Trump outrage of the day

[achvfi]

Trump leveraged his presidency to benefit his properties and they still lost considerable money. And it isn’t just the pandemic - they were s shopping for a buyer of his flagship DC hotel over a year ago as that has been a revenue loser.

I question why foreign entities would continue to prop up his hotels now that he is no longer president. What “power” does he have and what “tools” are at his disposal? @achvfi ?

He could continue to sow division, just be a distraction. He could influence a senator or two to their favor. He could throw his support around.

I dont like to say this but he could compete in next election to influence it or may be he will be our next president.

A billion dollars can be considered cheap to buy influence like that in geopolitical scheme.

[OtherJen]

It all depends on how his investments are setup, and also how the debt that he is able to secure is setup. I don't know the details but from what I understand, the debt he has coming due soon is backed by him personally. So he can't just bankruptcy away that debt.

Whereas, if he owns a particular corporation that owes a lot of money, he would be able to declare it bankrupt without it touching his other wealth. My guess is that the banks were already unwilling to lend him money without him personally backing it and refused to lend directly to one of his corps.

It helps if he still has Saudis, Qataris, Russians bailing his family out.

But was that sort of aid dependent on his continued position in the Oval Office?

He is still a very powerful man with lot of tools at his disposal. There was enough smoke that they were propping him up before 2016 and during his presidency so they wont be stopping now.

I assumed that he was propped up because he was likely to end up in the White House, where he would have the power and leverage to pay back the favor. He’s no longer in the White House, he may be barred from future political office, three of his four major crediting banks have cut ties with him, he’s facing expulsion from the Screen Actors Guild (which means another round of the Apprentice is very unlikely), and he has hundreds of millions of dollars in personally guaranteed debt coming due. He doesn’t have nearly as many tools as he did 4 years ago.

[nereo]

Trump leveraged his presidency to benefit his properties and they still lost considerable money. And it isn’t just the pandemic - they were s shopping for a buyer of his flagship DC hotel over a year ago as that has been a revenue loser.

I question why foreign entities would continue to prop up his hotels now that he is no longer president. What “power” does he have and what “tools” are at his disposal? @achvfi ?

He could continue to sow division, just be a distraction. He could influence a senator or two to their favor. He could throw his support around.

I dont like to say this but he could compete in next election to influence it or may be he will be our next president.

A billion dollars can be considered cheap to buy influence like that in geopolitical scheme.

Given the outcome of both senate elections, would his support still be seen as an asset?

A billion dollars might be cheap ( though I refute that) - though he doesn’t seem to have anywhere that amount in cash to just toss around. Liquidity seems to be a core problem of the Trump organization right now...

[sherr]

A billion dollars might be cheap ( though I refute that) - though he doesn’t seem to have anywhere that amount in cash to just toss around. Liquidity seems to be a core problem of the Trump organization right now...

I think you misread that; they're saying that the Saudis / whoever would be giving Trump a billion dollars for his influence, not that Trump would give it to someone else.

How much sway Trump still has in the Republican party is very much still an open question. But it looks to me like the answer is going to be "quite a lot".

[nereo]

A billion dollars might be cheap ( though I refute that) - though he doesn’t seem to have anywhere that amount in cash to just toss around. Liquidity seems to be a core problem of the Trump organization right now...

I think you misread that; they're saying that the Saudis / whoever would be giving Trump a billion dollars for his influence, not that Trump would give it to someone else.

How much sway Trump still has in the Republican party is very much still an open question. But it looks to me like the answer is going to be "quite a lot".

As. Thanks for the clarification.

As talltexan said, we will know more of the extent of Trump’s influence in 2022

[achvfi]

Given the outcome of both senate elections, would his support still be seen as an asset?

A billion dollars might be cheap ( though I refute that) - though he doesn’t seem to have anywhere that amount in cash to just toss around. Liquidity seems to be a core problem of the Trump organization right now...

He is still an big asset in many circles. I think we should stop underestimating him by now.

World beyond is crazier place when nations are involved in equation, there are no rules to be bound by.

More speculation here. What's to say money troubles are façade and he is already been paid up buku bucks waiting for him to safely access them by Saudis and Qataris at right time. For example during his presidency there were instances where Qataris were in big trouble one day, they were squeezed further by trump first and then trump-Kushner brokered a deal to get them out of the situation. Trump got paid some way. Same goes with Saudis.

Check this out for instance.
https://www.vanityfair.com/news/2019/02/qatar-666-5th-ave-jared-kushner

[nereo]

Given the outcome of both senate elections, would his support still be seen as an asset?

