The Trump Presidency – 2016

[JPhillips]

dola

WASHINGTON — When President Trump calls old friends on one of his iPhones to gossip, gripe or solicit their latest take on how he is doing, American intelligence reports indicate that Chinese spies are often listening — and putting to use invaluable insights into how to best work the president and affect administration policy, current and former American officials said.

Mr. Trump’s aides have repeatedly warned him that his cellphone calls are not secure, and they have told him that Russian spies are routinely eavesdropping on the calls, as well. But aides say the voluble president, who has been pressured into using his secure White House landline more often these days, has still refused to give up his iPhones. White House officials say they can only hope he refrains from discussing classified information when he is on them.

I'm sure the conservative outrage over data security is coming any minute.

[Edward64]

Originally Posted by RainMaker

Markets erased all the gains they made this year.

Yup, it hurts. Nasdaq is in correction territory. We are due for a bear market.

Hopefully it'll be quick, get it out of the system so we can start going back up.

[PilotMan]

trump's official statements on today, are the equivalent of your older sibling saying "stop hitting yourself, stop hitting yourself."

[digamma]

Andrew Gillum tonight: "I'm not saying Mr. DeSantis is a racist. I'm saying the racists think he's a racist."

[tarcone]

This senate race has me torn. No way I vote for Hawley. But at the same time, I dont see myself voting for McCaskill.
Hawley is flat out shady. I dont trust this guy at all.
I dont trust McCaskill either. But she seems to be more in line with a couple of the things I believe in. But I dont trust her either.


Its hard to vote when you sont trust wither party or the people they throw out there.

I need to research 3rd party cansisates.

[AENeuman]

Obviously not sure how today’s events will play out, but one more fun 1920’s parallel:

“But the Klan was easily at its most popular in the United States during the 1920s, when its reach was nationwide, its members disproportionately middle class, and many of its very visible public activities geared toward festivities, pageants, and social gatherings. In some ways, it was this superficially innocuous Klan that was the most insidious of them all. Packaging its noxious ideology as traditional small-town values and wholesome fun, the Klan of the 1920s encouraged native-born white Americans to believe that bigotry, intimidation, harassment, and extralegal violence were all perfectly compatible with, if not central to, patriotic respectability.

Ideologically, the Klan blended xenophobia, religious prejudice, and white supremacy together with a broadly conservative moralism.

Presenting itself in part as a Christian moral reform organization and in part as a vehicle for entrenching the economic and political power of white Anglo-Saxon Protestants, the Klan flourished with the promise that energetic white nationalism and traditional morals would hold back the tides of modernity and ensure that forces scheming to undermine the authority of native-born white Americans would be kept at bay.

But the violence was not the attraction for most members of the Klan. Indeed, most would likely have disavowed their support for such activities, and many surely did not consider themselves to be mean-spirited racists at all.”
The Rise and Fall of the Second Ku Klux Klan - The Atlantic

[SackAttack]

Originally Posted by Edward64

So you are saying this incident violated the first amendment?

A government official, or would-be government official, assaulting a member of the press as that journalist is exercising his First Amendment rights as a member of the free press is a violation.

The President of the United States praising and encouraging, explicitly or tacitly, acts of violence against a free press is absomotherfuckingLUTELY a violation of the First Amendment.

I'll ask the same question as above, is how Obama handled Wikileaks a violation (or threat to)?

1) Get the fuck out of here with your whataboutism. "B-b-but Obama" is not a reasonable response to "[Republican] did a fucking odious thing."

2) Did Obama, at any time, lay hands on Julian Assange, any member of Wikileaks, or any of the alleged leakers? Did he encourage anybody to commit acts of violence against the same, or applaud anybody who did?

If your conflation of Trump with Obama here is because Chelsea Manning got a disproportionately long sentence under the Espionage Act compared with other convicts of the same, you are grasping at the thinnest possible straws trying to cover Trump's ass for, again, some fucking odious behavior.

