Jump to content
Head Coach Openings 2024 ×
  • Current Donation Goals

    • Raised $2,716 of $3,600 target

New Donald Trump thread


Muda69

Recommended Posts

44 minutes ago, swordfish said:

 

Did anyone listen to the speech in the Rose Garden?  The President opened the Government for 3 weeks.  He literally said you have 3 weeks to fund the wall.  If not - it's an emergency.  Pelosi already said she wouldn't negotiate until the shutdown was over......It's over, workers are being paid, the SOTU will take place.  If in 3 weeks, there is no resolution, this President will finish this in his way.  He and every President since Reagan has promised a solution, he is determined to deliver a real fix.  I would bet if the House and Senate cannot come up with something, the DACA olive branch he was dangling will disappear.

Yeah, I listened when he said it was a crisis back in spring of 2018 with the first caravan that was going to overrun the US and take over.  That didn't come to fruition, so he rolled it out again during the mid-terms ... and again, it wasn't true then either.  I heard him right before the shutdown started, as did the GOP and everyone else when he said it was all figured out ... only to have Ann and Rush whisper in his ears and scrap the whole thing.  I also listened at the start of the shutdown when he said it would be months if need be.  We heard him when he said everyone in the country tells him that they want the wall ... when it isn't actually the case.  We heard him when he said that trade wars were easy.  We also heard him when he said no one in his campaign had any contact with Russia only to find out actually LOTS of them did ... even if they claim they didn't remember at the time.  We also heard him when he said he'd hire only the best people and how great they all were ... right up to the time when he bad-mouthed them all as they left them or he decided they wouldn't do what he wanted.  Yeah, we heard him ... much like the boy who cried wolf, it's kind of hard to tell whether there's really anything that he's really going to do.

As for that DACA olive branch, that's not the first time that he's dangled it and not the first time that he's also yanked it away.  He's actually the cause of the DACA "emergency" situation anyway.  He rescinded it without a fix in place.  Just like with the healthcare.  He's done that several times and folks, on both sides of the aisle, are starting to realize that until Trump puts it down on paper, he's not really negotiating in good faith.  It's just that the GOP is stuck between a rock and a hard place because there are folks that, no matter how many times the story changes with still believe what Trump is selling.  Trump claims that he's "negotiating" but he reminds me more of some local mafia folks in really bad mafia movies ... "Hey, nice house you have there.  Be a shame if something happened to it."  And even after the protection is paid, the house mysteriously "catches on fire" and there's the mafia guy there again offering to give the home owner a "good price" to help put out the fire.

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

52 minutes ago, gonzoron said:

Then he should scrap his plans for a wall. That is not the solution.

 

The 400+ folks that tunneled under an existing wall should've been a tip off, but Trump was too busy measuring the wall prototypes for drapes.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Interesting choice for response to SOTU ...

https://www.yahoo.com/news/abrams-former-georgia-governor-candidate-democrats-state-union-195337969.html

FTA:

Stacey Abrams, who narrowly lost Georgia's recent gubernatorial election, will deliver the Democrats' response to Republican President Donald Trump's State of the Union address next week, the top Democrat in the Senate, Chuck Schumer, said on Tuesday.

“I’m very excited she has agreed to be the responder,” Schumer told reporters, adding that he had asked her to give the response several weeks ago.

 

I would not be surprised to see Abrams challenge for a national position out of GA in 2020.  She might be able to pick up a rep slot, but I seriously think that, given the political winds and her showing in GA's governor's race in 2018, she could have a shot at Perdue.  Perdue has a 95.4% "vote with Trump" rating.  He also was the guy who came out and tried to run interference for Trump's "sh*thole" comments.  Of late, he's been urging Trump, even after the shutdown ended, to continue pushing for his wall funding.  He's going to potentially be vulnerable should Abrams be the Senate challenger in GA.  She could also potentially provide uptails for a Democratic presidential contender.  Trump won GA by 5% in 2016.  Abram's running, plus Kemp's shenanigans, will have a potential for a fired-up voter turnout which could be problematic for both Perdue and Trump, should Trump decide to run again.  

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Surprised this didn't get a whole lot of coverage in the media nor here ... then again, the shutdown, national emergencies, Roger Stone, etc. kind of pushed what would normally be a front-page item back a page or two:

https://www.yahoo.com/finance/news/trump-national-golf-club-fires-194934788.html

FTA:

Dozens of undocumented immigrants employed by Donald Trump’s ‘Trump National Golf Club’ in Westchester County, NY were fired earlier this month, as Trump waged a war in Washington to keep others like them from entering the country using a border wall.

