Donald Trump Presidency-Day One

[filghy2]

Got it ! .... Cancer of the mouth

I don't use my mouth for typing on the internet - do you? Or it it just for putting your foot in.

By the way, here's something you must have overlooked concerning that Peace Prize. We all know how closely you are following this issue.
https://www.vox.com/world/2018/5/16/...lton-statement

It also looks like those 'liberals' have even infiltrated the Republican-majority senate intelligence committee. https://www.vox.com/policy-and-polit...ence-committee

[Stavros]

Looks like John Bolton, an enthusiastic supporter of the President's decision to withdraw from the Iran Nuclear Agreement, was not told his boss had actually announced it, and with his rigid attitude to North Korea, he may not last long. As it happens, the President now appears to be ruling the USA on his own, which is how he ran his companies. Congress, as far as I know, has yet to recognize North Korea as a country, but I guess they are not bothered.

Trump is said to feel more and more confident in his presidential abilities without having to depend on advisers. He apparently made the final decision on Iran without final consultations with cabinet members and senior officials about ramifications, and then, as he does, tweeted it. Bolton only found out from a European official who had seen the tweet.
https://www.independent.co.uk/voices...-a8354206.html

[buttslinger]

I have read three people, that claimed there will be violence, if Trump is impeached. One was Rodger Stone, another was televangelist Jim Bakker. My point is, if this is true, that would mean their loyalty is to Trump over the Constitution, or the rule of law.

How do you logically debate a topic that time after time proves illogical? People vote on a case by case basis, the candidate exists in the eye of the voter, and it's a given that half the country's correct answer will be the other half's wrong answer. If, for any reason, the Russian Investigation got "legally" buried by the Right, I think you would see violence from the Left. So I think the one thing everybody can agree on is that there will be violence.

[Stavros]

I gasped when I first saw this:
“I have absolute right to do what I want to do with the Justice Department,”

But it seems that in purely legal terms, the President has realised he can do what he want. The point is that this is a President who has looked at the 'norms and values' that preceded him, and has dismissed them as if they were of no value at all. The assumption that a President would distance himself from the Justice Department because it is good for the practice of law in a democracy, has been exposed as just that, by someone with a deep need to shape everything to his desire, convinced of his own greatness. As with the assumption that was made long ago, that no President would use the Office to line his pockets so it didn't need to be spelled out in law, so this President can cheerfully rack up as much money as he can whether it is charging the American tax payer for his multiple golfing trips or selling out the US for deals with foreign countries that benefit him and has family financially.

There are two contending interpretations of the law but the Reuters link seems to be the best argued. We have had Prime Ministers in the UK who have intervened personally in legal matters, Tony Blair did it twice -over Iraq and the bribery scandal with BAE and Saudi Arabia- but I like to think it is harder for a Prime Minister to govern for his or her personal benefit in the brazen way that is now happening in the USA.

https://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/ent...b0b0e5a7a5b993
https://uk.reuters.com/article/us-ot...-idUKKCN1IM2DP
https://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs...=.e8a866c84963

[buttslinger]

They had to write it out that way because in rare emergencies, you need a President with immense powers ordering "exceptions to the rule" rules for natural and manmade disasters. And who did the American People elect to sit in that seat???? Who did the voters give that sacred power to?......
DONALD TRUMP?????WTF??????
Whatever fuckin happens, the American People OWN this whole mess, we handed the keys to the henhouse to the wolf.
We all knew what we were getting, Everybody saw it, the Republican voters know Trump is playing fast and loose with the law, they figure Hillary would have done the same. Trump voters know if Hillary had won she'd be shitting on them every chance she could, a Posture I applaud, by the way, he he he,
Never in a million years did I think a guy like Trump could command this attention now because the UNWRITTEN RULES say a guy like Trump could never elbow his way through the Senate and House. They have their own ways and means committees, dare I say.
For us to be talking about this is representative of something deeper than Trump, darker and stronger. More Dangerous. Freedom of Speech! ha ha ha. Trump's going down, but the monsters who spawned him will still be large and in charge.
I don't understand this but I have a hunch that if I did it would be pretty much what I think: Trump needs some jailtime to get his priorities straight.
Nothing I can write will change how WRONG that guy is.....
I really do think people are accepting him.

[yodajazz]

How do you logically debate a topic that time after time proves illogical? People vote on a case by case basis, the candidate exists in the eye of the voter, and it's a given that half the country's correct answer will be the other half's wrong answer. If, for any reason, the Russian Investigation got "legally" buried by the Right, I think you would see violence from the Left. So I think the one thing everybody can agree on is that there will be violence.

I have not heard anyone on the left, talking about civil war. And I'm talking about two well known figures on the right; 1. Jim Bakker did it on television, he has a significant television audience. I know someone personally, who watches his sow regularly. And Rodger Stone is a nationally known figure, and is even the subject of a movie, "Get Me Rodger Stone". The third person, was someone, making a post on Robert Mueller's Facebook page! I personally doubt that many would really resort to violence.