I'm not answering your question. Answer it your own damn self, and the next time you're inspired to engage in whataboutism, fuck off instead, okay?

[AlexB]

If people carry on voting for this clown, I have no idea how the world works any more.

Trump attacks opponents, media, threatens violence and war, over a period of (at least) four years
Trump lies about basically everything, claims reports pointing out the truth are lies and attacks
Fucktards in the country (we love the uneducated) pick up the one and in some cases the rhetoric itself, with some cases of violence towards journalists, now political opponents
Trump says we should respect all people
Trump says the media should stop the aggressive lying

I’m not going mad am I?

He is the single worst thing to happen to world politics in my lifetime.

All of the other despots, madmen and tyrants were in areas where this was common, but Trump has brought a destabilising, aggressive leadership with scant attention to the truth to a supposedly leading, educated and developed country that was ‘the policeman of the world’. It will change politics and the country for years if not decades to come, and I donkt think it will be in the ‘we must never let this happen again’ way.

Regardless of political leanings or policy belief, the character of the country has been irreversibly changed for the worse in at least the short-medium term.

Please just vote him down and eventually out.

[Thomkal]

From your lips Alex...


I've purposedly not been watching polls or analysis much this month. I remember how sad and depressed I was after the 2016 election and I don't want to feel that way again. Worse yet I don't want to see Trump win if the electorate comes through for him again in the midterms. I think the lie count is over 4,000 now. How could any American want that for their country, their leader? I just don't get it, and I don't want to be proven wrong again.

[Edward64]

Originally Posted by SackAttack

A government official, or would-be government official, assaulting a member of the press as that journalist is exercising his First Amendment rights as a member of the free press is a violation.

The President of the United States praising and encouraging, explicitly or tacitly, acts of violence against a free press is absomotherfuckingLUTELY a violation of the First Amendment.

I don't disagree that Gianforte being physically taken down for doing nothing but asking his questions was a violation so agree with first paragraph.

Tying Trump to it for his recent praise to this incident from June 2017 is not a connection I would make and hence my phrasing of "this incident". If you want to tie Trump's overall, constant barrage against the press as a violation, that I can agree with per #13491.

Originally Posted by SackAttack

1) Get the fuck out of here with your whataboutism. "B-b-but Obama" is not a reasonable response to "[Republican] did a fucking odious thing."

2) Did Obama, at any time, lay hands on Julian Assange, any member of Wikileaks, or any of the alleged leakers? Did he encourage anybody to commit acts of violence against the same, or applaud anybody who did?

Per #1, I was responding to Lathum's post in #13579. I countered with Wikileaks as possibly comparable. It's reasonable to counter in a debate with another example that may show the supposition is incorrect. (I use "possible" and "may" because I'm not convinced it was a violation myself but there is a healthy debate about this out there).

Originally Posted by Lathum View Post
Because we have never had a president who outright violates the first amendment the way trump does.

Per #2, did he "lay hands" or "encourage anybody to commit acts of violence" as the criteria for violation of first amendment is a narrow definition. Doesn't "prosecute" also fit?

Originally Posted by SackAttack

If your conflation of Trump with Obama here is because Chelsea Manning got a disproportionately long sentence under the Espionage Act compared with other convicts of the same, you are grasping at the thinnest possible straws trying to cover Trump's ass for, again, some fucking odious behavior.

No, didn't think about Chelsea Manning. Was thinking about Assange.

Originally Posted by SackAttack

I'm not answering your question. Answer it your own damn self, and the next time you're inspired to engage in whataboutism, fuck off instead, okay?

I thought you did a partially eloquent job of answering the question already. Thanks for your contribution.

[Lathum]

Originally Posted by Edward64

Per #2, did he "lay hands" or "encourage anybody to commit acts of violence" as the criteria for violation of first amendment is a narrow definition. Doesn't "prosecute" also fit?

If you beat up a protester at Trump’s rally, he’ll cover your legal fees. | The New Republic

took 2 seconds to find an example of Trump encouraging violence and offering to pay for the legal fees.