The immigrants in question were longtime employees of the golf course. Many of them had earned employee-of-the-month awards and had received glowing letters of recommendation for other employment. A few even had the keys to Eric Trump’s weekend home, The Washington Post reports.

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Before the GID crash, I had a post where I was tracking who would be out, who would stay, and who was in the air by the start of Trump's 3rd year.  Most of the folks that we figured would be out ended up disappearing like Sessions, Kelly, Mattis, etc. One of the folks I had marked in yellow was DNI, Dan Coates.  I had thought that he might leave on his own, especially if Mattis and/or Kelly disappeared.  He may well end up doing so, but the President might start tweeting and, in one of those tweets, accidentally or purposely fire Coates.

https://www.yahoo.com/news/trump-pushes-back-spy-chiefs-differ-north-korea-115050237.html

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On ‎1‎/‎28‎/‎2019 at 3:45 PM, swordfish said:

 

Did anyone listen to the speech in the Rose Garden?  The President opened the Government for 3 weeks.  He literally said you have 3 weeks to fund the wall.  If not - it's an emergency.  Pelosi already said she wouldn't negotiate until the shutdown was over......It's over, workers are being paid, the SOTU will take place.  If in 3 weeks, there is no resolution, this President will finish this in his way.  He and every President since Reagan has promised a solution, he is determined to deliver a real fix.  I would bet if the House and Senate cannot come up with something, the DACA olive branch he was dangling will disappear.

Obviously, it is not an actual "emergency" emergency, or he wouldn't be waiting three weeks (or have gone two years deep into his presidency) before taking action.   And his "fix" for the non-emergency emergency won't be "the Wall", unless "the Wall" is re-defined as whatever paltry 100 miles or so of barb wire or fencing or pretty metal slats he manages to get thrown up by soldiers (who really do have better things to do) in between the preliminary injunctions, so he can call into Fox and Friends and declare his great victory.    

But  I think your analysis is otherwise spot on.  😉

On ‎1‎/‎28‎/‎2019 at 3:52 PM, Muda69 said:

FTA:

Trump may be abrogating his constitutional authority by ordering the troops to go it alone in seizing land along the border. 

I don't this guy is using the word "abrogating" correctly here.  The gist of his argument seems to be that Trump would be exceeding his Constitutional authority if he did this, and I don't think "abrogating" is a synonym for "exceeding." 

 

 

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, Wabash82 said:

I don't this guy is using the word "abrogating" correctly here.  The gist of his argument seems to be that Trump would be exceeding his Constitutional authority if he did this, and I don't think "abrogating" is a synonym for "exceeding." 

Who am I to argue with a lawyer, a wordsmith, and the smartest guy on the GID?  I suggest you contact the author of said commentary and inform him of his incorrect usage of this word.  Here is Mr. Dickinson's contact info: https://www.law.pitt.edu/people/gerald-s-dickinson.  I'm sure he would welcome helpful criticism from a fellow legal professional.

 

Edited by Muda69
  • Disdain 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, Muda69 said:

Who am I to argue with a lawyer, a wordsmith, and the smartest guy on the GID?  I suggest you contact the author of said commentary and inform him of his incorrect usage of this word.  Here is Mr. Dickinson's contact info: https://www.law.pitt.edu/people/gerald-s-dickinson.  I'm sure he would welcome helpful criticism from a fellow legal professional.

 

Thank you. I needed the material to recreate my signature on GID 2.0. 

  • Haha 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 hours ago, gonzoron said:

AB113C97-1818-44EE-AA5B-489F6C14C344.jpeg

And some days it looks like more than that.  Think I found out what I might be doing in retirement.

Trump's daily schedule is quite empty

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What Was Missing From Trump's State of the Union? America's $1 Trillion Deficithttp://reason.com/blog/2019/02/05/whats-missing-from-trumps-state-of-the-u

Quote

America is running a near-record deficit despite close to a decade of continuous economic growth—and the nation's $22 trillion national debt is on a trajectory that will see it reach 93 percent of the nation's economy by the end of the next decade, higher than it was during World War II (and far beyond that in the decades to come).

That's the kind of problem that you might expect to be part of a serious and significant policy speech like the annual State of the Union address. But there was no mention Tuesday night of the urgent need to bring federal spending in line with tax revenue, and no discussion of how to curb the long-term growth of entitlement programs. About the only mention of spending at all, in fact, was a promise to "outspend" China militarily.

The Congressional Budget Office now says that America won't run a $1 trillion deficit until 2020—after some earlier projections estimated we'd hit that mark in the current fiscal year—but the temporary reprieve means little. While discretionary spending is set to decline by 1.3 percent over the next 10 years, the entitlement programs of Social Security, Medicaid, and Medicare, and the interest on the national debt, will continue to push the deficit higher.

