Author Topic: Trump outrage of the day  (Read 303307 times)

BECABECA

  • Bristles
  • ***
  • Posts: 468
  • Age: 39
  • Location: Huntington Beach, CA
  • Retired since July 2017, not bored yet!
Re: Trump outrage of the day
« Reply #350 on: December 09, 2019, 10:42:00 AM »
Latest outrage: Trump brings the war criminals that he pardoned up on stage at his fundraiser, rebranding them as heroes to his base while simultaneously rebranding our military as war criminals to the rest of the world.

nereo

  • Senior Mustachian
  • ********
  • Posts: 13536
  • Location: Just south of Canada
    • Here's how you can support science today:
Re: Trump outrage of the day
« Reply #351 on: December 09, 2019, 10:45:51 AM »
wasn't part of the mystique of Trump that he could 'self-fund' his campaigns and wouldn't need to rely on or be beholden to donors and their causes?

Kris

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 5664
Re: Trump outrage of the day
« Reply #352 on: December 09, 2019, 10:47:34 AM »
Latest outrage: Trump brings the war criminals that he pardoned up on stage at his fundraiser, rebranding them as heroes to his base while simultaneously rebranding our military as war criminals to the rest of the world.

This is honestly disgusting.

His "support our troops" base should be outraged.

talltexan

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 3896
Re: Trump outrage of the day
« Reply #353 on: December 09, 2019, 12:01:20 PM »
wasn't part of the mystique of Trump that he could 'self-fund' his campaigns and wouldn't need to rely on or be beholden to donors and their causes?

Perhaps you were misspelling "BLOOMBERG"?

Glenstache

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 2662
  • Location: Seattle!
  • Target FI date 2027 (maybe?)
Re: Trump outrage of the day
« Reply #354 on: December 09, 2019, 12:08:42 PM »
wasn't part of the mystique of Trump that he could 'self-fund' his campaigns and wouldn't need to rely on or be beholden to donors and their causes?

Perhaps you were misspelling "BLOOMBERG"?
I mean, choose your billionaire... starting with Ross Perot. But, the Trump reference here is pretty specific.

nereo

  • Senior Mustachian
  • ********
  • Posts: 13536
  • Location: Just south of Canada
    • Here's how you can support science today:
Re: Trump outrage of the day
« Reply #355 on: December 09, 2019, 12:26:01 PM »
wasn't part of the mystique of Trump that he could 'self-fund' his campaigns and wouldn't need to rely on or be beholden to donors and their causes?

Perhaps you were misspelling "BLOOMBERG"?

I'm skeptical of any wealthy candidate running for federal office that claims s/he will be "above" campaign donations.  Many make this claim, yet can't think of a single one who's actually been above money in poltics.  Meg Whitman spent a ton of her own money (something like $148 million) in California gov' race - but even there she took over $175MM in other contributions.

What baffles me is how many of Trump's supporters i) believed he really would self-fund his campaign and ii) don't seem to care that he's broken records for the amount of fundraising he's done in the first two years of his presidency.  Trump didn't even wait until the traditional ~3+ years in to blast that promise to death. 

bacchi

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 5004
Re: Trump outrage of the day
« Reply #356 on: December 09, 2019, 12:31:48 PM »
Latest outrage: Trump brings the war criminals that he pardoned up on stage at his fundraiser, rebranding them as heroes to his base while simultaneously rebranding our military as war criminals to the rest of the world.

This is honestly disgusting.

His "support our troops" base should be outraged.

All three cases were about the killing of non-combatant Muslims (one of whom was a POW).

Given the base dislike for brown people, and especially Muslims, it's not surprising that Trump pardoned them.

It also feeds into his "deep state" conspiracy theory. It's not the boots-on-the-ground that are a problem; it's the brass.

Glenstache

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 2662
  • Location: Seattle!
  • Target FI date 2027 (maybe?)
Re: Trump outrage of the day
« Reply #357 on: December 09, 2019, 12:45:55 PM »
wasn't part of the mystique of Trump that he could 'self-fund' his campaigns and wouldn't need to rely on or be beholden to donors and their causes?

Perhaps you were misspelling "BLOOMBERG"?

I'm skeptical of any wealthy candidate running for federal office that claims s/he will be "above" campaign donations.  Many make this claim, yet can't think of a single one who's actually been above money in poltics.  Meg Whitman spent a ton of her own money (something like $148 million) in California gov' race - but even there she took over $175MM in other contributions.

What baffles me is how many of Trump's supporters i) believed he really would self-fund his campaign and ii) don't seem to care that he's broken records for the amount of fundraising he's done in the first two years of his presidency.  Trump didn't even wait until the traditional ~3+ years in to blast that promise to death.
I mean, he also said he'd be working too much to play golf. So.... probably the best president ever.

BECABECA

  • Bristles
  • ***
  • Posts: 468
  • Age: 39
  • Location: Huntington Beach, CA
  • Retired since July 2017, not bored yet!
Re: Trump outrage of the day
« Reply #358 on: December 09, 2019, 12:52:44 PM »
Latest outrage: Trump brings the war criminals that he pardoned up on stage at his fundraiser, rebranding them as heroes to his base while simultaneously rebranding our military as war criminals to the rest of the world.

This is honestly disgusting.

His "support our troops" base should be outraged.

