• Current Events & Politics
    Welcome Guest
    Please read before posting:
    Forum Guidelines Bluelight Rules
  • Current Events & Politics Moderators: tryptakid | Foreigner

2017 Trump Presidency Thread

Status
Not open for further replies.
^^Very cool. Congrats. Well deserved.

Now look at my grand jury post if you haven't, or has the power given you a different perspective yet?

I was thinking of Aussies like you and Americans who could benefit from it...it's for those who don't know IT'S ON. :D

p.s. I'm on mobile, very limited information. :(
 
Last edited:
"I know y'all are very excited about Mueller going after Trump - and who knows, he might very well succeed in getting him impeached imprisoned."

Yes we are, because impeachment isn't Mueller's job, that's congress. No, Bob's gonna lock him up.

Hey we all need fantasies to get through the times when our feelings trump logic.

without mentioning clinton or obama or any of the people trump hates - what is good about him?

His patriotism and flawed character.

I have a hope that his anti p.c. approach will make newer generations of Americans more engaged in the political process, as they won't be turned off by the robot like behavior, and will chip away at political correctness until it is nonexistent.

congrats spacejunk!

Don't ban me bro.......
 
Last edited:
thank you :)
Now look at my grand jury post if you haven't, or has the power given you a different perspective yet?

cheers - it's a great post and i appreciate you explaining it to me.
it's certainly an interesting situation.
i think one of the things about trump is that the whole situation is fairly unprecedented, so it's hard to know what to think about these investigations and so on.
i'd really like to be more optimistic that he'll be held to account for any criminal acts he has committed, but i find it hard not to be a bit jaded when it comes to things like that.
i would really like to be proven wrong, however. this seems like a real test for how robust america's democracy and constitution is.
 
Donating to the same foundation that misappropriated BILLIONS of dollars that was meant to go to the earthquake-ravaged Haitians yet somehow disappeared.

Billions? That's pretty impressive. Haiti earthquake was 2010. A quick google search shows a 2011 report listing the foundation's total revenue at 314 million. That's for everything, not just Haiti.

How do you get billions out of that?

Re: Trump investigation. At least be honest that this is a witchhunt and that they are looking for literally anything unlawful that Trump's companies have done in the past (even though according to this thread he has no companies). They tried with the Russia collusion, no evidence found so that didn't stick. So now they're going to dig deeper and see if they can find anything. Maybe he paid a few contractors in cash back in the 90's and we use that to justify his incompetency for the presidency.. *cough*Whitewater... If a special prosecutor was simultaneously hired to dig into Clinton's closet then I would be more open to it. Want to remove corruption? Remove it all.

Well, there were the times the Trump foundation paid out to settle legal disputes of Trump's commercial organizations.

It seems to me that one should be more concerned about the problems a sitting president has, not a private citizen.
 
i'd really like to be more optimistic that he'll be held to account for any criminal acts he has committed, but i find it hard not to be a bit jaded when it comes to things like that.
i would really like to be proven wrong, however. this seems like a real test for how robust america's democracy and constitution is.

Thank you as well. :) I read a lot of bad articles and finally happily found those. (Yes, I read 20 lawyers' opinions.)

Mueller's investigation will take a long time. No doubt.

Trump will become more unhinged as information trickles out about witnesses. Who got a subpoena? What are they saying? How far into his family's finances has the expert team gone?

This could be years. If he was focused on this before, this is his worst nightmare now. It's something he can't control, and it is a private, closed-door process with a team that doesn't leak.

Good luck Chief of Staff Kelly!
 
Last edited:
It seems to me that one should be more concerned about the problems a sitting president has, not a private citizen.

Has, or had? Why again are we digging around in a President's financial history?

How do you get billions out of that?
We count and we listen to reporters, or even Haitian politicians.


you're not party to the details of mueller's investigation so you have no idea whether that's true or not.
I'm not party to the details because there's no fucking details! Investigators are even taking out insurance due to anticipating lawsuits against themselves.

and, further, i assume that, for example, hillary clinton's flaws are bad while trump's flaws are good?
There is being a flawed human with good intentions, and then there's being a goddamn murderous psychopath.
 
The $10 million to $25 million the Saudis donated was to the Clinton foundation, a non-profit, from which the Clintons drew no salary. Now I'm open to the idea that any charitable organization that's linked to any politician should be strictly regulated and audited regularly to ensure its following said regulations, but I'm guessing you aren't open to the idea that the Trump Foundation being under the same scrutiny.