 

Source: Congressional Budget Office January 2019 Budget and Economic OutlookSource: Congressional Budget Office January 2019 Budget and Economic Outlook

The decision to steer clear of the federal budget in Tuesday night's State of the Union address was not a mistake. Asked earlier on Tuesday about whether Trump would discuss the national debt in the speech, Chief of Staff Mick Mulvaney—the same Mick Mulvaney who made his name in Congress as a budget hawk—reportedly told reporters that "no one cares."

The deficit is not a sexy issue and it's not something that's likely to get solved quickly. It doesn't make for a good soundbite. And, of course, talking about something in the State of the Union Address is not the same as actually doingsomething.

Still, the talking matters. Acknowledging the size of the problem is a first step towards tackling it, and Trump refused to take that step on Tuesday night. It's unlikely Congress will act without considerable prodding—or until the debt becomes too large for the economy to bear, something that might happen by the end of the next decade, when the national debt will near the size of the economy as a whole.

Indeed, if the policies outlined in Trump's State of the Union address were to become reality, it would likely be bad news for the federal budget deficit. He promised to spend more money on the military (including on nuclear weapons), and to build his coveted border wall. Still, to be fair to the president, there have been many, many State of the Union speeches that have promised more spending—and rarely is deficit reduction on the menu. It's also not difficult to imagine a future Democratic president using the State of the Union to call for Medicare for All, which would only compound the entitlement spending that's driving much of the deficit.

Our days of being able to ignore the national debt and the entitlement programs continue to tick away.

Agreed.  A ticking time bomb we are leaving for your children and grandchildren to tackle.  Sickening and cowardly.  What would the remaining members of the "greatest generation" think of this?

 

 

  • Disdain 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, TrojanDad said:

 

My uncle Art (Navy and fought in 6 major engagements to include Leyte Gulf and Okinawa as a gunner) never, ever said a word. 

 

 

My dad, also Navy, was in those battles as well. Do you know what ship(s) your uncle served on? Dad was on USS Vincennes during Leyte and USS Vicksburg during Okinawa.

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, TrojanDad said:

76% align with last night's SOTU address and direction

I imagine his base were the main viewers, he could probably get the same numbers at one of his "rallys". No one I have talked to today watched it, Democrat or Republican.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

34 minutes ago, gonzoron said:

I imagine his base were the main viewers, he could probably get the same numbers at one of his "rallys". No one I have talked to today watched it, Democrat or Republican.

It is rare that I have ever watched it. I think the 2002 one was the last time I watched.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Trump's Absurd Claim that Americans Are Free from Government Coercion: https://mises.org/wire/trumps-absurd-claim-americans-are-free-government-coercion

Quote

In his State of the Union address Tuesday night, President Trump received rapturous applause from Republicans for his declaration: “America was founded on liberty and independence — not government coercion, domination, and control. We are born free, and we will stay free.” But this uplifting sentiment cannot survive even a brief glance at the federal statute book or the heavy-handed enforcement tactics by federal, state, and local bureaucracies across the nation.

In reality, the threat of government punishment permeates Americans’ daily lives more than ever before:

The number of federal crimes has increased from 3 in 1789 to more than 4000 today. Congress has criminalized “transporting alligator grass across a state line; unauthorized use of the slogan 'Give a hoot, don't pollute'; and pretending to be a 4-H club member with intent to defraud," as the Buffalo Criminal Law Review noted.

Law enforcement agencies arrested over 10 million people in 2017— roughly three percent of the population. Trump momentarily noticed the existence of government coercion last month when he complained about the FBI using “29 people” and “armored vehicles” for the arrest of Roger Stone. But SWAT teams conduct up to 80,000 raids a year, according to the ACLU, mostly for drug arrests or search warrants. Many innocent people have been killed in such raids.

Trump on Tuesday highlighted the case of Alice Johnson, unjustly sentenced to life in prison for a nonviolent drug offense. Trump’s commutation of her sentence is no consolation to the targets of 1.6 million drug arrests in 2017 - and it is not like those individuals showed up voluntarily at police stations asking to be “cuffed-and-stuffed.” More people are arrested for marijuana offenses than for all violent crimes combined, according to FBI statistics.

No coercion? Tell that to the scores of thousands of victims of asset forfeiture laws, which entitle law enforcement to confiscate people’s cash, cars, and other property based on the flimsiest accusation. Federal law-enforcement agencies seized more property via asset forfeiture provisions in 2014 year than all the burglars stole from homeowners and businesses nationwide.