[Edward64]

Originally Posted by Lathum

If you beat up a protester at Trump’s rally, he’ll cover your legal fees. | The New Republic

took 2 seconds to find an example of Trump encouraging violence and offering to pay for the legal fees.

I get that part.

My response was Assange is being "prosecuted" (not sure if that is the legal term) for his Wikileaks. Violating first amendment isn't just "lay hands" or "encouraging anybody to commit acts of violence", its also prosecuting the journalists or leakers isn't it?

[Lathum]

Trump on twitter doubling down on the fake news being responsible for the divide and not his own rhetoric. I’m sure his base will lap it up.

[PilotMan]

I guess this goes in here. It's government related.


China's hidden camps - BBC News


This is what a government that is focused on Law and Order at all costs looks like. As horrible as it sounds, from another perspective you could argue that this could just as easily happen in the US under the right circumstances. This is pretty much right up Jon's authoritarian wet dream right here. I think it's a valuable read, not just to see what an actual large scale government cover up and hush looks like, but to understand the reason's why something like this happens and what a government determined to find a solution looks like in the 21st century.

[kingfc22]

Originally Posted by Lathum

Trump on twitter doubling down on the fake news being responsible for the divide and not his own rhetoric. I’m sure his base will lap it up.

Of course they will.

It's your fault that you reported on the fact that I praised the body slamming of a reporter.

[Edward64]

Originally Posted by PilotMan

I guess this goes in here. It's government related.

China's hidden camps - BBC News

This is what a government that is focused on Law and Order at all costs looks like. As horrible as it sounds, from another perspective you could argue that this could just as easily happen in the US under the right circumstances. This is pretty much right up Jon's authoritarian wet dream right here. I think it's a valuable read, not just to see what an actual large scale government cover up and hush looks like, but to understand the reason's why something like this happens and what a government determined to find a solution looks like in the 21st century.

Thanks, good read. The bottom part caught my eye.

But while the system of profiling and control has been likened by some to Apartheid, clearly that is not entirely accurate.

Many Uighurs do have a stake in the system.

In reality a better parallel can be found in China's own totalitarian past.

As in the Cultural Revolution, a society is being told that it needs to be taken apart in order to be saved.

Your article reminded me of the Rohingya plight. They are considered illegal/stateless and definitely in a world of hurt. Both are Muslims minorities. There were also some terrorist activities by the Rohingya that the government reacted to. But instead of retraining camps, its more force/kick them out.

What Forces Are Fueling Myanmar’s Rohingya Crisis?

[PilotMan]

The definition of terrorist activities is typically in the eyes of the beholder.

Even in the US, the minority, especially an oppressed minority, might have justification to stand up for itself through any means necessary to get a seat at the table of equality and what is right. If the government has no desire to see that happen, then they are labeled terrorists and we move on with them having that label.

You could argue that the entire US Revolution was lead by terrorists who upended a lawful government. In modern day times, we would be seen as dangerous and in need of controlling, because we upset the stability of the time. In fact, an even more modern example, is trump's recent use of mobs and his goal to paint political opposition as unhinged, and dangerous. Another way to put as people who are upsetting the kind of stability he desires. trump has no desire to see stability and equality, he seeks stability through control, which is a hallmark of a totalitarian/authoritarian government. Today's modern day terrorist is another man's freedom fighter. It's all in the name of why. Look for any repressed group, and you'll find a parallel.

[Thomkal]

Biden and Robert DeNiro get packages as well.


And Grassley didn't want a full FBI investigation on Kavanaugh, but now he wants a full one done of two of the people who came forward during that time, Michael Avernati and his client Julie Swetnick.


400 Bad Request

[cuervo72]

Originally Posted by Edward64

I get that part.

My response was Assange is being "prosecuted" (not sure if that is the legal term) for his Wikileaks. Violating first amendment isn't just "lay hands" or "encouraging anybody to commit acts of violence", its also prosecuting the journalists or leakers isn't it?