A billion dollars might be cheap ( though I refute that) - though he doesn’t seem to have anywhere that amount in cash to just toss around. Liquidity seems to be a core problem of the Trump organization right now...

He is still an big asset in many circles. I think we should stop underestimating him by now.

World beyond is crazier place when nations are involved in equation, there are no rules to be bound by.

More speculation here. What's to say money troubles are façade and he is already been paid up buku bucks waiting for him to safely access them by Saudis and Qataris at right time. For example during his presidency there were instances where Qataris were in big trouble one day, they were squeezed further by trump first and then trump-Kushner brokered a deal to get them out of the situation. Trump got paid some way. Same goes with Saudis.

Check this out for instance.
https://www.vanityfair.com/news/2019/02/qatar-666-5th-ave-jared-kushner

So under this theory, Trump is breaking numerous laws to make his properties seem like they are making money, and to make him appear to be a failing businessman?  What’s the angle here?
There’s precious little to indicate he is doing well, financially, and just a steady stream of reports showing the contrary. 

The Kushner/Trump progress in the middle-east is one of the least substantive things to come out of this administration. There’s a reason why even conservative media stopped talking about it soon after it was announced.

[achvfi]

So under this theory, Trump is breaking numerous laws to make his properties seem like they are making money, and to make him appear to be a failing businessman?  What’s the angle here?
There’s precious little to indicate he is doing well, financially, and just a steady stream of reports showing the contrary. 

The Kushner/Trump progress in the middle-east is one of the least substantive things to come out of this administration. There’s a reason why even conservative media stopped talking about it soon after it was announced.

I think you misunderstand what I am saying. I am not trying connect his business failures to an elaborate plot. Him being a bad business man is why his businesses are failing.

I am talking about quid pro quo corruption. I am saying not to underestimate how far he can go to get ahead.

And also I am not talking about Trump/Kushner middle-east peace brokering. That is entirely different issue.

[partgypsy]

Maybe shutting down this thread is premature. Looked like he was up for using the DOJ to throw out election results.

https://www.wral.com/trump-and-justice-department-lawyer-said-to-have-plotted-to-oust-acting-attorney-general/19486725/

[Kris]

Maybe shutting down this thread is premature. Looked like he was up for using the DOJ to throw out election results.

https://www.wral.com/trump-and-justice-department-lawyer-said-to-have-plotted-to-oust-acting-attorney-general/19486725/

I think we are going to be finding out about outrageous things Trump did as president for some time to come.

[OzzieandHarriet]

He’s still at it. Throw him in jail already ...

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/trump-republican-split/2021/01/23/d7dc253e-5cbc-11eb-8bcf-3877871c819d_story.html

[nereo]

He’s still at it. Throw him in jail already ...

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/trump-republican-split/2021/01/23/d7dc253e-5cbc-11eb-8bcf-3877871c819d_story.html

Yup Trump is pushing his own “MAGA Party” to split from the GOP, most immediately to cajole wavering republicans in the senate (e.g. Collins) to support him during the impeachment trial.

Now that he’s lost he just wants to burn everything down.  Which his supporters seem more than happy to do.  The GOP’s “big tent” is getting smaller, bit by bit.

[Travis]

He’s still at it. Throw him in jail already ...

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/trump-republican-split/2021/01/23/d7dc253e-5cbc-11eb-8bcf-3877871c819d_story.html

Yup Trump is pushing his own “MAGA Party” to split from the GOP, most immediately to cajole wavering republicans in the senate (e.g. Collins) to support him during the impeachment trial.

Now that he’s lost he just wants to burn everything down.  Which his supporters seem more than happy to do.  The GOP’s “big tent” is getting smaller, bit by bit.

All while Graham insists that if the Party implodes it'll be because McConnell supports impeachment.

[frugalnacho]

I'm confused. Is he threatening to create his own party if they convict him and prevent him from holding office? Is he just doing it for spite? If they don't convict him he's just going to run again as republican? He's already proven he can't win an election though, even with the full backing of the GOP. 

Sounds like a lose lose situation for the GOP.  Sweet karma.

[wenchsenior]

Maybe shutting down this thread is premature. Looked like he was up for using the DOJ to throw out election results.

https://www.wral.com/trump-and-justice-department-lawyer-said-to-have-plotted-to-oust-acting-attorney-general/19486725/

I suspect shutting this thread down will be premature until he finally dies.

[GreenEggs]

I'm confused. Is he threatening to create his own party if they convict him and prevent him from holding office? Is he just doing it for spite? If they don't convict him he's just going to run again as republican? He's already proven he can't win an election though, even with the full backing of the GOP. 