Since 1970, the number of people confined in American prisons has increased by over 500 percent. Almost 10 percent of all American males will end up in prison at some point in their lives, according to an a 1997 Justice Department report. More than 10 percent of black males aged 20 to 34 were behind bars as of 2006, according to the Journal of American History.

Citizens and businesses pay more than $3 trillion in federal taxes each year thanks largely to the array of threats and penalties for non-compliance. Each week, scores of thousands of Americans have their bank accounts seized by the IRS, or have IRS liens put on their houses or land, or endure a tax audit, or receive notice of penalties and demands for additional taxes. The number of different penalties the IRS imposes on taxpayers has increased more than tenfold since 1954.

No one has a good estimate of the number of Americans who fall victim to arbitrary and capricious regulations by federal agencies. When the Supreme Court heard the case of the Agriculture Department’s dictates prohibiting raisin farmers from selling much of their harvest in 2014, Justice Elena Kagan suggested that the regime was “the world’s most outdated law.” But there are many other senseless provisions that the media and the courts simply ignore.

Trump perpetuates one of Washington’s fondest myths - that the federal government is not coercive unless the president or some agency boss formally announces their plans to brutally punish some group without cause. This is notion is avidly supported and propagated by many of the nation’s pundits and political scientists as a way to keep people paying and obeying.

Trump followed his “no coercion here” assertion with the following line: “Tonight, we renew our resolve that America will never be a Socialist country.” Democrats responded with a stony if not irritable silence. Perhaps the greatest irony in Washington is that the people who distrust Trump the most are seeking to vastly increase government power.

Democratic socialists have offered no evidence that new federal takeovers of the economy would not produce the same disasters as followed federal domineering of agriculture or the mortgage industry. Instead, new economic prohibitions would create a profusion of victims akin to Eric Garner, who was strangled in 2014 by a New York City policeman after being apprehended selling individual cigarettes without a license.

President Andrew Johnson rightly observed in an 1868 message to Congress, “It may be safely assumed as an axiom... that the greatest wrongs inflicted upon a people are caused by unjust and arbitrary legislation.” But the federal statute book and Code of Federal Regulations are Towers of Babble that contain vast numbers of punitive provisions that unjustly ruin or blight other Americans’ lives. Trust the Washington establishment to continue pretending that “there is nothing to see here” in the continuing automatic-pilot coercion of the nation.

Here! Here!

 

  • Disdain 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 hours ago, gonzoron said:

Image may contain: 1 person, textH

Hear, hear.

And Countrywomen......

https://www.atr.org/green-new-deal-air-travel-stops-becoming-necessary

This morning, Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez released an 

overview of the Democrat “Green New Deal” which threatens "a massive transformation of our society."

Below are the details of the proposal.

Rebuild every single building in the U.S.

“Upgrade or replace every building in US for state-of-the-art energy efficiency.”

Will end all traditional forms of energy in the next ten years.

The Green New Deal is “a 10-year plan to mobilize every aspect of American society at a scale not seen since World War 2 to achieve net-zero greenhouse gas emissions.”

Plans to ban nuclear energy within 10 years if possible.

“It’s unclear if we will be able to decommission every nuclear plant within 10 years, but the plan is to transition off of nuclear and all fossil fuels as soon as possible.”

Build trains across oceans and end all air travel!

“Build out highspeed rail at a scale where air travel stops becoming necessary”.

Don’t invest in new technology of Carbon Capture and Storage, just plant trees instead!

“We believe the right way to capture carbon is to plant trees and restore our natural ecosystems. CCUS technology to date has not proven effective.”

Mandates all new jobs be unionized.

“Ensure that all GND jobs are union jobs that pay prevailing wages and hire local.”

May include a carbon tax.

“We’re not ruling a carbon tax out, but a carbon tax would be a tiny part of a Green New Deal.”

May include cap and trade.

“…Cap and trade may be a tiny part of the larger Green New Deal plan.”

How much will it cost?

No estimate of the total cost of implementing the Green New deal is offered by Ocasio-Cortez.

However, as Ocasio-Cortez admits, “even if every billionaire and company came together and were willing to pour all the resources at their disposal into this investment, the aggregate value of the investments they could make would not be sufficient.”

She does provide one estimate that the cost to “repair and upgrade infrastructure U.S. infrastructure” alone will cost “$4.6 trillion at minimum.”

How will it be paid for? Don’t worry about that.

Ocasio-Cortez doesn’t provide any insight into how the trillions of dollars in spending will be paid for other than claiming, “The Federal Reserve can extend credit to power these projects and investments and new public banks can be created to extend credit”.

But as Ocasio-Cortez says, “the question isn’t how will we pay for it, but what will we do with our new shared prosperity”.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...