The Immediate Repercussions of President Donald J. Trump (Second Thread)


GDPR

1
Joined
Jul 5, 2008
Messages
224,670
Sounds strangely like Mitch McConnell refusing to bring Merrick Garland's Supreme Court nomination to a vote.

And Republicans had no problem with that.
It's nothing like that because constitutionally speaking the House has no role to play in the ratification of treaties. That's why there's literally no reason for Pelosi to allow a vote in the House on the ratification of that treaty.
 

owedtojoy

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 27, 2010
Messages
45,059
It's nothing like that because constitutionally speaking the House has no role to play in the ratification of treaties. That's why there's literally no reason for Pelosi to allow a vote in the House on the ratification of that treaty.
Congress have a role in setting tariffs, which are a form of taxes, Constitutionally the role of the lower House of Congress.

The Senate does approve International Treaties, but Trade Agreements involve the House of Representatives, and they must approve. Otherwise the President would have a tax raising power independent of the House, which is unconstitutional.

Trade or Treaty? Why Does the House Approve Free Trade Agreements?

I was pointing out that as McConnell was in no hurry with Merrick Galand's nomination, why should Nancy Pelosi be in any hurry with Trump's NAFTA II?

It is not as if anyone will notice a difference, anyway.
 

Dame_Enda

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 14, 2011
Messages
51,880
Seattle Times reporting the Fox affiliate journalist who faked video of Trump has been fired.

[TWEET]1083456061154185217[/TWEET]
 

petaljam

Moderator
Joined
Nov 23, 2012
Messages
30,564
Apparently, he never said Mexico was going to pay for the wall, in the sense that they would pay actual hard cash. What he meant was that they'd pay for it in some hand-wavy way, to do with NAFTA or whatever he calls it now.

Trump claims he never said Mexico would cut a check for the wall. Let’s go to the tape.
But didn't he say that if Mexico didn't pay $5bn he would block all money transfers from Mexican citizens within the US to family back in Mexico? Sounds like he meant he expected actual cash in some very tangible way.

Oh look - from 2016:

 

owedtojoy

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 27, 2010
Messages
45,059
Apparently, he never said Mexico was going to pay for the wall, in the sense that they would pay actual hard cash. What he meant was that they'd pay for it in some hand-wavy way, to do with NAFTA or whatever he calls it now.

Trump claims he never said Mexico would cut a check for the wall. Let’s go to the tape.
This is a clear-as-day attempt to rewrite history by Trump.

He repeatedly said that Mexico would need to make a distinct $5 billion or $10 billion payment to the United States for the wall. And when he asked crowds at his rallies in 2016 who was going to pay for the wall, they shouted back "Mexico!" not "Mexico by way of theoretical gains we will make as a result of a restructured international trade deal!"

I mean, come on.
The 29 most outrageous lines from Donald Trump's wild, impromptu news conference on the White House lawn - CNNPolitics

[TWEET]1083382636494622720[/TWEET]
 

owedtojoy

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 27, 2010
Messages
45,059

JacquesHughes

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 16, 2013
Messages
1,122
But didn't he say that if Mexico didn't pay $5bn he would block all money transfers from Mexican citizens within the US to family back in Mexico? Sounds like he meant he expected actual cash in some very tangible way.

Oh look - from 2016:


I hope the Democrats play this right: he doesn't get a wonder wall

1. He gets staff ( a running monthly cost), in depth, all the way along the border, admitting only those with a right of entry.
2. The staff are employed by 'the government'. The next tantrum he throws and 'shuts down the government' means the migrants flow in.
3. The budget for this is taken from 'defense' funding ( he does say it's a security emergency)
 

Orbit v2

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 8, 2010
Messages
11,476
But didn't he say that if Mexico didn't pay $5bn he would block all money transfers from Mexican citizens within the US to family back in Mexico? Sounds like he meant he expected actual cash in some very tangible way.

Oh look - from 2016:

Indeed. It's kind of disorientating and reminiscent of an Orwellian dystopia. Yesterday, the truth was one thing. Today, it's the complete opposite. The most disturbing thing about it, is how so many people are suggestible and so easily taken in by it.
 

President Bartlet

Well-known member
Joined
Jun 17, 2006
Messages
8,576
[video=youtube;RREuH924RVM]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RREuH924RVM[/video]

The orange moron and his gibberish outed yet again
 

amsterdemmetje

Well-known member
Joined
Sep 14, 2011
Messages
16,600
Indeed. It's kind of disorientating and reminiscent of an Orwellian dystopia. Yesterday, the truth was one thing. Today, it's the complete opposite. The most disturbing thing about it, is how so many people are suggestible and so easily taken in by it.
I just can't get the word cabbages out of my head when thinking of his base here absolute cabbages.
 

valamhic

Banned
Joined
Jan 31, 2011
Messages
19,844
Bernie Saunders (a well respected politition, if a bit old,) said last week that climate change was more important than the wall. (i.e migration). Climate change has been simmering away there with little public notice to the cost or its priority.

