Jump to content

A general thread to discuss Trump


intexasatthe moment

Recommended Posts

Sally Yates in her confirmation hearing as Deputy Attorney General being questioned by Jeff Sessions .


http://edition.cnn.com/2017/01/31/politics/sally-yates-jeff-sessions-deputy-attorney-general-hearing/


Sessions: "You have to watch out because people will be asking you to do things and you need to say no... But if the views the President wants to execute are unlawful, should the Attorney General or the Deputy Attorney General say no?"


Yates replies: "Senator, I believe the Attorney General or the Deputy Attorney General has an obligation to follow the law and the Constitution and to give their independent legal advice to the President."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

ED-N - It's just common courtesy or we just have a page of Trump threads DUCY? it's not about anyone's 'ownership' you moron .


ITATM - it's not about it being boring, I've been joining in on these threads it's just every fooking new bit of news there's a new thread. I look forward to your tomorrow news new Trump thread with eager anticipation?


TRUMPSPAM I'm loving it

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It is a bit annoying when duplicate threads appear e.g. the 2 petition threads, but at the moment there's such a lot of stuff coming out on Trump that I think it would swamp one thread and make it hard and incoherent to follow, so I don't mind the separation...for the time being.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

???? Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> There are 6 other threads you could have put this

> on FFS - selfish and tedious every new bit of

> Trump news creating a new thread


Eight now quids if you include Admin's latest

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Admin has asked for no more threads. But Trump is the worlds most talked about person currently. I'm not surprised and I bet similar is happening elsewhere.


Anyway pub on Chancery Lane at lunchtime today "Unlike Trump. We welcome everybody."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Returning to the OP, which for me indexes something new (as will the nomination of the Supreme Court Justice and the impending 'cable of dissent' that may lead to hundreds of sackings), this seems to me to be quite alarming - the precedent for this sort of action (politics against the advisory-of-law), is Nixon ... just before he was impeached.


All building up to quite a picture - and for me we should have threads for everything new going (not duplicates of course). There will be some highly dangerous days ahead - for the integrity of the EU particularly. What was said very clearly today by Tusk suggests to me that is perhaps the most worrying of all. But no new thread allowed apparently even though that has not been the focus of any previous thread.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

JohnL Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Anyway pub on Chancery Lane at lunchtime today

> "Unlike Trump. We welcome everybody."


Hah. It's at this point I wished I worked in TV. I'd be organising a crew to head out and test that little boast...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I was /am genuinely interested in views re Trump sacking the AG . It seems to me the action of a dictator but I'm not sure if I'm over reacting a little . I'm not familar with American politics . I hadn't realised that the other threads were discussing issues not indicated in their title .


Actually ,having had a look at one about petitions many of the posts just seem to be personal banter/point scoring between posters rather than discussion about Trumps actions .But thinking about it - I guess this forum is more about that ( banter etc ) and I take Admins point that there are plenty of "news" sites that I can read if I want to read about Trump and people's comments on his actions .

Link to comment
Share on other sites

His main problem currently is that the Democrats have withdrawn supply: so he cannot get new cabinet members nominated. There was a popular backlash against those Democrats who nodded through earlier appointments. Part of the US constitution is that at least one opposition member must at least be present for an appointment to be ratified: so if they are not there can be no new post. Wonderful!
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sue Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> This is a very very interesting and plausible analysis.


I've said it before and I'll say it again - Trump is a businessman, not a politician.


That is basically an extreme form of how a lot of businesses work - set the price at ?x + 20%, accept ?x and customer thinks they have a bargain.


Next time that wine is 'half price' at the supermarket (you know, the one that has been on and off half price for about a year or two) and you think 'bargain', you actually should be thinking 'sucker', because you've bought a ?5.99 wine you probably didn't want for the bargain price of ?5.99.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's extreme 'virtue signaling' writ large, to their voters and a sabre rattle to Russians and the likes.


'Look at how challenging we are on the world stage, we don't care what people think of us' In short, watch out, see what we'll do next.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That's interesting to read Sue ,thanks for posting . FWIW ( not much -) ) I don't buy the conspiracy theory bit that Trump is trying to distract us .The media is too fast and too all over everything .I hope .


