What does a TRUMP presidency look like?

[Admiral Yi]

Ah - I stand corrected then.  Still don't know why they didn't try to amend by adding the word "sometimes" or even "often"

Whereas I have a fairly good idea why the countries that voted against the amendment did so: to create this particular PR trap for DP countries.

[The Minsky Moment]

Ah - I stand corrected then.  Still don't know why they didn't try to amend by adding the word "sometimes" or even "often"

Whereas I have a fairly good idea why the countries that voted against the amendment did so: to create this particular PR trap for DP countries.

Hmm.  Good point.

[CountDeMoney]

From the CdM "we're all going to die" file

Trump rattled his national security advisers by suggesting he might fire the top U.S. commander of the war and comparing the decision-making process on troop levels to the renovation of a high-end New York restaurant, according to participants in the meeting.

"Have a great time!"

[Grinning_Colossus]

I imagine that the US voted against the resolution mainly because of paragraphs 2 and 5:

2. Calls upon States that have not yet acceded to or ratified the Second Optional Protocol
to the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights aiming at the abolition of the death
penalty to consider doing so;

5. Urges States that have not yet abolished the death penalty to ensure that the death
penalty is not applied against persons with mental or intellectual disabilities and persons
below 18 years of age at the time of the commission of the crime, as well as pregnant women;

[The Brain]

Surely pregnant women at a stage of pregnancy when an abortion would be OK could be executed?

[The Minsky Moment]

#5 tracks US law as per 2 Supreme Court decisions in the last 10 years.  That's what made me think some effort was being made to get the US on board.

[Admiral Yi]

#5 tracks US law as per 2 Supreme Court decisions in the last 10 years.  That's what made me think some effort was being made to get the US on board.

I don't follow.  How does adding things that the US is already doing get us on board?  Surely it's the things we're not doing that matter.

[Grinning_Colossus]

#5 tracks US law as per 2 Supreme Court decisions in the last 10 years.  That's what made me think some effort was being made to get the US on board.

I don't follow.  How does adding things that the US is already doing get us on board?  Surely it's the things we're not doing that matter.

Because it isn't condemning the US for doing them. I suspect, however, that elements of the current administration might disagree with the Supreme Court's decisions re: executing children and the mentally disabled.

[viper37]

#5 tracks US law as per 2 Supreme Court decisions in the last 10 years.  That's what made me think some effort was being made to get the US on board.

I don't follow.  How does adding things that the US is already doing get us on board?

if they call on abolishing DP, US won't sign.
If they call on abolishing DP under special circumstances that the US is already doing, then the US should sign.

[Admiral Yi]

if they call on abolishing DP, US won't sign.
If they call on abolishing DP under special circumstances that the US is already doing, then the US should sign.

That would work if signing meant you only agreed with certain parts.

[Malthus]

Donald Trump's dog

It's totally unprofessional for a newspaper of this caliber.  But I laughed.

And then, "Morongate". 

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2017/oct/04/rex-tillerson-trump-moron

[CountDeMoney]

Puerto Rico's municipal bonds collapsed today.  Way to go, Donald

[Barrister]

Donald Trump's dog

It's totally unprofessional for a newspaper of this caliber.  But I laughed.

And then, "Morongate". 

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2017/oct/04/rex-tillerson-trump-moron

Apparently it's incorrect to say Tillerson called Trump a moron.

He called him a "fucking moron".

https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2017/10/4/16424248/how-is-there-always-a-tweet-trump

To which someone dug up a Trump tweet from 2014 which included this image:

[viper37]

if they call on abolishing DP, US won't sign.
If they call on abolishing DP under special circumstances that the US is already doing, then the US should sign.

That would work if signing meant you only agreed with certain parts.

I don't understand you.
If you sign a document that says I call on you to abolish death penalty, it means you abolish death penalty for everyone.
If you sign a document that says I call on you to abolish death penalty for minors, pregnant women and mentally ill people, it means you abolish death penalty for only these people, something the US apparently does already.

[The Minsky Moment]

if they call on abolishing DP, US won't sign.
If they call on abolishing DP under special circumstances that the US is already doing, then the US should sign.

That would work if signing meant you only agreed with certain parts.

I've conceded that point.