Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
LGR4GM

Donald J Trump, your thoughts on his Presidency

Recommended Posts

52 minutes ago, LGR4GM said:

You are only talking about part of the story. You completely left out the Australia connection. 

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/12/30/us/politics/how-fbi-russia-investigation-began-george-papadopoulos.html 

 

Yep and this goes with my earlier post about Papadopoulos. The guy is an idiot through and through. 20 something year old who thinks he knows what he’s doing. Amateur hour on both sides of the aisle.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, SABRES 0311 said:

Yep and this goes with my earlier post about Papadopoulos. The guy is an idiot through and through. 20 something year old who thinks he knows what he’s doing. Amateur hour on both sides of the aisle.

Okay, then why not put that with your post on the Steele Dossier which we have learned was not the true start of the Trump/Russia investigation. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
55 minutes ago, LGR4GM said:

Okay, then why not put that with your post on the Steele Dossier which we have learned was not the true start of the Trump/Russia investigation. 

Because the post was in response to another’s with a link titled “Payback”. The idea being some view the dossier as a major component leading to the FISA warrant.

So it depends on how view the last two years.  Even if you believe the dossier was not integral to obtaining a FISA warrant Steele is supposedly an FBI informant. Did he begin providing his services to the FBI before or after the dossier? This is important IMO for context.

If he became an informant after producing the dossier could it be the FBI believed it was credible information. I would guess so considering the FBI thought Steele was reliable.

“That information came from the Steele dossier. At that point in the FISA application, the FBI included a lengthy footnote in which, referring to Steele as a "confidential human source" and "Source #1," it said "the FBI assesses Source #1 to be reliable." It also suggested the people who hired Steele might have had a political motive and were "likely looking for information that could be used to discredit Candidate #1's [Trump's] campaign."

-Washington Examiner

If he was already an informant prior to the dossier are we to believe Fusion GPS just so happened to outsource their research to an FBI informant? Could the Ohr’s marriage have led to Fusion GPS getting the idea to use Steele? If so that in itself is another problem.

Trump surrounds himself with dumb people probably to boost his ego. To curry favor they broke the law but I do not think at his direction.

 

Edited by SABRES 0311

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Oh I follow now. 

It seems like the FBI followed protocol on this. Or at least that is what info we have now.

Sure Trump may not have broken the law originally but since then... he has waged an ever escalating war on the foundations of the US democracy. I have to agree with some Democrats that if the election is a narrow defeat of Trump, I don't expect him to relinquish power. 

Edited by LGR4GM

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No discussion about the new plans to prop up farms hit by the Trump tariffs by using the tax money to buy farm output and distribute it?

Holy central planning, Batman.  Even Communist China is stepping away from that boondoggle.

If only there were a free market answer....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, Weave said:

No discussion about the new plans to prop up farms hit by the Trump tariffs by using the tax money to buy farm output and distribute it?

Holy central planning, Batman.  Even Communist China is stepping away from that boondoggle.

If only there were a free market answer....

It's only socialism when we are discussing health care... apparently. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
57 minutes ago, LGR4GM said:

Oh I follow now. 

It seems like the FBI followed protocol on this. Or at least that is what info we have now.

Sure Trump may not have broken the law originally but since then... he has waged an ever escalating war on the foundations of the US democracy. I have to agree with some Democrats that if the election is a narrow defeat of Trump, I don't expect him to relinquish power. 

What exactly do people think he will do to not relinquish power?

 

58 minutes ago, LGR4GM said:

Oh I follow now. 

It seems like the FBI followed protocol on this. Or at least that is what info we have now.

Sure Trump may not have broken the law originally but since then... he has waged an ever escalating war on the foundations of the US democracy. I have to agree with some Democrats that if the election is a narrow defeat of Trump, I don't expect him to relinquish power. 

The only way to know is declassification of everything. That includes if the DOJ followed protocol. To make that determination one would have to know the laws governing a CI investigation and criminal investigation. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
55 minutes ago, SABRES 0311 said:

What exactly do people think he will do to not relinquish power?. 