Sounds like a lose lose situation for the GOP.  Sweet karma.

That sounds like an incentive for the GOP to happily Impeach him, so he'll never be able to run for office again.  Right?

[ixtap]

I'm confused. Is he threatening to create his own party if they convict him and prevent him from holding office? Is he just doing it for spite? If they don't convict him he's just going to run again as republican? He's already proven he can't win an election though, even with the full backing of the GOP. 

Sounds like a lose lose situation for the GOP.  Sweet karma.

That sounds like an incentive for the GOP to happily Impeach him, so he'll never be able to run for office again.  Right?

It depends on whether you want to capitalize on his momentum or run a functioning democracy.

[nereo]

I'm confused. Is he threatening to create his own party if they convict him and prevent him from holding office? Is he just doing it for spite? If they don't convict him he's just going to run again as republican? He's already proven he can't win an election though, even with the full backing of the GOP. 

Sounds like a lose lose situation for the GOP.  Sweet karma.

He’s threatening to start his own party specifically to challenge any GOP legislator who votes for impeachment in the primaries.  It’s a political threat - vote against me and I will ensure you lose your next primary.

It seems he wants to play the role of spoiler even more than he wants to be a ‘kingmaker’.  It’s becoming a key part of his defense (i.e. “if you can’t defend your actions, threaten/scare the Jury”).  Why he is so worried about losing when he’s no longer in office is the interesting question - some think it’s so that he can run again in 2024.  I personally think it has more to do with not losing the $215k guaranteed Presidential stipend plus the additional $500k+ he can use for his post-presidential office expenses, which will almost certainly be at one of the Trump Organization properties (thereby giving him perpetual taxpayer income).

[markbike528CBX]

As I've said to my Republican congressman (one of the 10), the sooner the Republicans ditch tRump, the better for the Republican Party, let alone the United States of America.

......If all you care about is the Republican Party , or if you care at all for the Republican Party, then you will take the opportunity to remove the cancer of Trump-ism from the Republican Party, by affirming measures to censure and remove Donald Trump from any public office or position of influence.......

I suspect shutting this thread down will be premature until he finally dies.

I'm holding out for when his grandiose mausoleum crumbles to dust.  Then it will be "safe" to  shut down this thread.  So sad..... :-)

[OtherJen]

Oh boy. 'Gondor has no king’: pro-Trump lawsuit cites Lord of the Rings (The Guardian)

"Gondor has no king,” the lawsuit states, a footnote providing an explanation of the woeful fate of Tolkien’s entirely imaginary land populated by dragons, wizards, hobbits and elves, all threatened by a baleful Dark Lord backed up by an army of orcs and with famously little time for due democratic process.

The suit explains how Gondor’s throne was empty and its rightful kings in exile, presumably positing the idea that Trump is the true king of America – a land happily monarch-free since 1776.

“This analogy is applicable since there is now in Washington DC a group of individuals calling themselves the president, vice-president and Congress who have no rightful claim to govern the American people,” the case states.

It adds: “Since only the rightful king could sit on the throne of Gondor, a steward was appointed to manage Gondor until the return of the King, known as ‘Aragorn’, occurred at the end of the story.”

The lawsuit then suggests that America’s version of the stewards of Gondor should be selected from among – surprise, surprise – Trump’s cabinet members, who should run the country.

I cannot wait to see what a judge does with this.

[sui generis]

Maybe shutting down this thread is premature. Looked like he was up for using the DOJ to throw out election results.

https://www.wral.com/trump-and-justice-department-lawyer-said-to-have-plotted-to-oust-acting-attorney-general/19486725/

I suspect shutting this thread down will be premature until he finally dies.

And even then, we might just repurpose it for the next outrageous Trump.  What with Lara planning to run for Senate in NC and the competing horrors of Don Jr. and Eric, I'm afraid we may have more Trump outrages for generations to come!

[ixtap]

Oh boy. 'Gondor has no king’: pro-Trump lawsuit cites Lord of the Rings (The Guardian)

"Gondor has no king,” the lawsuit states, a footnote providing an explanation of the woeful fate of Tolkien’s entirely imaginary land populated by dragons, wizards, hobbits and elves, all threatened by a baleful Dark Lord backed up by an army of orcs and with famously little time for due democratic process.

The suit explains how Gondor’s throne was empty and its rightful kings in exile, presumably positing the idea that Trump is the true king of America – a land happily monarch-free since 1776.

“This analogy is applicable since there is now in Washington DC a group of individuals calling themselves the president, vice-president and Congress who have no rightful claim to govern the American people,” the case states.