All three cases were about the killing of non-combatant Muslims (one of whom was a POW).

Given the base dislike for brown people, and especially Muslims, it's not surprising that Trump pardoned them.

It also feeds into his "deep state" conspiracy theory. It's not the boots-on-the-ground that are a problem; it's the brass.

It should still be surprising that the POTUS pardoned troops of war crimes, no matter who the crimes were against. And these criminals were turned in by their own soldiers. Maybe this pumps up the armchair patriots who have never been in the military, but this has to be demoralizing to the vast majority of the enlisted soldiers who see that guys like them testified against these officers and it was all for nothing.

GuitarStv

  • Senior Mustachian
  • ********
  • Posts: 16600
  • Age: 39
  • Location: Toronto, Ontario, Canada
Re: Trump outrage of the day
« Reply #359 on: December 09, 2019, 01:03:12 PM »
Latest outrage: Trump brings the war criminals that he pardoned up on stage at his fundraiser, rebranding them as heroes to his base while simultaneously rebranding our military as war criminals to the rest of the world.

This is honestly disgusting.

His "support our troops" base should be outraged.

All three cases were about the killing of non-combatant Muslims (one of whom was a POW).

Given the base dislike for brown people, and especially Muslims, it's not surprising that Trump pardoned them.

It also feeds into his "deep state" conspiracy theory. It's not the boots-on-the-ground that are a problem; it's the brass.

It should still be surprising that the POTUS pardoned troops of war crimes, no matter who the crimes were against. And these criminals were turned in by their own soldiers. Maybe this pumps up the armchair patriots who have never been in the military, but this has to be demoralizing to the vast majority of the enlisted soldiers who see that guys like them testified against these officers and it was all for nothing.

Dick Cheney under George W authorized US troops to commit war crimes (at the very least torture . . . but also the creation of facilities full of kidnapped and untried people were subjected to rape, sexual degradation, humiliation, and in several cases it would seem murder).  Zero repercussions to date for any of the people at the top.  Given this history, it's not really surprising at that America is failing to punish their soldiers convicted of war crimes.

BECABECA

  • Bristles
  • ***
  • Posts: 468
  • Age: 39
  • Location: Huntington Beach, CA
  • Retired since July 2017, not bored yet!
Re: Trump outrage of the day
« Reply #360 on: December 09, 2019, 01:10:10 PM »
Latest outrage: Trump brings the war criminals that he pardoned up on stage at his fundraiser, rebranding them as heroes to his base while simultaneously rebranding our military as war criminals to the rest of the world.

This is honestly disgusting.

His "support our troops" base should be outraged.

All three cases were about the killing of non-combatant Muslims (one of whom was a POW).

Given the base dislike for brown people, and especially Muslims, it's not surprising that Trump pardoned them.

It also feeds into his "deep state" conspiracy theory. It's not the boots-on-the-ground that are a problem; it's the brass.

It should still be surprising that the POTUS pardoned troops of war crimes, no matter who the crimes were against. And these criminals were turned in by their own soldiers. Maybe this pumps up the armchair patriots who have never been in the military, but this has to be demoralizing to the vast majority of the enlisted soldiers who see that guys like them testified against these officers and it was all for nothing.

Dick Cheney under George W authorized US troops to commit war crimes (at the very least torture . . . but also the creation of facilities full of kidnapped and untried people were subjected to rape, sexual degradation, humiliation, and in several cases it would seem murder).  Zero repercussions to date for any of the people at the top.  Given this history, it's not really surprising at that America is failing to punish their soldiers convicted of war crimes.

While that was also disgusting and should have never happened or at the very least should have been prosecuted and publicly disavowed, overturning war crime convictions is a new disgusting low that we as a country had not yet embraced. Until Trump.

GuitarStv

  • Senior Mustachian
  • ********
  • Posts: 16600
  • Age: 39
  • Location: Toronto, Ontario, Canada
Re: Trump outrage of the day
« Reply #361 on: December 09, 2019, 01:15:40 PM »
I don't see a distinction between overturning a conviction for a low level war criminal, and never bothering to prosecute a high level one.

BECABECA

  • Bristles
  • ***
  • Posts: 468
  • Age: 39
  • Location: Huntington Beach, CA
  • Retired since July 2017, not bored yet!
Re: Trump outrage of the day
« Reply #362 on: December 09, 2019, 01:22:01 PM »
I don't see a distinction between overturning a conviction for a low level war criminal, and never bothering to prosecute a high level one.

The distinction is that the Bush administration at least put on the pretense of the mental gymnastics to justify that waterboarding was not torture and so not a war crime. And W didnít then bring the waterboarders up on the stage with him at fundraising events and tout them as heroes. There was at least some recognition that war crimes in general arenít good and doing something close to it isnít something you want to hang your fundraising on.

Trump has essentially said war is different now and we shouldnít be beholden to any of the old definitions of war crimes. And not just that, but we should be proud of being war criminals now.

So while both are bad, I believe that equivocating what W did with what Trump is doing is a disservice to humanity.

GuitarStv

  • Senior Mustachian
  • ********
  • Posts: 16600
  • Age: 39
  • Location: Toronto, Ontario, Canada
Re: Trump outrage of the day
« Reply #363 on: December 09, 2019, 01:31:58 PM »
When Bush authorized Guantanamo Bay and Abu Grahib, he essentially said that war is different now, and the US isn't beholden to any of the old definitions of war crimes.