Assange is in hiding because the UK has a warrant for his arrest on charges of rape and sexual assault. Nothing about being prosecuted for Wikileaks.

[NobodyHere]

Originally Posted by cuervo72

Assange is in hiding because the UK has a warrant for his arrest on charges of rape and sexual assault. Nothing about being prosecuted for Wikileaks.

Weren't the rape charges dropped a little while ago?

[Edward64]

Originally Posted by cuervo72

Assange is in hiding because the UK has a warrant for his arrest on charges of rape and sexual assault. Nothing about being prosecuted for Wikileaks.

From the wiki.

Julian Assange - Wikipedia

After WikiLeaks released the Manning material, United States authorities began investigating WikiLeaks and Assange personally with a view to prosecuting them under the Espionage Act of 1917.[137] In November 2010 US Attorney-General Eric Holder said there was "an active, ongoing criminal investigation" into WikiLeaks.[5] It emerged from legal documents leaked over the ensuing months that Assange and others were being investigated by a federal grand jury in Alexandria, Virginia.[138][139] An email from an employee of intelligence consultancy Strategic Forecasting, Inc. (Stratfor) leaked in 2012 said, "We have a sealed indictment on Assange."[140] The US government denies the existence of such an indictment.[141][142]
:
Assange was being examined separately by "several government agencies" in addition to the grand jury, most notably the FBI.[150] Court documents published in May 2014 suggest that Assange was still under "active and ongoing" investigation at that time.[151]
:
Moreover, some Snowden documents published in 2014 show that the United States government put Assange on the "2010 Manhunting Timeline",[152] and in the same period they urged their allies to open criminal investigations into the editor-in-chief of WikiLeaks.[153] In the same documents there was a proposal by the National Security Agency (NSA) to designate WikiLeaks as a "malicious foreign actor", thus increasing the surveillance against it.

You may be right that Assange is in the embassy because he was running away from the rape and assault charges.

However, I'm pretty sure he had plenty to fear from extradition and US prosecution.


And per the charges, all he has to do is avoid visiting Sweden again.

On 19 May 2017, the Swedish authorities dropped their investigation against Assange, claiming they could not expect the Ecuadorian Embassy to communicate reliably with Assange with respect to the case. Chief prosecutor Marianne Ny officially revoked his arrest warrant, but said the investigation could still be resumed if Assange visited Sweden before August 2020. "We are not making any pronouncement about guilt", she said.[166][167][18]

[cuervo72]

I'd assume procuring classified documents would be a bit different than a free speech issue.

[Edward64]

Originally Posted by cuervo72

I'd assume procuring classified documents would be a bit different than a free speech issue.

Just some random googling (trying to pick ones that I recognize, ACLU is in one quote but there's plenty others out there).

A lot of healthy discussion about the situation with wiki leads being a first amendment issue. So yeah, for many its a valid concern.

https://www.wired.com/2017/04/us-cha...freedom-trial/

“Never in the history of this country has a publisher been prosecuted for presenting truthful information to the public," ACLU attorney Ben Wizner, who has defended NSA leaker Edward Snowden, writes in a statement to WIRED. "Any prosecution of WikiLeaks for publishing government secrets would set a dangerous precedent that the Trump administration would surely use to target other news organizations.”

WikiLeaks and the First Amendment | HuffPost

The so-called SHIELD Act, which has been introduced in both Houses of Congress, would amend the Espionage Act of 1917 to make it a crime for any person knowingly and willfully to disseminate, in any manner prejudicial to the safety or interest of the United States,” any classified information... concerning the human intelligence activities of the United States or... concerning the identity of a classified source or informant” who is working with the intelligence community of the United States.

Although this Act may well be constitutional as applied to a government employee who unlawfully “leaks” such material to persons who are unauthorized to receive it, it is plainly unconstitutional as applied to other individuals or organizations who might publish or otherwise disseminate the information after it has been leaked. With respect to such other speakers, the Act violates the First Amendment unless, at the very least, it is expressly limited to situations in which the dissemination of the specific classified information at issue poses a clear and present danger of grave harm to the nation.

