of anything yet proven, is a dead end and  the competition among the potential candidates in next year's election to be more anti-Trump than anyone else  just distracts from finding a candidate and a credible set of policies  to challenge Trump next year. Trump is eminently beatable but his opponents are in danger of  giving him a chance of winning again.   

 

(There are parallels in the UK and the divisive beauty contest to Replace May which gives Johnson a good chance ow winning)

 

 

I don't disagree with anything you've written.

 

I'd like to point out two things though. One, I've never claimed that Trump is unique in his boorish behaviour and, two, I would never offer up JFK as a role model for anyone, least of all President. Kennedy was lucky in that he had a compliant press who turned a blind eye to his philandering, so that the general public were not aware of it.

 

Impeaching Trump is an interesting discussion. It will die in the Senate, for sure, but the process could result in a negative hit on Trump's popularity. Even a couple of percentage points could make a big difference in the election.  But the Dems need to get their act together, and I certainly agree that credible policies are necessary. Just being anti-Trump will not be enough.

[Justin Z]

28 minutes ago, The Real Maroonblood said:

There loss is Scotland's gain.

 

18 minutes ago, ri Alban said:

 

Cheers guys

 

18 minutes ago, ri Alban said:

I thought it was because you loved the JTs.

 

This didn't hurt either

[jake]

16 minutes ago, ri Alban said:

I thought it was because you loved the JTs.

 

The dumb brexiters thought they put a stop to this. Immigrants!

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Yeah that dumb we actually thought the US was in Europe.

That dumb we thought our vote counted.

Still nice to see the intelligentsia keeping it simple with the auld bigot racist thang.

 

 

[Sawdust Caesar]

I like this t-shirt.

 

[jake]

13 minutes ago, Sawdust Caesar said:

I like this t-shirt.

 

See what bugs me is that it would be good if Mexicans wanted to cross out of a desire to travel.

But the fact that not just Mexicans but people from every part of the world want to cross to Australia the US Europe is economic.

 

And it will only get worse.

I have to laugh at those who think they are progressive who claim who will clean our toilets.

 

Mexicans Africans wouldn't want to go through the turmoil if we didnt condone the hegemony which promotes greed .

A hegemony which takes us to war.

A hegemony whichexcuses murder as long as we pretend we are on the paper thin difference in policy.

 

This thread is an example of the delusion .

I call you out not because I like Trump.

But because you offer the same but just less vulgar.

 

 

[The Real Maroonblood]

Send in Farage.

Trump **** o** and mind your own  business you absolute despicable excuse for a Human Being.

Edited June 2, 2019 by The Real Maroonblood

[Joey J J Jr Shabadoo]

On 01/06/2019 at 14:56, alfajambo said:

Are you sure it wasn’t because American chocolate tastes like sick?

That definitely didn't help.