I guess I can see the argument that Trump is taking is one step further . . . but it's a road that America seems only too comfortable to walk down.

BECABECA

  • Bristles
  • ***
  • Posts: 468
  • Age: 39
  • Location: Huntington Beach, CA
  • Retired since July 2017, not bored yet!
Re: Trump outrage of the day
« Reply #364 on: December 09, 2019, 02:33:08 PM »
...
I guess I can see the argument that Trump is taking is one step further . . . but it's a road that America seems only too comfortable to walk down.

*Some* of America is comfortable to walk down this road, most of these because theyíve been manipulated into thinking that it isnít morally reprehensible by the few who stand to personally gain from it.

But I continue to believe that most Americans are not comfortable with what is happening. Unfortunately, while we are actively trying to turn the ship around, inertia causes any course corrections to be very slow, especially major ones.

I assume you donít want Americans to feel hopeless about their country, I assume you want the same thing that I do: for us to actually do something to fix it. I have a lot of respect for your arguments across this forum, which is why I was surprised that the two times Iíve posted a new low on this thread have been met with a ďyouíve been this way all alongĒ response from you. This doesnít inspire action, I think it inspires the opposite: it makes us more likely to label this latest outrage we've noticed as business as usual and nothing to be alarmed about because thereís nothing we can do to change it.

So thanks for grudgingly admitting that you can see the argument that this latest outrage is one step further ;)

Itís tremendously helpful to have the perspective of a non American knowledgeable on all these bits of American history and foreign policy, as it helps us see where our biases may be coming in. Help us be better.

scottish

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1799
  • Location: Ottawa
Re: Trump outrage of the day
« Reply #365 on: December 09, 2019, 06:20:53 PM »
It's f...ing nuts.   Next thing Trump will have his own praetorian guard to look after his succession.   Just watch...

Travis

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 3188
  • Location: South Korea
Re: Trump outrage of the day
« Reply #366 on: December 10, 2019, 06:21:12 AM »
Latest outrage: Trump brings the war criminals that he pardoned up on stage at his fundraiser, rebranding them as heroes to his base while simultaneously rebranding our military as war criminals to the rest of the world.

This is honestly disgusting.

His "support our troops" base should be outraged.

That's what they think he just did.  Meanwhile those same folks are all over the internet vilifying that "fat colonel" who is one of the star witnesses in the impeachment investigation.  I'm sure if that officer had something to say about Pelosi they'd be recommending him for a medal.

GuitarStv

  • Senior Mustachian
  • ********
  • Posts: 16600
  • Age: 39
  • Location: Toronto, Ontario, Canada
Re: Trump outrage of the day
« Reply #367 on: December 10, 2019, 08:01:27 AM »
...
I guess I can see the argument that Trump is taking is one step further . . . but it's a road that America seems only too comfortable to walk down.

*Some* of America is comfortable to walk down this road, most of these because theyíve been manipulated into thinking that it isnít morally reprehensible by the few who stand to personally gain from it.

But I continue to believe that most Americans are not comfortable with what is happening. Unfortunately, while we are actively trying to turn the ship around, inertia causes any course corrections to be very slow, especially major ones.

I assume you donít want Americans to feel hopeless about their country, I assume you want the same thing that I do: for us to actually do something to fix it. I have a lot of respect for your arguments across this forum, which is why I was surprised that the two times Iíve posted a new low on this thread have been met with a ďyouíve been this way all alongĒ response from you. This doesnít inspire action, I think it inspires the opposite: it makes us more likely to label this latest outrage we've noticed as business as usual and nothing to be alarmed about because thereís nothing we can do to change it.

So thanks for grudgingly admitting that you can see the argument that this latest outrage is one step further ;)

Itís tremendously helpful to have the perspective of a non American knowledgeable on all these bits of American history and foreign policy, as it helps us see where our biases may be coming in. Help us be better.

Fair enough.  It's sometimes frustrating to see so few fucks given for a fundamental violation of human rights and the law . . . especially when it often appears to be accompanied with boisterous "We're the greatest" style self-aggrandizement and jingoistic patriotism.  :P

Kyle Schuant

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1297
  • Location: Melbourne, Australia
Re: Trump outrage of the day
« Reply #368 on: December 10, 2019, 05:25:55 PM »
Given the base dislike for brown people, and especially Muslims, it's not surprising that Trump pardoned them.
To be fair, Calley was pardoned for killing Asian civilians.

Meanwhile in Australia, war crimes allegations against the SAS, supported by testimony from SAS troopers, have been "investigated" for several years now, by different agencies etc. However, one of the chief suspects is the winner of a Victoria Cross.

And of course, the Germans are famous for having released most of their war criminals very early.

Historically, most countries don't like trying their own military members for war crimes, and if pressured into doing so, pardon them or release them early. This applies whatever the colour of their victims' skin, and the US is far from unique in this.

Kris

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 5664
Re: Trump outrage of the day
« Reply #369 on: December 10, 2019, 05:43:06 PM »
And of course, the Germans are famous for having released most of their war criminals very early.


Umm...

I donít think thatís what theyíre famous for.