U.S. v. WikiLeaks: Can Assange be prosecuted? - US news - WikiLeaks in Security | NBC News

Has Assange violated the Espionage Act?

The release of these diplomatic cables could not be more public, and about half of the 250,000 cables that WikiLeaks gave to newspapers are classified. Is there any doubt that Assange has violated the Espionage Act?

Abbe D. Lowell, defense attorney: There can be serious doubt, indeed, “reasonable doubt,” that Mr. Assange has violated the act. First, there has never been a prosecution under the act for a First Amendment-protected media outlet or reporter. The AIPAC case was the closest in that it charged lobbyists. [Lowell defended one of the lobbyists; the government dropped the charges.] It is not clear that a court would rule that the act can apply constitutionally in this context.

[Brian Swartz]

Originally Posted by Thomkal

I don't want to see Trump win if the electorate comes through for him again in the midterms. I think the lie count is over 4,000 now. How could any American want that for their country, their leader? I just don't get it, and I don't want to be proven wrong again.

My answer to this sentiment is always the same: the real issue is that 40%+ of the electorate are, by and large, not particularly excited by Trump -- it's just that they think the alternative is worse. That's the real problem, and barring a literal act of God I don't think it is fixable.

[kingfc22]

Silly media still covering this “bomb stuff”.

Is this fucking asshole for real?

[Thomkal]

They have just arrested a man in Florida for some part in the bombings. News conference around 2:30 ET

[Thomkal]

Originally Posted by kingfc22

Silly media still covering this “bomb stuff”.

Is this fucking asshole for real?

Yeah because its more and more likely its a conservative/Republican supporter behind them, so have to downplay and ridicule the media over it before the election.

[kingfc22]

Originally Posted by Thomkal

Yeah because its more and more likely its a conservative/Republican supporter behind them, so have to downplay and ridicule the media over it before the election.

Yea. One look at that dude’s van says it all.

[CU Tiger]

nevermind

[cartman]

The best take I saw:

This van is what Steve Bannon would turn into if he was a Transformer.

[miami_fan]

Ladies and Gentlemen,

#FloridaManFriday

[molson]

I kind of figured that when the grand master plan was sending crude bombs made from internet instructions directly to political figures and then not a single one detonated - all roads would lead to a Florida van.

[ISiddiqui]

The strangest thing to me was all those US Soccer stickers all over the van next to the Trump stuff.

[albionmoonlight]

And now we begin the transition from False Flag to Lone Nut.

[Edward64]

An unconfirmed name.

Internal Error

Federal authorities arrested a man in Florida on Friday after a number of explosive devices were sent to prominent Democratic politicians and others this week, the Department of Justice said. The suspect was identified at Cesar Sayoc, 56, the New York Times reported.

Public records showed a Cesar Sayoc listed with an address in Aventura, Florida, and a past address in Fort Lauderdale, as well as another past address in New Jersey.

A photo of a white van towed at the scene where the suspect was apprehended showed a vehicle covered in political stickers, including Trump decals and a presidential seal. The van was found in Plantation, Florida, west of Fort Lauderdale.

[Lathum]

Major trump supporter on my timeline claiming the caravan is paid for by dems and the bombing is a set up because even a bit would be more subtle. Nothing matters. There is literally no level of lunacy he or his supporters can get to that will make people turn on him. They will continue to claim set up. It is really an unbelievable time we live in. History will look back on these likely 8 years as the biggest stain on our nation and the reason for our likely demise. Winning.

[JPhillips]

My new go-to argument winner!

Trump: "People never give us credit for this: Abraham Lincoln was a Republican, right? Right? I was having arguments with people...and I wasn't probably on my game...and I just blurted out...and I said it strong. 'BUT ABRAHAM LINCOLN WAS A REPUBLICAN.' And I won the argument."