Cher has recommenced the Dems give Trump the wall. She sees what Trump is up to. Remember he told the black voters (what do you have to loose) He is now asking himself (what do I have to loose?).

Its 20 months to November 2020. The campaign will start in June 2020, just 16 months away. He is going to corner voters with a simple choice.

Vote for climate change and create mayhem where nothing else matters and there will be chaos all around you or
Vote for a wall with no climate change and see you well-being improved right now.

That's the gamble, I don't know who will win, but the battle lines are drawn.
 

Gwannow

Well-known member
Joined
Jun 30, 2016
Messages
861
Something that news outlets are saying, which also occurred to me, is that the wall, shutdown, national emergency, etc. is merely a distraction to divert attention away from the Mueller investigation and Cohen's upcoming public congressional testament. It might appear to make sense to the Republicans, but it is only a delaying tactic in reality. Republicans are already trying to stifle what Cohen's testimony will be. They are also trying to suppress what the public can be told when Mueller's final report is published. The tactic might work for them because the legal challenges could take years and by then who knows what the political situation will be.
I cannot see Trump being re-elected unless the Democrats pick a totally unsuitable candidate; which is not by any means certain, i.e. Warren, or Biden - both of whom would be a disastrous choice.
I think, tho, since Trump proclaimed so strongly on television the responsibility for the shutdown of government, it is going to be huge disadvantage for him if he runs in 2020. But with Trump you can never predict, I also didn't think that he would win in 2016. it seems that he has definitely taken over the mantle from Bill Clinton as the "Teflon President".
 

owedtojoy

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 27, 2010
Messages
45,059
Something that news outlets are saying, which also occurred to me, is that the wall, shutdown, national emergency, etc. is merely a distraction to divert attention away from the Mueller investigation and Cohen's upcoming public congressional testament. It might appear to make sense to the Republicans, but it is only a delaying tactic in reality. Republicans are already trying to stifle what Cohen's testimony will be. They are also trying to suppress what the public can be told when Mueller's final report is published. The tactic might work for them because the legal challenges could take years and by then who knows what the political situation will be.
I cannot see Trump being re-elected unless the Democrats pick a totally unsuitable candidate; which is not by any means certain, i.e. Warren, or Biden - both of whom would be a disastrous choice.
I think, tho, since Trump proclaimed so strongly on television the responsibility for the shutdown of government, it is going to be huge disadvantage for him if he runs in 2020. But with Trump you can never predict, I also didn't think that he would win in 2016. it seems that he has definitely taken over the mantle from Bill Clinton as the "Teflon President".
Trump loves it ... all the attention, the reporters, the tub-thumping, wild angry statements, jetting off to the border .... it is like campaigning, which is the only part of politics he seems to enjoy.

He does not enjoy "politicking" - negotiating, compromising, making deals or standing by them.

He has to come back to earth sometime. Declaring a National Emergency, which seems to be his last shot, would kick it into courts, and he would have much less to do.
 

owedtojoy

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 27, 2010
Messages
45,059
Something that news outlets are saying, which also occurred to me, is that the wall, shutdown, national emergency, etc. is merely a distraction to divert attention away from the Mueller investigation and Cohen's upcoming public congressional testament. It might appear to make sense to the Republicans, but it is only a delaying tactic in reality. Republicans are already trying to stifle what Cohen's testimony will be. They are also trying to suppress what the public can be told when Mueller's final report is published. The tactic might work for them because the legal challenges could take years and by then who knows what the political situation will be.
I cannot see Trump being re-elected unless the Democrats pick a totally unsuitable candidate; which is not by any means certain, i.e. Warren, or Biden - both of whom would be a disastrous choice.
I think, tho, since Trump proclaimed so strongly on television the responsibility for the shutdown of government, it is going to be huge disadvantage for him if he runs in 2020. But with Trump you can never predict, I also didn't think that he would win in 2016. it seems that he has definitely taken over the mantle from Bill Clinton as the "Teflon President".
"Teflon President"?

He is the first President who does not even pretend to be everyone's President. It is all about cosseting his base, and hoping it is enough to get him over the line in 2020.



The Wall imbroglio has cost him ... will it be fatal? Time will tell. 538:

The polling news of the week is the ongoing partial government shutdown. A FiveThirtyEight analysis found that Americans increasingly blame President Trump for the partial government shutdown. Recent polls found that 47 percent to 51 percent of Americans blame Trump for the shutdown, while about a third blame congressional Democrats.
 
Top