OzzieandHarriet

  • Bristles
  • ***
  • Posts: 442
Re: Trump outrage of the day
« Reply #370 on: December 11, 2019, 07:31:03 AM »

talltexan

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 3896
Re: Trump outrage of the day
« Reply #371 on: December 11, 2019, 07:41:18 AM »
Perhaps I'm connected with an unusual group of practicing Jews, but they all basically tell me some variant of, "We know his tweets are dumb, but his daughter is Jewish, and it's clear he has Israel's back, so we're all in."

GuitarStv

  • Senior Mustachian
  • ********
  • Posts: 16600
  • Age: 39
  • Location: Toronto, Ontario, Canada
Re: Trump outrage of the day
« Reply #372 on: December 11, 2019, 07:45:57 AM »
This ... is just ... 🤬

https://www.cnn.com/2019/12/10/politics/trump-order-judaism-nationality/index.html


Interesting.


Stuff that immediately comes to mind reading that:

1.  Trump said some sort of anti-Semitic stuff (again) and was called out on it (again).  To make up for it, he seems to have grabbed the first thing that has to do with Jewish people that came across his plate and decided that he was going to be as pro-jew as possible on it.  So, I guess his thought is that as long as you can point at something that seems non-bigoted, then you have a shield against anything bigoted you ever say.   :P

2.  Educational institutes receiving funding in the US are allowed to discriminate based on the religion of the people applying???  WTF?  Why is the president singling out a single religious group for special treatment, rather than fixing the law that allows this discrimination for all?

3.  Was anti-Jewish enrollment a problem in the universities in the US?

4.  If being a practicing Jew is now legally considered a nationality, will the US issue all Jews special passports?  How is Jewish nationality different from Israeli nationality?  Will Israel recognize this new status somehow?

talltexan

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 3896
Re: Trump outrage of the day
« Reply #373 on: December 11, 2019, 07:53:06 AM »
Wait, it's a fucking nationality???

GuitarStv

  • Senior Mustachian
  • ********
  • Posts: 16600
  • Age: 39
  • Location: Toronto, Ontario, Canada
Re: Trump outrage of the day
« Reply #374 on: December 11, 2019, 08:03:47 AM »
Wait, it's a fucking nationality???

To clear up any confusion, Trump could issue nationality identification cards to all practicing Jews in the US.  Can't see anyone having a problem with that.

talltexan

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 3896
Re: Trump outrage of the day
« Reply #375 on: December 11, 2019, 08:11:43 AM »
I probably come across as unreasonably anti-Trump in my comments on these discussion boards, but I just got done spending Thanksgiving with my mom, and telling her that she was wayyyy separated from reality for believing Trump would turn out to basically be Hitler. This news item will not help my case.

talltexan

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 3896
Re: Trump outrage of the day
« Reply #376 on: December 11, 2019, 08:13:55 AM »
Okay, I did more reading, and I need to calm down. It's being classified as an "ethnicity or nationality" for the purposes of certain hate crime laws being enforced. This may well be a case of the media just trying to make Trump look bad.

nereo

  • Senior Mustachian
  • ********
  • Posts: 13536
  • Location: Just south of Canada
    • Here's how you can support science today:
Re: Trump outrage of the day
« Reply #377 on: December 11, 2019, 08:41:15 AM »
@talltexan (and others following along) - regarding Trump's actions toward Jewish Americans you might want to check out Jennifer Rubin's latest piece which looks at various facets. 

FWIW Rubin is a conservative, a Jewish American and a 'Never-Trumper' (though unlike her colleague and fellow conservative-jewish-political-columnist Max Boot she remains a registered Republican).
https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2019/12/09/trumps-anti-semitic-attacks-american-jews-keep-coming/

Sorry about the paywall...

ixtap

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 2434
Re: Trump outrage of the day
« Reply #378 on: December 11, 2019, 08:45:55 AM »
Being pro Israel is no defense against anti Semitism. One reason we currently have a country called Israel is because the Nazis helped Jews illegally immigrate to Palestine before they decided it was easier to just dispose of them altogether.

talltexan

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 3896
Re: Trump outrage of the day
« Reply #379 on: December 11, 2019, 09:01:26 AM »
Thank you for sharing.

A while ago I stopped reading Rubin because it felt like she was reflexively anti-Trump, so her output wasn't likely to challenge me (as I am also that way, but actively seek out things that might convince me I'm wrong about him). Her columns are still well-written.

Samuel

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 513
  • Location: the slippery slope
Re: Trump outrage of the day
« Reply #380 on: December 11, 2019, 10:33:19 AM »
2.  Educational institutes receiving funding in the US are allowed to discriminate based on the religion of the people applying???  WTF?  Why is the president singling out a single religious group for special treatment, rather than fixing the law that allows this discrimination for all?

3.  Was anti-Jewish enrollment a problem in the universities in the US?

It's not about enrollment discrimination, it's about the climate on some college campuses being so pro-Palestinian/anti-Israel that Jewish students are being (or at least feeling) harassed and intimidated. Religion is not a protected class under current Civil Rights law but nationality/ethnicity is, so this change allows the government to withhold federal dollars from colleges they feel are not adequately addressing this problem.

Whether the intent is actually to protect harassed minorities or to inhibit growing BDS (Boycott, Divestment, Sanction) movements against Israel is up for debate. I suppose it could be both.