I do agree with seabag about sabre rattling . A lot of people who voted for Trump will love his "strength" .


And I absolutely agree that "The immigration ban may be more viscerally upsetting, but the other moves are potentially far more dangerous."


eg "that the DHS felt they could ignore a federal court than that Trump signed an EO blocking green card holders in the first place. It is a much bigger deal that Trump removed a permanent military presence from the NSC" and that the AG was removed .


I do wonder if Trump is trying to provoke - demonstrations so that he can bring in controls to limit public gatherings ,other countries sothat he can impose /justify ever tighter anti terrorist ( what he'd describe as ) actions .

Link to comment
Share on other sites

intexasatthe moment Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> And is Trumps filing to run again in 2020 have any

> particular significance ?


Yes it's very significant - under US law any non-profit campaigning against a presidential candidate (or any other candidate for office) risks having its tax-free charitable status revoked by the IRS. So, for example, if Planned Parenthood campaign against his anti-abortion stance, he can accuse them of politically attacking a candidate for the 2020 election and go after their charitable status.


Declaring as a candidate also allows him to solicit funds from businesses and other organisations in a way the President is not allowed to but a candidate is.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Latest Discussions

    • Just had a carpets cleaned by Steve Nourse and his colleague at short notice. They are lovely guys and the cleaning was quick and carpets look great. Good value. 
    • Looking for tickets for 2 adults one child under 2 and one child over 2. However, please let me know if you have any combination of tickets you are no longer able to use.  Thanks 07756110500
    • all I said was "take a pro cash stance too far" - what twisting have I done?   plenty of good arguments for retention of cash - but let's not get too detached from reality either lest we go back to trading livestock   But to go back to your post DD:   "Or don't stop using cash" Yep plenty of people will agree with this - nothing controversial here   "Stop using your phone or even your watch as a banknote" - getting a bit weird now - why not - it's super convenient for both users and businesses. And far easier to keep a track of your balance using your electronic wallet than old systems of cheques taking days to clear, how much did I take from cashpoint 2 days ago etc. But people will differ so whatever works   "God only knows how much damage we're doing to the planet because all the above must require a hell of a lot of resources and juice from the grid" - big straw man argument here. Why bring this in? Unless you are also suggesting we don't buy any goods not made from within a 5 mile radius and nothing transported by air or sea? "a big lump of plastic with a screen and full of personal information that can be easily gleamed." I've had my phone stolen but nothing was lost because it was secure.I've been mugged and lost cash and valuable. It's not a binary thing   "your sky rocket with a phone in your hand. It's become a source of dopamine for many. It's an addiction for many."  Proper overreaching now There is a reason people like their modern phones - and it isn't just replacing cash. Replacing all of these functions in a tiny device is a magnificent achievement and to just boil  it down to "big lump with a screen" is reductive in the extreme  
    • I agree with the posts that housing is an urgent need in Peckham and throughout Southwark. But as Alice says, it’s the percentage of social / affordable housing that matters. In October last year, there were over 4,200 households on the Council’s waiting list for housing in Peckham alone (over 17 thousand across Southwark). But the developer is only offering 35% affordable housing (which means that 65% will be unaffordable). Both Southwark Council and the GLA say that a big development like this should provide 50% affordable housing.   Re-development of the site is a great opportunity to make the town centre “cleaner, safer and more sustainable and welcoming” (borrowing Nigello’s great words). Is this dense development going to do that, when it provides no real green and open space where people can spend time outside and nature can help us tackle the growing problems of climate change like absorbing flood water, cooling the air on baking summer days? Are 7-storey buildings along Rye Lane (where the average buildings are 2-3 storeys) going to be welcoming to users of the town centre? How will the development impact on Peckham’s economy? Currently there is busy daytime commercial activity of shops providing for different demographics and needs including a rich offering of international groceries and other products, alongside a thriving night-time economy. I can’t see anything in the proposal that suggests how it will enhance and empower the local economy. Yes please, let’s have a great development on this site that enhances the town centre. This means not letting the developer get away with packing people into dense blocks that turn their back on the town centre and which will be a recipe for urban decay in the long run. Peckham deserves better than this!
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

Search
×
    Search In
×
×
  • Create New...