News:

And we're back!

Main Menu

What does a TRUMP presidency look like?

Started by FunkMonk, November 08, 2016, 11:02:57 PM

Previous topic - Next topic

The Larch

Quote from: Sheilbh on January 13, 2021, 11:43:06 AM
Quote from: Barrister on January 13, 2021, 11:36:45 AM
Quote from: Sheilbh on January 13, 2021, 11:34:18 AM
I'm still looking forward to the Donald Trump Presidential Library and Golf Club which will, no doubt, host the Republican primary debates in 2040.

FYP
:lol: The Donald J Trump Presidential Leisure Resort.

Edit: God there's going to be interactive walls of tweets isn't there :ph34r:

Only if they can be retrieved from a banned account.  :ph34r:

Sheilbh

Genuine thought - presumably under historical records preservation laws there must be some poor staffer in the Library of Congress or something who has to archive his tweets :lol: :(

I wonder if there's even an argument to try and access his drafts and DMs :ph34r:
Let's bomb Russia!

Barrister

Quote from: Sheilbh on January 13, 2021, 12:17:22 PM
Genuine thought - presumably under historical records preservation laws there must be some poor staffer in the Library of Congress or something who has to archive his tweets :lol: :(

I wonder if there's even an argument to try and access his drafts and DMs :ph34r:

There were stories early on in his Presidency that staffers were having a hard time getting Trump to comply with the archive laws.  For example he'd keep ripping up his notes, which staff would have to painstakingly tape back together.

I can't imagine it got better over time.
Posts here are my own private opinions.  I do not speak for my employer.

Sheilbh

Quote from: Barrister on January 13, 2021, 12:21:18 PM
Quote from: Sheilbh on January 13, 2021, 12:17:22 PM
Genuine thought - presumably under historical records preservation laws there must be some poor staffer in the Library of Congress or something who has to archive his tweets :lol: :(

I wonder if there's even an argument to try and access his drafts and DMs :ph34r:

There were stories early on in his Presidency that staffers were having a hard time getting Trump to comply with the archive laws. For example he'd keep ripping up his notes, which staff would have to painstakingly tape back together.

I can't imagine it got better over time.
I suppose Reince Priebus needed something to do.
Let's bomb Russia!

The Minsky Moment

Forget non-compliance the question is what he has attempted to destroy deliberately.

Remember that Congress never got key docs and communications over the Ukraine scandal, there is plenty of scandalous stuff that could see the light of day > Jan 20.  Unless it conveniently went missing ...

Last time I raised this grumbler pooh-poohed the concern on grounds that his people wouldn't risk charges for destroying docs; I would suggest he revise his estimates on the probability of Trump people's willingness to break laws.
The purpose of studying economics is not to acquire a set of ready-made answers to economic questions, but to learn how to avoid being deceived by economists.
--Joan Robinson

Darth Wagtaros

Quote from: Sheilbh on January 13, 2021, 12:17:22 PM
Genuine thought - presumably under historical records preservation laws there must be some poor staffer in the Library of Congress or something who has to archive his tweets :lol: :(

I wonder if there's even an argument to try and access his drafts and DMs :ph34r:
I hope he has all his shit on proper government servers and equipment. It'd be a shame if we had to... LOCK HIM UP.
PDH!

The Larch

More names for the impeachment bloc?

QuoteA 'Stop the Steal' organizer, now banned by Twitter, said three GOP lawmakers helped plan his D.C. rally

Weeks before a mob of President Trump's supporters stormed the U.S. Capitol, right-wing activist Ali Alexander told his followers he was planning something big for Jan. 6.

Alexander, who organized the "Stop the Steal" movement, said he hatched the plan — coinciding with Congress's vote to certify the electoral college votes — alongside three GOP lawmakers: Reps. Andy Biggs (Ariz.), Mo Brooks (Ala.) and Paul A. Gosar (Ariz.), all hard-line Trump supporters.


"We four schemed up of putting maximum pressure on Congress while they were voting," Alexander said in a since-deleted video on Periscope highlighted by the Project on Government Oversight, an investigative nonprofit. The plan, he said, was to "change the hearts and the minds of Republicans who were in that body, hearing our loud roar from outside."

Maladict

QuoteRepublican leaders are expecting about 10 to 20 House Republicans to vote for impeachment but sources tell CNN there are many more members who "want to vote to impeach but they legitimately fear for their lives and their families' lives," CNN's Jamie Gangal reports.