Of course I am. All I do is bang on about implementing justice fairly and evenly.
And LOL @ Saudi Arabia being charitable: an insane, oppressive regime that beheads people for being gay and stones rape victims to death just happened to, out of the goodness of their hearts, donate $25 MILLION and it just happened to be to the Clinton Foundation.....wow.... those loving Saudis are so amazing. Donating to the same foundation that misappropriated BILLIONS of dollars that was meant to go to the earthquake-ravaged Haitians yet somehow disappeared. Haiti saw less 5% of the money that was donated. The Clinton Foundation is a criminal pay-for-play enterprise, even their ex-CEO Eric Braverman blew the whistle on them and told reporters to "follow the money".

I don't presume to speak for Escher, but it seems quite clear to me that he was referring to the Clinton Foundation as a charity. It would be odd to describe a sovereign state, or any set of members of a royal family, as a charity; though, a member of the latter may properly be called a philanthropist in the right circumstances (philanthropist=/=a charity, presuming you mean in the organisational sense).

Billions? That's pretty impressive. Haiti earthquake was 2010. A quick google search shows a 2011 report listing the foundation's total revenue at 314 million. That's for everything, not just Haiti.

How do you get billions out of that?

We count and we listen to reporters, or even Haitian politicians.

What do you count? Which reporters are you listening to? You haven't provided a credible source whatsoever. At about 1:21 the politician says that $14.3 billion was contributed to the Clinton Foundation to help Haiti, at 1:21 he says Haitians received "not even 2% of that money", at 1:36 he says "they were given millions of dollars from that money". It isn't even clear what he is saying, were the Clinton's given millions of dollars out of $14.3 billion, or did he mean that $14.3 billion was donated but Haitian's only received millions? Even if we suppose the politician is credible, and that supposition is not obvious, in less than 20 seconds he seems to be making inconsistent statements. Of course, it is possible that when he said 'millions' at 1:36 he meant thousands of millions (i.e. billions), but that seems rather unlikely. Citing a minute long clip of some politician asserting prima facie inconsistent claims is hardly something you can expect most to take seriously.

As an aside, the politician in the clip is called Bernard Sansaricq, he ran for US congress in 2012 as a Republican candidate. So, he does have a bit of a vested interest in shitting on democrats. Moreover, this article says that he went to Trump rallies and alleged that Bill Clinton attempted to bribe him.

I am not saying Mr Sansaricq is a liar, I certainly don't know that - but, it does seem like he may have a vested interest in casting aspersions against the Clinton's. This doesn't mean he is wrong, but some hard data, as opposed to the inconsistent testimony of a man who has a fairly clear conflict of interest, would be much more persuasive. When you say "[w]e count", it seems to me that you are implying that there is hard data which one actually can count, a link to a credible source of said data would be appreciated.

Again, I ask, what are you counting? Where are the figures which show billions, rather than millions, were donated to the Clinton Foundation in order to provide relief from the 2011 earthquake? Where are the figures which show these funds were misappropriated? I am totally agnostic on this issue, but your evidence seems far from conclusive. You seem quite concerned with speaking the "truth", so please, point me to some hard (and credible) data that will lead me there.
 
Last edited:
fair to assume that you think politicians who lean left aren't true patriots? see: no true scotsman

and, further, i assume that, for example, hillary clinton's flaws are bad while trump's flaws are good? :)

alasdair

I had no idea what no true scotsman meant, learn something new everyday thank you.

No there are some patriotic left, I assume, but by the time they become figureheads, they will already had been corrupted.

It's a joke the biggest reason I was a democrat, tbh was I thought they were a party that would hold corporations and politicians accountable to their actions.

I thought the dnc was the party of accountability.

Then in 2016 the DNC rigged the primaries with HRC as it's elected candidate the entire time, then came the criminal investigations, then came muh russia.

The republicans may not be any better but at least they didn't run on a platform of superior morals and virtue signalling, that is what the dnc has become.
 
Has, or had? Why again are we digging around in a President's financial history?
because his business ties to russian interests are now within the scope of the investigation.

every other president releases their tax returns. why is trump unwilling to do so?

I'm not party to the details because there's no fucking details!
tell us more about how you know what's going on with the internals of the mueller investigation?

There is being a flawed human with good intentions, and then there's being a goddamn murderous psychopath.
your biased inconsistency is on show more frequently. you talk a lot about how we should be investigating hillary but you have a problem with the investigation of trump? you want to have your cake and eat it.

alasdair
 
The republicans may not be any better but at least they didn't run on a platform of superior morals and virtue signalling, that is what the dnc has become.