It adds: “Since only the rightful king could sit on the throne of Gondor, a steward was appointed to manage Gondor until the return of the King, known as ‘Aragorn’, occurred at the end of the story.”

The lawsuit then suggests that America’s version of the stewards of Gondor should be selected from among – surprise, surprise – Trump’s cabinet members, who should run the country.

I cannot wait to see what a judge does with this.

Can the judge refer the filers for mental care?

[nereo]

Maybe shutting down this thread is premature. Looked like he was up for using the DOJ to throw out election results.

https://www.wral.com/trump-and-justice-department-lawyer-said-to-have-plotted-to-oust-acting-attorney-general/19486725/

I suspect shutting this thread down will be premature until he finally dies.

And even then, we might just repurpose it for the next outrageous Trump.  What with Lara planning to run for Senate in NC and the competing horrors of Don Jr. and Eric, I'm afraid we may have more Trump outrages for generations to come!

Fred trump created Donald, both nurture and nature. He in turn has given us Don Junior, Eric, etc.
Raising kids with privilege and no moral standing doesn’t bode well society.

Anyone remember the last debate between Hillary Clinton and trump, where each was asked to say one nice thing about the other, and Hillary cites his children were wonderful people? Seems that was premature...

[markbike528CBX]

Maybe shutting down this thread is premature. Looked like he was up for using the DOJ to throw out election results.

https://www.wral.com/trump-and-justice-department-lawyer-said-to-have-plotted-to-oust-acting-attorney-general/19486725/

I suspect shutting this thread down will be premature until he finally dies.

And even then, we might just repurpose it for the next outrageous Trump.  What with Lara planning to run for Senate in NC and the competing horrors of Don Jr. and Eric, I'm afraid we may have more Trump outrages for generations to come!

Don't forget Barron  2041   (ducks and rolls, flame suit on)   I actually feel sorry for the kid (now, before possible outrages), how would YOU like to be the child of The Donald?

[frugalnacho]

I'm confused. Is he threatening to create his own party if they convict him and prevent him from holding office? Is he just doing it for spite? If they don't convict him he's just going to run again as republican? He's already proven he can't win an election though, even with the full backing of the GOP. 

Sounds like a lose lose situation for the GOP.  Sweet karma.

He’s threatening to start his own party specifically to challenge any GOP legislator who votes for impeachment in the primaries.  It’s a political threat - vote against me and I will ensure you lose your next primary.

It seems he wants to play the role of spoiler even more than he wants to be a ‘kingmaker’.  It’s becoming a key part of his defense (i.e. “if you can’t defend your actions, threaten/scare the Jury”).  Why he is so worried about losing when he’s no longer in office is the interesting question - some think it’s so that he can run again in 2024.  I personally think it has more to do with not losing the $215k guaranteed Presidential stipend plus the additional $500k+ he can use for his post-presidential office expenses, which will almost certainly be at one of the Trump Organization properties (thereby giving him perpetual taxpayer income).

I was under the impression that he gets all the perks of being a past president regardless of whether he's convicted.  The statute says he qualifies unless he's removed from office, and he wasn't removed, his term just expired.  Even if convicted now he won't have been removed from office, so he technically qualifies. At least that's how the youtube lawyers presented it.  I don't know if the Senate can specify that the conviction will strip him of those. I guess we'll have to wait and see.

[markbike528CBX]

Oh boy. 'Gondor has no king’: pro-Trump lawsuit cites Lord of the Rings (The Guardian)

"Gondor has no king,” the lawsuit states, a footnote providing an explanation of the woeful fate of Tolkien’s entirely imaginary land populated by dragons, wizards, hobbits and elves, all threatened by a baleful Dark Lord backed up by an army of orcs and with famously little time for due democratic process.

The suit explains how Gondor’s throne was empty and its rightful kings in exile, presumably positing the idea that Trump is the true king of America – a land happily monarch-free since 1776.

“This analogy is applicable since there is now in Washington DC a group of individuals calling themselves the president, vice-president and Congress who have no rightful claim to govern the American people,” the case states.

It adds: “Since only the rightful king could sit on the throne of Gondor, a steward was appointed to manage Gondor until the return of the King, known as ‘Aragorn’, occurred at the end of the story.”

The lawsuit then suggests that America’s version of the stewards of Gondor should be selected from among – surprise, surprise – Trump’s cabinet members, who should run the country

I cannot wait to see what a judge does with this.

Via https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2021/jan/23/donald-trump-lawsuit-lord-of-the-rings-gondor-election

https://www.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.txwd.1120287/gov.uscourts.txwd.1120287.6.0.pdf   

I have been reading the Congressional Record https://www.congress.gov/congressional-record 
, lately to see what was actually said. So having a actual source is important to me nowadays.