Declare martial law and call the elections rigged. He has been laying the ground work for the latter since before the 2016 election.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, drnkirishone said:

Declare martial law and call the elections rigged. He has been laying the ground work for the latter since before the 2016 election.

It takes more than an accusation considering how decentralized our military is. Firing up a base and making a legitimate case to commanders, subordinate commanders and so on is another thing. I’d relax on that one.

Edited by SABRES 0311

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We take the handing over of power for granted in the usa.  Put the wrong person in the machine and add the right conditions and it can be a recipe for disaster

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
46 minutes ago, drnkirishone said:

We take the handing over of power for granted in the usa.  Put the wrong person in the machine and add the right conditions and it can be a recipe for disaster

He has pushed our constitution (Constitution) to its limits thus far and we have survived. I have faith.

  • Like (+1) 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I support the guy but like I said I don’t think we are to the point where the military will subject the country to martial law. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 minutes ago, SABRES 0311 said:

I support the guy but like I said I don’t think we are to the point where the military will subject the country to martial law. 

 

I never support a guy. I support policies and I’m just not sure that his policies are good for me.

And this is American. Isn’t that all I’m supposed to be concerned about?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, SwampD said:

I never support a guy. I support policies and I’m just not sure that his policies are good for me.

And this is American. Isn’t that all I’m supposed to be concerned about?

Yes this is America.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, SABRES 0311 said:

I support the guy but like I said I don’t think we are to the point where the military will subject the country to martial law. 

 

Why not? The election was "rigged" or "fraudulent" and the he will claim to be the rightful commander and chief. Not saying it will happen but at this point, all contingencies should be considered. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, 5th line wingnutt said:

I’m not sure how I feel about the tarries (I’m not an economist), but I’m surely not going to make up my mind base on that article. That was terrible. It’s like he just made up numbers.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 minutes ago, SwampD said:

I’m not sure how I feel about the tarries (I’m not an economist), but I’m surely not going to make up my mind base on that article. That was terrible. It’s like he just made up numbers.

What numbers do you have and why are they better?

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
29 minutes ago, 5th line wingnutt said:

What numbers do you have and why are they better?

 

I should have said cherry-picked. He only mentions the 15% increase in the tariffs, but why ignore the original 10%.

His throwaway line about the effect on farmers is also interesting. He talks about the reduction in cost of things, but that's only because there is a surplus now. Once farmers stop growing, the cost will go back up or we'll bail them out. There will be a cost to that that he ingnores.

He complains about being mislead by the media yet he is doing the same thing.

Again, I don't know if they are a net positive or not, but these issues are always deeper than a few bullet points in some click bait.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, LGR4GM said:

Why not? The election was "rigged" or "fraudulent" and the he will claim to be the rightful commander and chief. Not saying it will happen but at this point, all contingencies should be considered. 

I don’t know if you are serious or joking. Hate the guy all you want but give the Generals some credit. The ones I’ve heard speak don’t seem like they do things without thought. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, 5th line wingnutt said:

@Eleven has wondered why the religious right supports Trump...this is half the answer

https://theweek.com/articles/840979/what-got-wrong-about-trump-culture-war

That is one interesting piece, no doubt, from a lot of perspectives.  And it does answer part of the question.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, SABRES 0311 said:

I don’t know if you are serious or joking. Hate the guy all you want but give the Generals some credit. The ones I’ve heard speak don’t seem like they do things without thought. 

That makes me feel better. I am being serious to some extent. What happens if he loses by a small margin, say 1-3% and decides he thinks he won? Or the election was fraudulent. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, LGR4GM said:

That makes me feel better. I am being serious to some extent. What happens if he loses by a small margin, say 1-3% and decides he thinks he won? Or the election was fraudulent. 

You would have to ask a lawyer who specializes in that area. I would imagine it goes to the Supreme Court. At that point the citizenry will decide how they will react. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well I suppose we are a ways away from that right now. Currently we have a trade war that has to play out. He tanks the economy it won't matter because he will lose by a landslide. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...