"Liz Cheney, these Republicans who have announced, they are showing courage at the same time as I have been told by Republican sources that members, Republican members, have said they are not going to vote for impeachment because they are still scared of Donald Trump," Gangal told CNN's Wolf Blitzer.

That will make those Capitol cops feel better.

Razgovory

I don't even know why Paul Gosar is in Congress.  He was elected in a fraudulent election.  By what right does he hold office?
I've given it serious thought. I must scorn the ways of my family, and seek a Japanese woman to yield me my progeny. He shall live in the lands of the east, and be well tutored in his sacred trust to weave the best traditions of Japan and the Sacred South together, until such time as he (or, indeed his house, which will periodically require infusion of both Southern and Japanese bloodlines of note) can deliver to the South it's independence, either in this world or in space.  -Lettow April of 2011

Raz is right. -MadImmortalMan March of 2017

Duque de Bragança

Quote from: Monoriu on January 13, 2021, 07:54:31 AM
Quote from: Maladict on January 13, 2021, 07:16:29 AM
I guess there's no USS Nixon for a reason.

Lots of military bases are named after Confederate generals who fought against the federal government.  If traitors who actually fought against the federal government on the field of battle can have bases named after them, I see no reason why there can't be a USS Nixon.

Specially if the ship is to be mostly deployed in the China Sea(s).  :D

Barrister

Quote from: Monoriu on January 13, 2021, 07:54:31 AM
Quote from: Maladict on January 13, 2021, 07:16:29 AM
I guess there's no USS Nixon for a reason.

Lots of military bases are named after Confederate generals who fought against the federal government.  If traitors who actually fought against the federal government on the field of battle can have bases named after them, I see no reason why there can't be a USS Nixon.

You have to look at when those bases were named - all from the late 19th century, after reconstruction (and during Jim Crow) all with the "Lost Cause" myth being adopted that Confederates weren't fighting against the Federal government, but in defence of their homes.
Posts here are my own private opinions.  I do not speak for my employer.

HVC

Quote from: Barrister on January 13, 2021, 01:26:14 PM
Quote from: Monoriu on January 13, 2021, 07:54:31 AM
Quote from: Maladict on January 13, 2021, 07:16:29 AM
I guess there's no USS Nixon for a reason.

Lots of military bases are named after Confederate generals who fought against the federal government.  If traitors who actually fought against the federal government on the field of battle can have bases named after them, I see no reason why there can't be a USS Nixon.

You have to look at when those bases were named - all from the late 19th century, after reconstruction (and during Jim Crow) all with the "Lost Cause" myth being adopted that Confederates weren't fighting against the Federal government, but in defence of their homes.

So when the true heir, Barron, becomes president for a life in a decade he can rename as many things as he wants :P
Being lazy is bad; unless you still get what you want, then it's called "patience".
Hubris must be punished. Severely.

Tonitrus

Quote from: Barrister on January 13, 2021, 01:26:14 PM
Quote from: Monoriu on January 13, 2021, 07:54:31 AM
Quote from: Maladict on January 13, 2021, 07:16:29 AM
I guess there's no USS Nixon for a reason.

Lots of military bases are named after Confederate generals who fought against the federal government.  If traitors who actually fought against the federal government on the field of battle can have bases named after them, I see no reason why there can't be a USS Nixon.

You have to look at when those bases were named - all from the late 19th century, after reconstruction (and during Jim Crow) all with the "Lost Cause" myth being adopted that Confederates weren't fighting against the Federal government, but in defence of their homes.

:huh:  All of them were built/established after 1917 and on, with just under half at start of WW2.

Not arguing with the basis of them being named so, however.

The Minsky Moment

Naming a base after Braxton Bragg is more like taunting the Confederacy than honoring it
(NB not a justification)
The purpose of studying economics is not to acquire a set of ready-made answers to economic questions, but to learn how to avoid being deceived by economists.
--Joan Robinson

Sheilbh

Quote from: Barrister on January 13, 2021, 01:26:14 PM
You have to look at when those bases were named - all from the late 19th century, after reconstruction (and during Jim Crow) all with the "Lost Cause" myth being adopted that Confederates weren't fighting against the Federal government, but in defence of their homes.
Weren't they in the 20s? Like the Confederate statues?

I've mentioned it before but I remember that line from someone who specialises in post-conflict societies that the "Lost Cause" etc sort of represents a successful, post-civil war reconciliation between the two parts of white America (at the expense of black America), even down to creating a common myth/history.
Let's bomb Russia!