This "suit" is one of the funniest in a very sad way, like seeing Wile E. Coyote and KNOWING what is coming.
Apparently some people [and lawyers] have access to much stronger drugs than the rest of us.

[nereo]

I'm confused. Is he threatening to create his own party if they convict him and prevent him from holding office? Is he just doing it for spite? If they don't convict him he's just going to run again as republican? He's already proven he can't win an election though, even with the full backing of the GOP. 

Sounds like a lose lose situation for the GOP.  Sweet karma.

He’s threatening to start his own party specifically to challenge any GOP legislator who votes for impeachment in the primaries.  It’s a political threat - vote against me and I will ensure you lose your next primary.

It seems he wants to play the role of spoiler even more than he wants to be a ‘kingmaker’.  It’s becoming a key part of his defense (i.e. “if you can’t defend your actions, threaten/scare the Jury”).  Why he is so worried about losing when he’s no longer in office is the interesting question - some think it’s so that he can run again in 2024.  I personally think it has more to do with not losing the $215k guaranteed Presidential stipend plus the additional $500k+ he can use for his post-presidential office expenses, which will almost certainly be at one of the Trump Organization properties (thereby giving him perpetual taxpayer income).

I was under the impression that he gets all the perks of being a past president regardless of whether he's convicted.  The statute says he qualifies unless he's removed from office, and he wasn't removed, his term just expired.  Even if convicted now he won't have been removed from office, so he technically qualifies. At least that's how the youtube lawyers presented it.  I don't know if the Senate can specify that the conviction will strip him of those. I guess we'll have to wait and see.

Impeachment strips a president of his pension per my understanding (“...honor, trust. and profit”)

From article I section 3:
...judgment in cases of impeachment shall not extend further than to removal from office, and disqualification to hold and enjoy any office of honor, trust or profit under the United States.

[LennStar]

Anyone remember the last debate between Hillary Clinton and trump, where each was asked to say one nice thing about the other, and Hillary cites his children were wonderful people? Seems that was premature...

Crooked Hillary. Always lying! Can't trust her!

[OtherJen]

I'm confused. Is he threatening to create his own party if they convict him and prevent him from holding office? Is he just doing it for spite? If they don't convict him he's just going to run again as republican? He's already proven he can't win an election though, even with the full backing of the GOP. 

Sounds like a lose lose situation for the GOP.  Sweet karma.

He’s threatening to start his own party specifically to challenge any GOP legislator who votes for impeachment in the primaries.  It’s a political threat - vote against me and I will ensure you lose your next primary.

Apparently Sarah Huckabee Sanders is running for governor of Arkansas based on her loyalty to Trump. 'Cause she did such a great job as press secretary and all. [/s]

https://www.google.com/amp/s/thehill.com/homenews/campaign/535632-sarah-huckabee-sanders-announces-gubernatorial-campaign%3famp

[talltexan]

Maybe shutting down this thread is premature. Looked like he was up for using the DOJ to throw out election results.

https://www.wral.com/trump-and-justice-department-lawyer-said-to-have-plotted-to-oust-acting-attorney-general/19486725/

I suspect shutting this thread down will be premature until he finally dies.

And even then, we might just repurpose it for the next outrageous Trump.  What with Lara planning to run for Senate in NC and the competing horrors of Don Jr. and Eric, I'm afraid we may have more Trump outrages for generations to come!

Fred trump created Donald, both nurture and nature. He in turn has given us Don Junior, Eric, etc.
Raising kids with privilege and no moral standing doesn’t bode well society.

Anyone remember the last debate between Hillary Clinton and trump, where each was asked to say one nice thing about the other, and Hillary cites his children were wonderful people? Seems that was premature...

I've long had that final question in mind. Frankly, I think Trump came out the better for it. The debates were awful for him in general, but his response about Sec. Clinton, "She is a fighter who will never quit," was perfect for energizing all the people who were afraid of her to take a chance and vote for him. Essentially, anyone who was certain a President Clinton would annoy zhem was being told that annoyance would be non-stop and relentless.

Her "his kids" response was--frankly--vapid and false. His kids have left no ambiguity with their behavior since then.

[frugalnacho]

I'm confused. Is he threatening to create his own party if they convict him and prevent him from holding office? Is he just doing it for spite? If they don't convict him he's just going to run again as republican? He's already proven he can't win an election though, even with the full backing of the GOP. 

Sounds like a lose lose situation for the GOP.  Sweet karma.