Israel friendly Democrats have introduced similar legislation multiple times in recent years, so it's not strictly a conservative/liberal issue, which is oddly refreshing.

Daley

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 4123
  • Location: Cow country. Moo.
  • Got that mustache feeling.
Re: Trump outrage of the day
« Reply #381 on: December 11, 2019, 10:41:25 AM »
I'd deliberately stayed out of commenting in this thread for quite some time, but...

https://www.cnn.com/2019/12/10/politics/trump-order-judaism-nationality/index.html

Interesting.

[snip]

If being a practicing Jew is now legally considered a nationality, will the US issue all Jews special passports?  How is Jewish nationality different from Israeli nationality?  Will Israel recognize this new status somehow?

I find this last part especially troubling, on multiple levels. Not just from the obvious problems on the surface, but this is downright troubling from a position within my own practiced faith. What's going to happen with Messianic Judaism, the Hebrew Roots Movement, and the Sabbath keeping Christians under this EO? I won't deny for a second that there's some deeply ironic anti-semitic people within the movement who subscribe to the Two House or Supersessionist positions (neither of which I'm comfortable with), but what happens to the rest of us under this mandate? Will this suddenly make Sabbath keeping without converting to a stripe of Judaism that demands a denial of Messiah a hate crime? Are followers of Messiah going to be forced to congregate on Sundays only despite scripture's position on the subject being a mark of a changed time and season that elevates man-made traditions above His word and Torah, only to have their own legal rights trampled and called racist for honoring a weekly feast day of their Creator?

And let us not forget unintended consequences for Jews themselves. The people who hate Jews hate them irrationally and with an eye of jealousy. This is going to feed those fires further by being given special protections.

This is breaking down the separation of church and state even further. There should have been religious protections extended through the Civil Rights Act to combat the dangers of the BDS movement for students, not a declaration of nationality based on religion.

OzzieandHarriet

  • Bristles
  • ***
  • Posts: 442
Re: Trump outrage of the day
« Reply #382 on: December 11, 2019, 11:04:17 AM »
Okay, I did more reading, and I need to calm down. It's being classified as an "ethnicity or nationality" for the purposes of certain hate crime laws being enforced. This may well be a case of the media just trying to make Trump look bad.

But Judaism is neither an ethnicity nor a nationality. So itís simply wrong.

And Trump doesnít need any help looking bad. He IS bad.

nereo

  • Senior Mustachian
  • ********
  • Posts: 13536
  • Location: Just south of Canada
    • Here's how you can support science today:
Re: Trump outrage of the day
« Reply #383 on: December 11, 2019, 11:29:36 AM »
How easily we forget...

The founders made separation of church and state a cornerstone of this new country NOT because they were worried that religious ideas would influence government, but because they wanted government to stay out of their religion (as the Church of England had in Great Brittan). 

Secularites correctly worry about religion in politics. But very few religious people seem to understand the dangers of getting into bed with politics.  Example A: the evangelicals, who are now following a thrice-married agnostic adulterer because they want him to appoint more judges that reflect their values. Sadly I think many miss the irony inherent in that choice.

talltexan

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 3896
Re: Trump outrage of the day
« Reply #384 on: December 11, 2019, 12:34:26 PM »
The bill for Evangelicals hasn't come due yet. They cared mostly about judges, and they are reaping those benefits.

I think it will be twenty years before anyone realizes that people born after 1990 didn't join the church when they started having kids because of Evangelicals' support of Trump during 2016-2030 discrediting them. That is when the bill will come due, but it's so far in the future that it may well be a good exchange for them anyway.

nereo

  • Senior Mustachian
  • ********
  • Posts: 13536
  • Location: Just south of Canada
    • Here's how you can support science today:
Re: Trump outrage of the day
« Reply #385 on: December 11, 2019, 12:43:19 PM »
2030?  Don't tell me you are joining Kyle in that non-sense...

talltexan

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 3896
Re: Trump outrage of the day
« Reply #386 on: December 11, 2019, 02:07:10 PM »
Perhaps you're referring to Kyle's prediction that one of Trump's children will succeed him in the White House? I personally think one of the sycophantic administration members, like Pence, Mulvaney, Haley, or Pompeo would do better running in elections once Trump signals he's done, and they clearly have political skill that Ivanka and co. lack. But just as George HW Bush was ex post considered the third Reagan term, I think this will apply to any one of these others who might win the WH.

Serious question, though: why is the two-term prohibition so much stronger than the Emoluments prohibition? Many Republicans seem content to support any candidate who is not a Democrat, provided that candidate can win an election. Why would they suddenly become principled and say, "We liked Trump while he was in his first two terms, but he needs to stop now."? They will claim that some or another crisis demands a strong leader, and--as it turns out--there is one who continues to be willing to serve without taking a salary.

RangerOne

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 714
Re: Trump outrage of the day
« Reply #387 on: December 11, 2019, 02:46:16 PM »
I probably come across as unreasonably anti-Trump in my comments on these discussion boards, but I just got done spending Thanksgiving with my mom, and telling her that she was wayyyy separated from reality for believing Trump would turn out to basically be Hitler. This news item will not help my case.

While Trump is certainly the worst president we have ever had (with regards to basic competence, foreign policy and leadership) , the reality of his current presidential term and possibly another 4 years, will likely not result in any calamity that will drastically harm the majority of Americans. And even a major recession/depression is very hard to pin on a single president since it takes so many factors to build up to downturn.