But there is a narrative that Putin's goal was to promote acrimony. Looks like Trump is doing the job, constantly attacking American institutions; deep state, FBI and CIA leadership, judges, the press, Obama, Hillary, comedians, etc. Trump's claim of millions illegal voters, is a psychological attack on our electoral system, raises anger, for those, that believe him. So if Putin has ill will toward the US, would Trump be the perfect vehicle?

[Stavros]

[QUOTE=yodajazz;1839821]
I have not heard anyone on the left, talking about civil war. And I'm talking about two well known figures on the right; 1. Jim Bakker did it on television, he has a significant television audience. I know someone personally, who watches his sow regularly. And Rodger Stone is a nationally known figure, and is even the subject of a movie, "Get Me Rodger Stone". The third person, was someone, making a post on Robert Mueller's Facebook page! I personally doubt that many would really resort to violence.

--A few points on the above:
1) consider the view that the Civil War, as a military confrontation between the USA and the anti-American Confederacy ended in 1865, but the restoration of the rights of Slave States against the Rights of Man through the compromises made by Congress that stripped Black Americans of their right to vote and segregated them physically as well as politically and economically, means that the Civil War did not end until 1965, 100 years later with the legislation restoring the rights of man to all Americans. The end of the Dixiecrats and the widening polarisation of Democrats and Republicans has grown since 1965 as the Confederacy has united with ultra-Conservatives in the Christian 'Moral Majority' movement, and the Libertarian ideologies of the Koch Brothers and TEA Party activists to restore and promote the Confederacy as the alternative Nationalism of the USA where God, Family and Country means: White, Christian and Heterosexual.

2) What the Republican Party did in 2016 was abandon its identity as an American party, and collapse into a rump of Confederate Nationalists using a con-man and loud mouth incapable of governing as President for precisely that reason: to use this useful idiot for their own purposes: to re-structure taxes to benefit the rich at the expense of everyone else; and to facilitate the obliteration of the Rights of Man in the Confederate states on the simple premise that Black people, Latinos and Asians are not Americans and certainly have no right to be considered equal citizens in the USA.

3) Nationalism in the USA if based on the Rights of Man gives every American the right to belong and to share the benefits of the country equally; the nationalism of the Confederates limits the definition to White, Christian and Heterosexual Americans, and nobody else. Steve Bannon lauds Nationalism against Globalism, but associates Black People, Latinos and Asians with the 'sickness' of Globalism, seeking to restore the supremacy of Confederate Nationalism as THE American identity. This is a complete reversal of both the Civil War, and the American Revolution -the Rights of Man were established in opposition to the absolute right of Kings, yet they now revere the President as the King and God, sent to save them from the oblivion of demographic change
.
The armed militias have been fighting their cause for years, from the assassinations of Robert Kennedy and Martin Luther King, through the Oklahoma Bombing to the Bundy clan. They will fight, but will many more join them to rescue their America from the Rights of Man?

But there is a narrative that Putin's goal was to promote acrimony. Looks like Trump is doing the job, constantly attacking American institutions; deep state, FBI and CIA leadership, judges, the press, Obama, Hillary, comedians, etc. Trump's claim of millions illegal voters, is a psychological attack on our electoral system, raises anger, for those, that believe him. So if Putin has ill will toward the US, would Trump be the perfect vehicle?

-Parallel lines sometimes cross: if you believe the concept of Disruptive Innovation can be transferred from business to politics both the Russian and American Presidents are engaged in it, one to disrupt the system of global politics, the other to disrupt the system in the USA, both with the intention of replacing what exists, with something more congenial to their national interests, as defined by them.
It is thus in Russia's interests to weaken democracy to validate its own autocracy; to weaken the European Union to dismantle an economic bloc that is more powerful collectively than Russia but dismantled leaves only Germany and France as its major European competitors; and to eject the USA from East Asia to strengthen its strategic position in relation to China, Korea and Japan who are set to dominate the economy in the 21st century.

In the American case, the disruptive innovation is designed if not to smash the party political system to pieces, to expose it to shocks that force reform on 'gridlocked' party politics and Congress, after all in the first tv debate for the Republican candidacy he stated without shame he would run as President even if the party did not nominate him. He has no party, he is a maverick.

Crucially, this President has three aims, in this order of priority: 1) to get as rich as possible by using the Office of the President for financial gain for himself and his family. 2) To destroy as much as he can of the legacy of the Obama Administration, to harass and insult and abuse Obama and all and anyone who served in his Administration and by doing so prove to the Confederacy he is as Racist and Sexist as they can be and shares their agenda; and 3) to disrupt the existing economic order in order to benefit the top tiers of the US economy -ie, himself-, primarily through protectionist measures in international trade.