He’s threatening to start his own party specifically to challenge any GOP legislator who votes for impeachment in the primaries.  It’s a political threat - vote against me and I will ensure you lose your next primary.

It seems he wants to play the role of spoiler even more than he wants to be a ‘kingmaker’.  It’s becoming a key part of his defense (i.e. “if you can’t defend your actions, threaten/scare the Jury”).  Why he is so worried about losing when he’s no longer in office is the interesting question - some think it’s so that he can run again in 2024.  I personally think it has more to do with not losing the $215k guaranteed Presidential stipend plus the additional $500k+ he can use for his post-presidential office expenses, which will almost certainly be at one of the Trump Organization properties (thereby giving him perpetual taxpayer income).

I was under the impression that he gets all the perks of being a past president regardless of whether he's convicted.  The statute says he qualifies unless he's removed from office, and he wasn't removed, his term just expired.  Even if convicted now he won't have been removed from office, so he technically qualifies. At least that's how the youtube lawyers presented it.  I don't know if the Senate can specify that the conviction will strip him of those. I guess we'll have to wait and see.

Impeachment strips a president of his pension per my understanding (“...honor, trust. and profit”)

From article I section 3:
...judgment in cases of impeachment shall not extend further than to removal from office, and disqualification to hold and enjoy any office of honor, trust or profit under the United States.

I think that applies specifically to holding office.  So they can convict him, and then separately they can vote to not allow him to hold any public office, ie "any office of honor, trust or profit", moving forward.  He still qualifies for his benefits under the former presidents act, even if they convict and vote to prohibit him from serving in an office of honor, an office of trust, or an office of profit. 

I don't think he is going to be convicted though.  Somehow after all of this he still has a stranglehold on a huge portion of the population, and a large amount of the party.  A pathologically lying, dually impeached disgraced fascist that incited a deadly insurrection against his own government, and he is still getting support from people even after he left office.  It's mind blowing. 

[seattlecyclone]

I think you could easily argue that "past president" is an office of profit, given all the valuable benefits it entails, and the Senate could specify that he no longer gets those upon conviction. It would then be up to the Supreme Court to decide otherwise.

[ixtap]

I think you could easily argue that "past president" is an office of profit, given all the valuable benefits it entails, and the Senate could specify that he no longer gets those upon conviction. It would then be up to the Supreme Court to decide otherwise.

I don't think we can or should take away the protection. It is unfortunate that he will manipulate that to his best advantage, but I do not want a Trump martyr cult starting.

[Dicey]

I think you could easily argue that "past president" is an office of profit, given all the valuable benefits it entails, and the Senate could specify that he no longer gets those upon conviction. It would then be up to the Supreme Court to decide otherwise.

I don't think we can or should take away the protection. It is unfortunate that he will manipulate that to his best advantage, but I do not want a Trump martyr cult starting.

I think the protection extended to his adult children bothers me more.

[sherr]

I think the protection extended to his adult children bothers me more.

I believe the Secret Service protection for his adult kids ends in the next 6 months; it doesn't go on indefinitely. While they're certainly going to use it to suck a few more million out of the public's funds by forcing the Secret Service to rent apartments from them or something, that to me is not the end of the world just because of the relatively near end-date.

[seattlecyclone]

I think you could easily argue that "past president" is an office of profit, given all the valuable benefits it entails, and the Senate could specify that he no longer gets those upon conviction. It would then be up to the Supreme Court to decide otherwise.

I don't think we can or should take away the protection. It is unfortunate that he will manipulate that to his best advantage, but I do not want a Trump martyr cult starting.

The political ramifications will surely be at the top of every senator's mind when they make their votes in the coming weeks. I don't think it's right to say "the Constitution clearly doesn't allow this" when there's no real precedent for this and it took me about a minute to come up with an argument why it could be just fine. The Senate could certainly go with this argument if they felt it wise. If Trump decided to dispute that, there are nine people who have the power to create binding precedent in the other direction, and none of us know their thoughts on the matter.

[Glenstache]

I expect a lot of Republicans will not vote to impeach because it will alienate the substantial portion of their base that has bought into Qanon conspiracy theories. Impeaching Trump would be a direct contradiction of that alternate-fact universe. This would be compounded if the elements of the conviction included not just affirmation of removal from office (post-inauguration), but also disqualification from holding office.

Rand Paul's interview with George Stephanopoulous over the weekend in which he *still* refused to acknowledge the results of the election are a canary in the mineshaft. To his credit, GS responded that there were not two sides to the the issue, as evidenced by the multitude of cases and DOJ findings that the election fraud accusations were baseless.