The down side of Trump with regard to race is that he is all too eager to parrot white supremacist troupes in order to please his base and buy into policies born of the fears they exacerbate. This has clearly made life for some in the US, immigrants and asylum seekers form the south, extremely bad.

I also realize that it seems the vast majority of Republics are willing to overlook Trumps obvious and glaring flaws as a leader due to the fact that he is delivering so many policy wins for them and sticking it to the liberals both domestic and foreign. I can't really empathize with this position because there simply hasn't been a democratic candidate in my life time that was as deeply flawed as Trump. (Which I assume makes the hardcore Clinton hatters role their collective eyes. But as power hungry and shady as the Clintons may be, they are not as deranged as Trump.)

I do feel like Trump is a different kind of person than a Hitler. Both favor totalitarian regimes clearly based on Trumps favoring of similar types of leaders. But Trump I think lacks the kind of sick single minded delusion that lead Hitler to push the final solution. I am not a historian but I have the impression that Hitler was an ideologue and had a grand vision for how everything should be, and probably more than believed the vision he was pushing.

I don't think Trump believes in anything. He simply has made a career of using media manipulation to stay relevant, famous and make money. He is the kind of leader that would indulge the politics of a twisted ideologue if he thought it would help his media campaign. Not because he actually is deeply dedicate to some sick twisted vision. I do think that makes him far less dangerous in the short term because he isn't steering us hard in anyone particular fucked up direction.

I think it is more apt to say he is kind of swerving all over the road just trying to deliver enough media victories to his base to keep getting praised at rallies. I think it is really hard to say if any of the norms he is breaking will have lasting impacts on future norms. Because I think Trump is so unique in his ability to get away with doing stupid shit. And I think few potential presidents on either side are brazen enough to follow his example to achieve similar levels of norm breaking.

scottish

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1799
  • Location: Ottawa
Re: Trump outrage of the day
« Reply #388 on: December 11, 2019, 03:39:51 PM »
Okay, I did more reading, and I need to calm down. It's being classified as an "ethnicity or nationality" for the purposes of certain hate crime laws being enforced. This may well be a case of the media just trying to make Trump look bad.

But Judaism is neither an ethnicity nor a nationality. So itís simply wrong.

And Trump doesnít need any help looking bad. He IS bad.

I don't think that's completely true.    There are Ashkanazi and Sephardic Jews and they each have their own ethnic identity.

There are similar groups of people scattered where the Brits arbitrarily created countries.   Think of the Kurds for example.

John Galt incarnate!

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1559
  • Location: On Cloud Nine
Re: Trump outrage of the day
« Reply #389 on: December 11, 2019, 05:04:05 PM »


Serious question, though: why is the two-term prohibition so much stronger than the Emoluments prohibition?

I do not think that the  Present/Emoluments Clause presents an issue of  constitutional  violation  for the reason that virtually all of Congress knows that while president, Trump continues to benefit financially from his far-flung enterprises. I think Congress' knowledge of these financial benefits and lack of any consistent, congressional   opposition to Trump receiving them is tantamount to "Consent of the Congress."

Months ago I posed the following hypothetical.

Suppose a televised conference between Trump and Putin.

The conference is in Moscow.

As the conference ends  Trump and Putin shake hands after which Putin puts a hand in his pocket to get a valuable gold watch that he hands to Trump. As he hands the watch to Trump Putin says: "I am pleased that you attended the conference. Here is a present for you."

Most of  Congress sees Trump's acceptance of the watch  or reads about it in newspapers or online news sources.

Congress neither says nor does anything  about Trump's acceptance of the watch.

Below is the Title of Nobility Clause that includes the Present/Emoluments Clause.



No Title of Nobility shall be granted by the United States: And no Person holding any Office of Profit or Trust under them, shall, without the Consent of the Congress, accept of any present, Emolument, Office, or Title, of any kind whatever, from any King, Prince, or foreign State.


Is Congress' cognizance of Trump's acceptance of the present from Putin and inaction  about it tantamount to Congress  consenting  to Trump's acceptance of the present from Putin?

In the information age of the 21st century I'm curious as to what constitutes Congress' "Consent" to a president's acceptance of "any present, Emolument, Office, or Title, of any kind whatever, from any King, Prince, or foreign State."
« Last Edit: December 11, 2019, 05:19:34 PM by John Galt incarnate! »

nereo

  • Senior Mustachian
  • ********
  • Posts: 13536
  • Location: Just south of Canada
    • Here's how you can support science today:
Re: Trump outrage of the day
« Reply #390 on: December 11, 2019, 05:41:42 PM »
No, I was referring to his repeated predictions that he will be elected to a third and sometimes forth term.
Serious question, though: why is the two-term prohibition so much stronger than the Emoluments prohibition? Many Republicans seem content to support any candidate who is not a Democrat, provided that candidate can win an election.

I think a key difference between the emoluments and the 22nd amendment is that the latter requires active participation, and isn't open to interpretation (no matter how dubious and flawed the logic may be).  The GOP - like the Dems - have to select a nominee.  One really can't say "but this wouldn't be a third term".  The emoluments clause has all sorts of logical loopholes for people.  He'd be making these deals if he wasn't president. Trump Hotel is really a normal place for the Saudi's to stay when in Washington.  and perhaps the biggest logical fallacy of all: you can't prove he's change his mind based on any of these so-called emoluments violations.