You're gonna tell me that courting the evangelicals with signals about Jesus and Family Values isn't synonymous with the GOP? It was a deliberate strategy, just like winning the Southern bigot vote. (No, that's not overstating.)

This election wasn't any different, until the last two dropped out. (And I can only remember a couple of Holy Rollers making a stand and pointing out Trump is a vile human being. The rest made clear their beliefs are bullshit, I intend to treat them with the same respect now.)
 
i don't think non-violent offenders should be imprisoned, especially not in the way people are in the States.

Do you believe that Bernie Maddof was improperly sentenced in his non-violent ponzi scheme?

Do you believe bankers should not have gone to jail for defrauding tax payers out of billions and taking their homes at the same time?

How about people like the Koch Bro's that single handily destroy ecosystems and inject widespread cancer due to dumping toxic waste?

These are the non-violent crimes I feel should get life, in order to dissuade future demons of these heinous crimes.

You're gonna tell me that courting the evangelicals with signals about Jesus and Family Values isn't synonymous with the GOP? It was a deliberate strategy, just like winning the Southern bigot vote. (No, that's not overstating.)

This election wasn't any different, until the last two dropped out. (And I can only remember a couple of Holy Rollers making a stand and pointing out Trump is a vile human being. The rest made clear their beliefs are bullshit, I intend to treat them with the same respect now.)

I actually respect the fact that evangelicals kinda acknowledge they're beliefs as bullshit versus brainwashed idiots like Maxine Waters rambling identity gibberish or ppl like Carl the Cuck going on about "Fucking white males", or BLM going on about how non-violent the victims of police euthanasia when almost every one had a long history of committed crimes, or feminazi's crying about equal pay when in reality they want supremacy, or fatty-rights going on about how they're healthy at any size....so long as healthy tax payers pay their healthcare bill burden.

They're more hypocritical and ridiculous than any evangelical ever could.
 
Last edited:
Unfortunately, I had put these facts up without a citation and full quotes. Here they are...

In reviewing filings from the Eric Trump Foundation and other charities, it's clear that the [golf] course wasn't free--that the Trump Organization received payments for its use, part of more than $1.2 million that has no documented recipients past the Trump Organization. Golf charity experts say the listed expenses defy any reasonable cost justification for a one-day golf tournament.

[Mr. Trump] said [of fundraising events for children with cancer], "I don't care if it's my son or not--everybody gets billed."

- The Donald J. Trump Foundation famously acted like an arm of the overall business, using the charity's money to settle a Trump business lawsuit, make a political donation and even purchase expensive portraits of its namesake.

How Donald Trump Shifted Kids-Cancer Charity Money Into His Business in Forbes
 
because his business ties to russian interests are now within the scope of the investigation.
Yes but why? You just parrot propaganda and can rarely justify your positions with common sense. Going along with the establishment is not a rational justification (in fact it is generally highly irrational). I thought this was about "Russian collusion to influence an election", not about doing business with Russians in the past?

every other president releases their tax returns. why is trump unwilling to do so?
He is not legally obliged to, so I don't know why this is an even an issue among some people. Do you think there is evidence of Russian collusion hidden in his tax returns? How about behind the couch, or in his sock drawer?

tell us more about how you know what's going on with the internals of the mueller investigation?
Did you bother to read the article I linked? There is no evidence of collusion. James Comey, Adam Schiff, Dianne Feinstein, Maxine Waters, Jeh Johnson, James Clapper ALL said that there was NO DIRECT EVIDENCE of Trump/Russia collusion. You and the others know that there is nothing there so you're willing to dig into his past financial affairs to find business dealings with any Russians at all.

your biased inconsistency is on show more frequently. you talk a lot about how we should be investigating hillary but you have a problem with the investigation of trump? you want to have your cake and eat it.
Can you read? I stated that I was in favor of it IF it was being conducted fairly, which it is not. And if you're a supporter and defender of murderous psychopath Clinton then you need your head examined.
 
He is not legally obliged to...
the numerous past presidents who did it were not legally obliged to do so yet they did it anyway in the interests of transparency. he's an international business man whose tangled business connections could impact his ability to act fairly. seeing the tax returns would have allowed voters to make a more informed decision. it's interesting, given a lot of your comments in this and other threads, that you are against the u.s. electorate making a more informed decision on a candidate.

also, aside, are you related to this guy:

...nice to have a President that operates with transparency.

i guess transparency is only a good thing when it suits you?

alasdair
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top