[Thomkal]

Originally Posted by Lathum

Major trump supporter on my timeline claiming the caravan is paid for by dems and the bombing is a set up because even a bit would be more subtle. Nothing matters. There is literally no level of lunacy he or his supporters can get to that will make people turn on him. They will continue to claim set up. It is really an unbelievable time we live in. History will look back on these likely 8 years as the biggest stain on our nation and the reason for our likely demise. Winning.

Not surprised at all. Trump could flat out admit he colluded with Russia and they won't care.

[Thomkal]

They have pictures of him at Trump rallies too already. Seems to be a bit of a minor celebrity amongst them

[Ksyrup]

I've seen several retweets from people who had posted pics from the last couple years where they'd seen this van and posted about it because of how ridiculous it is, with a "IT'S THAT VAN!" post today.

[Ksyrup]

That dude's twitter page is as craptastic as you would expect. There's a tweet to Jeff Flake which seems to suggest he's threatening to burn his house down.

[cartman]

The wording and phrasing remind me of a certain JasonGreatWhiteFootballLeagueOCT

LLLLOOOOOVVVEEE IT

[PilotMan]

Well I'm glad that he isn't representative of a typical trump supporter, thereby absolving trump (or his admin) of any responsibility.

[Thomkal]

Almost as many tweets today about the new Timeless finale movie announced today than MAGABomber tweets Coming in late December, 2 hour movie to end the show on a good note (Though its trying to find a new network)

[RainMaker]

Originally Posted by Ksyrup

That dude's twitter page is as craptastic as you would expect. There's a tweet to Jeff Flake which seems to suggest he's threatening to burn his house down.

He threatens a lot of people on it. Twitter once again doing a bang up job policing their service.

[RainMaker]

Kind of an interesting twist. In Florida the Governor can reinstate your voting rights if you're a felon. Scott typically only reinstates white Republicans. If this guy voted in 2016, it would appear that Scott had to reinstate his voting rights despite his lengthy criminal record all because of his political affiliation.

Florida felon voting rights: Who got theirs back under Scott? - News - The Palm Beach Post - West Palm Beach, FL

[CU Tiger]

Originally Posted by PilotMan

Well I'm glad that he isn't representative of a typical trump supporter, thereby absolving trump (or his admin) of any responsibility.

Well..was Obama responsible for the Congressional baseball game shooter?


Both sides have nuts. Both sides have zealots. Equal amounts on both sides.



To suggest otherwise is to wave the flag blindly of your chosen side.

[ISiddiqui]

Originally Posted by RainMaker

Kind of an interesting twist. In Florida the Governor can reinstate your voting rights if you're a felon. Scott typically only reinstates white Republicans. If this guy voted in 2016, it would appear that Scott had to reinstate his voting rights despite his lengthy criminal record all because of his political affiliation.

Florida felon voting rights: Who got theirs back under Scott? - News - The Palm Beach Post - West Palm Beach, FL

John Oliver actually did a piece on this. Gov. Scott constantly asks about the person's faith before making his decision as well. And then he basically decides on a whim whether to do it or not.

[JPhillips]

After the arrest was public Trump spoke to a group that started yelling George Soros and Lock him up. Trump chuckled and said Lock him up.

Both sides have zealots, but Trump is instigating violence and demonizing his opponents. There's a reason Sayoc targeted a wide range of victims, they were all targets of Trump's attacks.

[PilotMan]

Originally Posted by CU Tiger

Well..was Obama responsible for the Congressional baseball game shooter?


Both sides have nuts. Both sides have zealots. Equal amounts on both sides.



To suggest otherwise is to wave the flag blindly of your chosen side.

Again, as has been quoted other places, at no time did Obama tell people to go out and attack opponents. At no time did he refer to the opposition as "crazy", "unhinged", "dangerous", or praise physical violence against or facilitate conspiracy theories about Republicans who were out to get him. None at all.

This isn't a both sides argument here.

To say otherwise lacks a fundamental understanding of supporting facts, logic and understanding fallacies.