OzzieandHarriet

  • Bristles
  • ***
  • Posts: 442
Re: Trump outrage of the day
« Reply #391 on: December 11, 2019, 06:27:51 PM »
Okay, I did more reading, and I need to calm down. It's being classified as an "ethnicity or nationality" for the purposes of certain hate crime laws being enforced. This may well be a case of the media just trying to make Trump look bad.

But Judaism is neither an ethnicity nor a nationality. So itís simply wrong.

And Trump doesnít need any help looking bad. He IS bad.

I don't think that's completely true.    There are Ashkanazi and Sephardic Jews and they each have their own ethnic identity.

There are similar groups of people scattered where the Brits arbitrarily created countries.   Think of the Kurds for example.

The Jewishness and the ethnicity are two different things.

partgypsy

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 4109
Re: Trump outrage of the day
« Reply #392 on: December 12, 2019, 06:17:49 AM »


Serious question, though: why is the two-term prohibition so much stronger than the Emoluments prohibition?

I do not think that the  Present/Emoluments Clause presents an issue of  constitutional  violation  for the reason that virtually all of Congress knows that while president, Trump continues to benefit financially from his far-flung enterprises. I think Congress' knowledge of these financial benefits and lack of any consistent, congressional   opposition to Trump receiving them is tantamount to "Consent of the Congress."

Months ago I posed the following hypothetical.

Suppose a televised conference between Trump and Putin.

The conference is in Moscow.

As the conference ends  Trump and Putin shake hands after which Putin puts a hand in his pocket to get a valuable gold watch that he hands to Trump. As he hands the watch to Trump Putin says: "I am pleased that you attended the conference. Here is a present for you."

Most of  Congress sees Trump's acceptance of the watch  or reads about it in newspapers or online news sources.

Congress neither says nor does anything  about Trump's acceptance of the watch.

Below is the Title of Nobility Clause that includes the Present/Emoluments Clause.



No Title of Nobility shall be granted by the United States: And no Person holding any Office of Profit or Trust under them, shall, without the Consent of the Congress, accept of any present, Emolument, Office, or Title, of any kind whatever, from any King, Prince, or foreign State.


Is Congress' cognizance of Trump's acceptance of the present from Putin and inaction  about it tantamount to Congress  consenting  to Trump's acceptance of the present from Putin?

In the information age of the 21st century I'm curious as to what constitutes Congress' "Consent" to a president's acceptance of "any present, Emolument, Office, or Title, of any kind whatever, from any King, Prince, or foreign State."

The watch thing would only be a problem if Trump kept the watch. Presidents in past have been given and accepted all sorts of gifts (of varying value, heck the statue of Liberty was a gift) from foreign dignitaries. The thing is, they stay with the office of the President and they are displayed in the White house or stored somewhere. We already know that Trump has received gifts of value from foreign powers, which are personal and benefit him only (vs given symbolically to the office of the presidency (primarily information, emails of his political opponent, also disinformation campaign, cash donations for his inaguration). The Republicans know this. However they are saying this is normal, and that other presidents have done this, without actually being able to provide examples. Legal scholars have already weighed in saying what Trump has done is certainly more serious and a bigger violation of the office of President than what Nixon did, and he was previously our gold standard of violating the oath of the office of President.

Anyways the gold watch is not a problem, as long as he doesn't keep it. 
« Last Edit: December 12, 2019, 06:21:13 AM by partgypsy »

talltexan

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 3896
Re: Trump outrage of the day
« Reply #393 on: December 12, 2019, 07:18:32 AM »
No, I was referring to his repeated predictions that he will be elected to a third and sometimes forth term.
Serious question, though: why is the two-term prohibition so much stronger than the Emoluments prohibition? Many Republicans seem content to support any candidate who is not a Democrat, provided that candidate can win an election.

I think a key difference between the emoluments and the 22nd amendment is that the latter requires active participation, and isn't open to interpretation (no matter how dubious and flawed the logic may be).  The GOP - like the Dems - have to select a nominee.  One really can't say "but this wouldn't be a third term".  The emoluments clause has all sorts of logical loopholes for people.  He'd be making these deals if he wasn't president. Trump Hotel is really a normal place for the Saudi's to stay when in Washington.  and perhaps the biggest logical fallacy of all: you can't prove he's change his mind based on any of these so-called emoluments violations.

I will own those predictions, and I began making them the day after he was elected in 2016. Indeed I have long thought that people underestimate the chances of Trump running for and winning a third term. I do not think this is a 50-50 thing.

We see FDR as a hero because he oversaw a successful WWII effort, and because the Great Depression ended on his watch. I see a lot of FDR in Trump. Not the good parts, but the bad parts. I cannot imagine anyone thought in early 1933 that the man who was President then would still be president ten years later. The more I study FDR--and this is hard because I was raised to revere him--the more I learn about his flouting of the rule of law, confiscation of everyone's gold, the outrage of the internment camps for Japanese citizens, and incoherence of his economic programs.

FIPurpose

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1395
  • Location: WA
    • FI With Purpose
Re: Trump outrage of the day
« Reply #394 on: December 12, 2019, 08:00:31 AM »
Sure, but FDR was before the 22nd Amendment. It may not be up to Trump.

