What does a TRUMP presidency look like?

[crazy canuck]

The WH cable is more in keeping with diplomatic protocol.  Trudeau is being the dick on this one.

How is he possibly being a dick?

"the Prime Minister refuted the baseless allegations . . ." etc
It's supposed a diplomatic summary, not an argument from Lionel Hutz

Every time the US alleges our softwood industry receives an unfair subsidy and imposes a tariff the World Trade Organization tribunal finds the allegation has no merit and orders the US to remove the Tariff.  Nothing has changed.  If our Prime Minister didn't call it for what it is he would lose a lot of respect.

It is simply the fourth or fifth verse of the same song - the softwood agreement expires; the US Lumber industry petitions the US Trade Commission complaining about Canadian unfair trade subsidies; shockingly the US Trade Commission finds there is and tarrifs are imposed; the Canadian industry litigates, "wins" and the tariffs are removed.  But in the meantime the US industry gets the benefit of an unlawful tariff. Such is life living next to the land of the free and home of the brave 

[CountDeMoney]

Every time the US alleges our softwood industry receives an unfair subsidy and imposes a tariff the World Trade Organization tribunal finds the allegation has no merit and orders the US to remove the Tariff.  Nothing has changed.  If our Prime Minister didn't call it for what it is he would lose a lot of respect.

It is simply the fourth or fifth verse of the same song - the softwood agreement expires; the US Lumber industry petitions the US Trade Commission complaining about Canadian unfair trade subsidies; shockingly the US Trade Commission finds there is and tarrifs are imposed; the Canadian industry litigates, "wins" and the tariffs are removed.  But in the meantime the US industry gets the benefit of an unlawful tariff. Such is life living next to the land of the free and home of the brave 

Like you're not used to it;  the first tariff signed by Washington in the Tariff Act of 1789 was on Canadian lumber.  #USAUSAUSA

[viper37]

Every time the US alleges our softwood industry receives an unfair subsidy and imposes a tariff the World Trade Organization tribunal finds the allegation has no merit and orders the US to remove the Tariff.  Nothing has changed.  If our Prime Minister didn't call it for what it is he would lose a lot of respect.

It is simply the fourth or fifth verse of the same song - the softwood agreement expires; the US Lumber industry petitions the US Trade Commission complaining about Canadian unfair trade subsidies; shockingly the US Trade Commission finds there is and tarrifs are imposed; the Canadian industry litigates, "wins" and the tariffs are removed.  But in the meantime the US industry gets the benefit of an unlawful tariff. Such is life living next to the land of the free and home of the brave 

Like you're not used to it;  the first tariff signed by Washington in the Tariff Act of 1789 was on Canadian lumber.  #USAUSAUSA

that's why we burnt the White House a few years later. #Canada1812

[viper37]

And none of this addresses my original point.  Assuming for the sake of argument that only candidates approved by Big Evil Money are allowed on the ballot, the choice between those Big Evil Money approved candidates still resides with the voter.

public opinion can be swayed.

[viper37]

http://www.cnn.com/2016/02/05/politics/hillary-clinton-bill-clinton-paid-speeches/

I don't think CNN counts as a "GOP base" media.

$153 MILLION in paid speaking fees, almost all of which came from corporate America, and a huge percentage straight from Wall Street.

Obama just got 400k$ for one speech, paid by corporate America.  He stopped being President 100 days ago.

I don't think it's fair to accuse them of corruption based on that.  What's an ex president supposed to do? Stay at home and live with his pension?

[viper37]

I guess that is where my hope lies. That somebody as basically reasonable who has Obama's campaigning talents materialized out of nowhere to lead us again.

I think I know what you want.

[jimmy olsen]

http://www.cnn.com/2016/02/05/politics/hillary-clinton-bill-clinton-paid-speeches/

I don't think CNN counts as a "GOP base" media.

$153 MILLION in paid speaking fees, almost all of which came from corporate America, and a huge percentage straight from Wall Street.

Obama just got 400k$ for one speech, paid by corporate America.  He stopped being President 100 days ago.

I don't think it's fair to accuse them of corruption based on that.  What's an ex president supposed to do? Stay at home and live with his pension?

He's only 55 years old. If he really wants to do something then run for the House and run for Minority Leader/Speaker.

[Camerus]

The Obamas also apparently got a $65 million book advance. Nice optics there.

At least unlike Trump he waited until he was out of office to enrich himself and thus there's theoretically no conflict of interest... but what a terrible message it sends.

[garbon]

That you are allowed to make money after being the most powerful man in the world?

[celedhring]

The problem here is whether politician X was cozy to the people giving him these fat contracts during his term in office, and these are just deferred payment. It's not an easy balance to strike, since indeed politicians have a right to work after leaving office, like any other citizen.

This is a big issue in Spain right now too. Almost all our former presidents have been appointed to the boards of fat corporations after leaving office, same with fat book deals and speech payments.

[Admiral Yi]

So fat!

It's hard to see what any politician could do in office to deserve a $6 million ex post bribe from a book publisher.

[celedhring]

So fat!

It's hard to see what any politician could do in office to deserve a $6 million ex post bribe from a book publisher.

I don't know in the US, but for example in Spain the largest book publishers are part of huge media congloms that do benefit from cozying up to politicians.

[garbon]

I think I'd want evidence of corruption beyond just the assumption that a person making a lot of money is corrupt.

[Camerus]

Well, it was $65 million, not $6 million.

Of course, it raises questions of undue influence as Cel said, especially as the likelihood of recouping that money through sales seems low.

But even if there's zero evidence of that having happened here, given the current political climate and the troubles faced by the Democrats in particular, to accept such a large sum weeks after leaving office to my mind at least sends the wrong message.

[grumbler]

The Obamas also apparently got a $65 million book advance. Nice optics there.

At least unlike Trump he waited until he was out of office to enrich himself and thus there's theoretically no conflict of interest... but what a terrible message it sends.

What a terrible message comes from the "I read some speculation that met my standards for OUTRAGE so I AM OUTRAGE even though I don't have any facts about which to be outraged."

It is possible that the bidding did reach the $60M+ range, but you really should wait for some facts before you start deciding that there is a "terrible message" in bidding for book rights.