That literally millions of Americans have gone down the rabbit hole of disinformation to the extent that they are twisting all new information to fit the narrative is deeply problematic because: 1) a major political party is in a position (in part through catering to it) that they have a serious potential to splinter if they dispute what are objectively conspiracy theories, and 2) enough Americans bought into it that it is radicalizing a critical mass to conduct violence against the government (see the Capitol riots). That the Qanon and related/overlapping conspiracies are forming alignment between disparate groups like anti-vaxxers, white supremacists, right-wing militias, and theocrats is very problematic because they are aligned against the foundations of our democracy. This is, quite frankly, the Achilles heel of the first amendment. I am an ardent believer in freedom of speech, but the outcome where people detach from reality is difficult to counter. I do not know how to address it.
I recently listened to a very interviewing interview with a researcher in disinformation on the Lawfare podcast. For those that like podcasts, it is worth a listen.
https://www.lawfareblog.com/lawfare-podcast-information-disorder-during-and-after-trump-presidency

[Fishindude]

7,300+ posts and 15 months of Trump hate in this thread.
 

[GuitarStv]

7,300+ posts and 15 months of Trump hate in this thread.

And none of it undeserved.

[Glenstache]

7,300+ posts and 15 months of Trump hate in this thread.

Seems like we have been dropping the ball and not keeping up.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/how-fact-checker-tracked-trump-claims/2021/01/23/ad04b69a-5c1d-11eb-a976-bad6431e03e2_story.html

The final tally of Trump’s presidency: 30,573 false or misleading claims — with nearly half coming in his final year.

[/i]

[OtherJen]

7,300+ posts and 15 months of Trump hate in this thread.

And none of it undeserved.

Yeah, as an American voter, I really don't appreciate 1) attempts to overturn a valid election because of sour grapes or 2) attempted violent sedition.

[Psychstache]

7,300+ posts and 15 months of Trump hate in this thread.

And none of it undeserved.

Yeah, as an American voter, I really don't appreciate 1) attempts to overturn a valid election because of sour grapes or 2) attempted violent sedition.

But her emails!?!?!?

/S

[talltexan]

7,300+ posts and 15 months of Trump hate in this thread.

@Fishindude , I will own that I spent years trying to understand Trump, trying to train myself to see the other side. Every time he appointed an obviously unqualified cabinet secretary like Rick Perry (who was my governor) or Betsy DeVos, I reminded myself "He has that power." I listened to more Scott Adams than anyone else around me, and put on Limbaugh if luck should have me in the car over my lunch hour. Even as I grieved for the death of facts and the obvious hypocrisy of the people sitting all around me in church, I realized that we were destined to live in a fractured world in which reality could be totally different for just enough people to keep Trump in power.

COVID changed all that. I realize it hasn't for many people, but this virus took a course that--on balance--seemed entirely predictable given Trump's apparent personality and skillset.

People ask me how I think the virus would have gone if Trump had lost that election in 2016. I think President Tim Kaine would have done a remarkable job of following the pandemic playbook left behind by our 43rd and 44th Presidents.

[nereo]

People ask me how I think the virus would have gone if Trump had lost that election in 2016. I think President Tim Kaine would have done a remarkable job of following the pandemic playbook left behind by our 43rd and 44th Presidents.

President Kaine.  Huh. 
I think we've been too easy on ourselves, and don't compare our outcomes to other nations whenever the outcome is unflattering to the US.  Healthcare in general is a good example (total cost, overall outcomes, bankruptcies resulting from, etc.)

We are neck-in-neck with India for total number of Covid deaths, a country that has almost 4x as many people.  Factoring in population (i.e. deaths-per-capita) we are neck-and-neck with the UK and way behind China, India, Indonesia and Pakistan (the four other most populous nations).  Compare us with the EU and the US would be 25th out of 28 countries, despite our vast economic resources and our ability to control our borders from Europe.

We have, in a nutshell, had one of the absolute worst outcomes from Covid in the world.  No aspect of our country can account for it - not population, not population density, not ease of entry.  We cannot escape the conclusion that we failed in the first 12 months, and half a million American citizens will die because of it. 

[Just Joe]

The news this morning pointed out that we've had more COVID deaths now than Americans killed in WWII. Then they proceeded to talk about the ways you can't compare WWII deaths to COVID deaths which left me irritated. Regardless of how we want to split those hairs - it is lives lost and lives wasted.

[GuitarStv]

The news this morning pointed out that we've had more COVID deaths now than Americans killed in WWII. Then they proceeded to talk about the ways you can't compare WWII deaths to COVID deaths which left me irritated. Regardless of how we want to split those hairs - it is lives lost and lives wasted.