1. The House could nullify his electoral votes based on his ineligibility.
2. The Supreme Court could be forced into removing him from office.
3. Trump ain't makin it that long. He wont be blessed with Carter's longevity.

Davnasty

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 2582
Re: Trump outrage of the day
« Reply #395 on: December 12, 2019, 08:06:34 AM »
No, I was referring to his repeated predictions that he will be elected to a third and sometimes forth term.
Serious question, though: why is the two-term prohibition so much stronger than the Emoluments prohibition? Many Republicans seem content to support any candidate who is not a Democrat, provided that candidate can win an election.

I think a key difference between the emoluments and the 22nd amendment is that the latter requires active participation, and isn't open to interpretation (no matter how dubious and flawed the logic may be).  The GOP - like the Dems - have to select a nominee.  One really can't say "but this wouldn't be a third term".  The emoluments clause has all sorts of logical loopholes for people.  He'd be making these deals if he wasn't president. Trump Hotel is really a normal place for the Saudi's to stay when in Washington.  and perhaps the biggest logical fallacy of all: you can't prove he's change his mind based on any of these so-called emoluments violations.

I will own those predictions, and I began making them the day after he was elected in 2016. Indeed I have long thought that people underestimate the chances of Trump running for and winning a third term. I do not think this is a 50-50 thing.

We see FDR as a hero because he oversaw a successful WWII effort, and because the Great Depression ended on his watch. I see a lot of FDR in Trump. Not the good parts, but the bad parts. I cannot imagine anyone thought in early 1933 that the man who was President then would still be president ten years later. The more I study FDR--and this is hard because I was raised to revere him--the more I learn about his flouting of the rule of law, confiscation of everyone's gold, the outrage of the internment camps for Japanese citizens, and incoherence of his economic programs.

We can't deny you your prediction as anything is possible, but do you dispute nereo's reasoning? He gave a logical response to your question but you didn't acknowledge it.

I've spoken to Trump supporters who genuinely believe he's done nothing wrong in relation to his businesses. He tells them that he put everything in a blind trust and that takes care of any conflict of interest and they believe him. He can't use the same sort of hand waving justification to run for a third term. Will he tell them 8 years is actually 4? Will he tell them the 22nd amendment doesn't exist?

Beyond that, how would this even be logistically possible? Do you have a process in mind where he could plausibly end up on the ballot?

nereo

  • Senior Mustachian
  • ********
  • Posts: 13536
  • Location: Just south of Canada
    • Here's how you can support science today:
Re: Trump outrage of the day
« Reply #396 on: December 12, 2019, 08:44:17 AM »
Well probably peanuts in comparison to much of what's gone on this past few years, but Trump Jr. was retroactively given a permit to kill an endangered sheep in Mongolia.  So we've got the president's son benefiting from political favors for  morally dubious actions. At a time when many of his supporters are going on about Hunter Biden using his father's political clout to get a cushy board position in Ukraine.

Hubris in the extreme.  Hey, your father is president and they are moving in on impeachment based on him allegedly using his position to enrich himself.  How about you don't do anything idiotic like use your father's influence just for your own jollies?

https://www.propublica.org/article/trump-inc-podcast-donald-trump-jr-went-to-mongolia-got-special-treatment-from-the-government-and-killed-an-endangered-sheep

Samuel

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 513
  • Location: the slippery slope
Re: Trump outrage of the day
« Reply #397 on: December 12, 2019, 08:59:35 AM »
The "appearance of impropriety" standard is for suckers.

Just Joe

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 4057
Re: Trump outrage of the day
« Reply #398 on: December 12, 2019, 09:06:12 AM »
Perhaps I'm connected with an unusual group of practicing Jews, but they all basically tell me some variant of, "We know his tweets are dumb, but his daughter is Jewish, and it's clear he has Israel's back, so we're all in."

Remind me again why Jews are so hated again? I've met a few over the years - pretty ordinary people. Just not many self-identifying Jews around my part of flyover country.

GuitarStv

  • Senior Mustachian
  • ********
  • Posts: 16600
  • Age: 39
  • Location: Toronto, Ontario, Canada
Re: Trump outrage of the day
« Reply #399 on: December 12, 2019, 09:23:54 AM »
Perhaps I'm connected with an unusual group of practicing Jews, but they all basically tell me some variant of, "We know his tweets are dumb, but his daughter is Jewish, and it's clear he has Israel's back, so we're all in."

Remind me again why Jews are so hated again? I've met a few over the years - pretty ordinary people. Just not many self-identifying Jews around my part of flyover country.

In the middle ages there was a common interpretation of the bible that lending money was usury . . . and thus Christians were forbidden from performing this practice.  Jewish people weren't, so many became money lenders to fill the economic gap.  Which eventually led to lots of stereotypes about Jewish people being corrupt money grubbing people  . . .  kinda a combination of resentment towards people who lend money and Christians hating folks who aren't Christianity (Jews got blamed for killing Christ, for consorting with Satan, etc.).  Then, building from this they were a convenient minority scapegoat for all sorts of things.

It's crazy that a stereotype from the middle ages would still be kicking around . . . but the current president of the US regularly repeats tropes built from it so I guess it is still a thing.