This article explains how this Disruptive Innovation and protectionism in the short term may benefit the US economy, but in the long term leaves sectors of it vulnerable to precisely the foreign intervention/globalization the President is opposed to, while the other offers perspective of how Disruptive Innovation may work in politics.

http://blogs.lse.ac.uk/businessrevie...ve-innovation/

https://www.forbes.com/sites/offwhit.../#1d0b1d626854

[buttslinger]

While we've all done our part to bellyache and complain,............. besides the mid-term elections the United States has a built-in failsafe precaution against injustice called the FBI. In what world WOULDN'T Mueller and his team find enough evidence to BURY Trump under Club Fed? If that world turned out to be the Republican House and Senate, I think you would see the gloves come off, the rule of order lifted and a lot of pissed off Democrats taking it to the streets.
All the shit you see, there's ten times more you don't see, look what's been uncovered just by reporters so far.
I remember Lindsay Graham lamenting that when Mueller started the investigation, the public would never hear about the dirt on Trump anymore because all the sensational stuff would be dished behind doors, under oath, top-secret. Yet every day there's a new swamp water line marked. How can Trump not see the writing on the wall, he knows every crime he committed before and after being elected! If it's proved that Trump knowingly aided Putin in any way because of something Putin had on him, in 1776 that would have been a hangable offense. As protectors of the Constitution, the entire Republican Party needs a spanking. Pence will not pardon Trump. Who knows? We've sped past politics and social scraping, we're deep diving through a 16-hour exploratory surgery into the psyche of the American Mind. It can get pretty dark in there.

[yodajazz]

@Stavros Thanks so much for your post! I agree with you, about the thing being a continuation of the original Civil War. One thing i see is that the movement, is fueled by negativity. I actually do not mind honoring Confederate war heroes. It's the negativity that grows, into negative consequences. The left is using similar tactic, but it does not run that deep, in my book. But speaking of negativity, it blew my mind, reading about a poll taken, that found that 55% of white americans, feel they are oppressed! And it does not seem like it is the super rich, and corporate elite, as it is minorities, and the government. Here we are having been previously told, we are the richest, and most powerful nation in the world, (american exceptionalism), to now being oppressed?

I'm currently reading an excellent book, called "Dark Money" by Jane Meyer. It's a long and detailed read, (350 pages, plus notes and index). It is about the billionaires, who have basically taken over the republican party, and turned it to be more libertarian, than anything. That suits the bottom line, of the oil magnates, Wall Street tycoons, big business owners, etc. It is anti-union, anti regulation, etc. But the trick is, they have convince, moderate, and poorer people, that it is in their best interests, as well. Now this is not from the book, but more from your point. That is, the racism of the confederacy, is a useful tool, to ally moderate and poor whites, to their libertarian agenda. The government promoting equal rights, and opportunities, is cast as, taking away from whites. Regulations, which are one the few things, keeping big corporations, and Wall Street, in check, is always cast as, "job killing regulations". Meanwhile the richest family in America, got so by importing goods, made from cheap foreign labor.

Anyway the book is fascinating. I never knew that Fred Koch, the father of the infamous Koch brothers, got his first big boost, by hooking up with Hitler, and his nazi regime, in their early part of their assuming control of Germany, to build Germany's largest oil refinery. He then went on to help Stalin, (after the war?). He did express regrets for that later. He became a founding member of a far-right group called The John Birch Society. I remember hearing a lot about them, as a youth.

So my post, is to show you, I agree with your analysis. I will get around to reading your links, later, Thanks!

[yodajazz]

@Buttslinger Trump is toast, in my book. There is so much there. I feel like Mueller has so much stuff, it's a matter, of who to hit next. And I feel like he is also killing time, so that things get closer to November, and more so January 2019, when the new Congress takes over. There will certainly be more democrats, then. One thing I want to point out, is that Trump's collusion stories, always leave out money as a motivating factor, in russia's interference. It is always framed as, a "dislike for Hillary". But ending sanctions, is very likely the most important reason Putin supported Trump. Very few people believe that 'russian adoptions' had anything to do with the infamous June 2016 Trump Tower meeting. However, if adoptions were discussed, that is basically an admission, that sanctions were discussed. However, adoptions were suspended by Putin, in response to sanctions. So in order to have adoptions resumed, the issue of sanctions, would have had to been discussed. I could see that adoptions could have been brought up, as an excuse to the american public, as a benefit for plans to end American sanctions. And remember Michael Flynn was reported to have discussed ending sanctions, while Trump was still on the inauguration stand. it is reasonable to believe that sanctions were discussed in the numerous meetings, between Trump team members, and russians, during the election cycle, and the inauguration. I remember the documented number being 31. Yet in a recent post someone claimed the number was now in the 80's. But even 31 meetings over six months, (nomination to inauguration) comes out to one every week! Yet both Trump and Jeff Session, at first denied, that there were any meeting at all. I have yet to hear of any substantive reason, why they lied.