Yeah, but it's half a million old people.  Nobody gives a shit about old people.  If it was half a million people aged 20 - 40 we would be seeing quite a different response.

[RetiredAt63]

The news this morning pointed out that we've had more COVID deaths now than Americans killed in WWII. Then they proceeded to talk about the ways you can't compare WWII deaths to COVID deaths which left me irritated. Regardless of how we want to split those hairs - it is lives lost and lives wasted.

Yeah, but it's half a million old people.  Nobody gives a shit about old people.  If it was half a million people aged 20 - 40 we would be seeing quite a different response.

And they are old people in nursing homes and seniors' residences, so really out of sight and out of mind.   Grrrr.

And since B119 is here, vaccinate the truckers driving between Canada and the US ASAP.

ETA wrong name, B117 strain.

[GuitarStv]

The news this morning pointed out that we've had more COVID deaths now than Americans killed in WWII. Then they proceeded to talk about the ways you can't compare WWII deaths to COVID deaths which left me irritated. Regardless of how we want to split those hairs - it is lives lost and lives wasted.

Yeah, but it's half a million old people.  Nobody gives a shit about old people.  If it was half a million people aged 20 - 40 we would be seeing quite a different response.

And they are old people in nursing homes and seniors' residences, so really out of sight and out of mind.   Grrrr.

And since B119 is here, vaccinate the truckers driving between Canada and the US ASAP.

FFS . . . Canada never cancelled plane trips to the rest of the world.  Not once.  Just sternly suggested that people shouldn't travel.  So we have had a constant influx of disease vectors who fucked off for a vacation.

Cancelling pleasure travel to other countries is a no brainer for this kind of thing.  It's phenomenally stupid that we didn't bother doing this - and indicative of how little we care about the people who die.

[Glenstache]

@talltexan , thanks for being interested in understanding multiple points of view. I have also made a point of taking time to go to outlets and corners of the internet that are afield of what I agree with from FoxNews (a tame version these days) to Breitbart, etc. I even spent some time reading articles on the OathKeepers webpage and the associated comments. Living in a West Coast bubble where I work with highly educated people, it is a very good reference point and grounding. What has most disturbing about it is the separation from objective reality. I am fine with people having different views on tax issues, on moral issues such as abortion, on immigration policy, on economic ways to address climate change, etc. But it is a whole thing altogether when objective reality is thrown away in support of a preferred narrative. I think the covid response is just a particularly apparent version of the expression of this. The concept of a policy debate or exchange of ideas, which is fundamental to the concept of a functioning and informed democracy, is simply not part of the public sphere without objective reality being a part of the ground rules.

[RetiredAt63]

The news this morning pointed out that we've had more COVID deaths now than Americans killed in WWII. Then they proceeded to talk about the ways you can't compare WWII deaths to COVID deaths which left me irritated. Regardless of how we want to split those hairs - it is lives lost and lives wasted.

Yeah, but it's half a million old people.  Nobody gives a shit about old people.  If it was half a million people aged 20 - 40 we would be seeing quite a different response.

And they are old people in nursing homes and seniors' residences, so really out of sight and out of mind.   Grrrr.

And since B119 is here, vaccinate the truckers driving between Canada and the US ASAP.

FFS . . . Canada never cancelled plane trips to the rest of the world.  Not once.  Just sternly suggested that people shouldn't travel.  So we have had a constant influx of disease vectors who fucked off for a vacation.

Cancelling pleasure travel to other countries is a no brainer for this kind of thing.  It's phenomenally stupid that we didn't bother doing this - and indicative of how little we care about the people who die.

I know.  I just didn't mention it because this is the T**** outrage of the day thread.

Rant:
There are days I wish I had retired to Nova Scotia instead of Ottawa.  All our Conservative Premiers are competing for the worst handling of the pandemic award.  Feds have enough vaccine ordered to vaccinate us all 3 times over, but we have to get the Phizer vaccine from Belgium because T**** wouldn't let the US manufacturer sell to us, and now that plant is closed for upgrades.  I think Trudeau has asked Biden for some from the US but they may just be rumour.  It would definitely improve Canada/US relations if Biden did.  Moderna is coming in small quantities.  Given the easier storage I don't know why we have more orders from Phizer than from Moderna.  We are waiting for FDA approval of  the Oxford Astra-Zeneca vaccine when it has already been approved by the UK and the EU.   

And we trust arrivals to self-quarantine.  Australia and New Zealand have mandatory hotel quarantine and it works.  At this point it is obvious the honour system isn't enough.

At least Quebec and Ontario are fining large gatherings.

Rant over.