The Trump Presidency – 2016

[JPhillips]

F Belichick if he accepts the Medal of Freedom from Trump.

[miami_fan]

Eh, I get it given his affinity for history and it is the highest civilian award in the country. It also lends credence to my theory that Trump was coming back to the White House to get more pictures.

[thesloppy]

Can he go pick it up from Biden?

[sterlingice]

Originally Posted by JPhillips

F Belichick if he accepts the Medal of Freedom from Trump.

I gather Bill is going to secretly videotape the ceremony. https://t.co/o5CDR5kzVA

— Jon Ralston (@RalstonReports) January 11, 2021

SI

[JPhillips]

Melania is doing her best to remind people how horrible she really is.

[albionmoonlight]

Originally Posted by JPhillips

Melania is doing her best to remind people how horrible she really is.

The "Free Melania" movement was always weird. At no point did she ever indicate she was anything other than 100% behind her husband. And it is pretty clear that she, herself, is personally a pretty horrible human being.

People just assumed that she was "trapped" in that marriage based on nothing.

[Lathum]

Originally Posted by JPhillips

Melania is doing her best to remind people how horrible she really is.

That statement she made is mind boggling.

Can you imagine how crazy the right wing media would go if officers and protesters were killed at a BLM rally and eulogized in the same manner.

[CrimsonFox]

Originally Posted by albionmoonlight

The "Free Melania" movement was always weird. At no point did she ever indicate she was anything other than 100% behind her husband. And it is pretty clear that she, herself, is personally a pretty horrible human being.

People just assumed that she was "trapped" in that marriage based on nothing.

yup it's kind of like an eva peron deal

[GrantDawg]

Originally Posted by albionmoonlight

The "Free Melania" movement was always weird. At no point did she ever indicate she was anything other than 100% behind her husband. And it is pretty clear that she, herself, is personally a pretty horrible human being.

People just assumed that she was "trapped" in that marriage based on nothing.

I still think she is a Russian-trained asset on a mission to seduce an American billion to manipulate America politically, and it worked spectacularly.


Not really, but it would make a great movie. I am surprised it is not a common conspiracy.

[GrantDawg]

*sigh*

NEWS: In one of his final acts as secretary, Pompeo will designate Cuba a state sponsor of terrorism today. https://t.co/qNe9Q2JdjN

— Nicholas Wadhams (@nwadhams) January 11, 2021

[bob]

Opinion: Democrats Have Been Shameless About Your Presidential Vote Too
https://www.nytimes.com/2021/01/06/o...ral-votes.html

Thought this was interesting as I didn't know the history of objecting to the electoral votes in the past prior to this week.

[GrantDawg]

Originally Posted by bob

Opinion: Democrats Have Been Shameless About Your Presidential Vote Too
https://www.nytimes.com/2021/01/06/o...ral-votes.html

Thought this was interesting as I didn't know the history of objecting to the electoral votes in the past prior to this week.

There has always been a fringe that would willingly fight for the impossible, but the grown-ups in the room never allowed it to go very far. The only time in my life that a possible challenge would have had any possibility to have legs, it was Florida in 2000. Gore was the one that stopped that idea. He recognized the damage that would be caused by continued fighting. He knew erosion in the faith of the electoral process would cause long term damage to the party and the process. The current President doesn't care.

[JPhillips]

Yes, there's a difference between publicity stunts and actually coordinating with folks to overturn an election.

[Galaril]

Originally Posted by bob

Opinion: Democrats Have Been Shameless About Your Presidential Vote Too
https://www.nytimes.com/2021/01/06/o...ral-votes.html

Thought this was interesting as I didn't know the history of objecting to the electoral votes in the past prior to this week.

This is a false equivalency and has already been disproved but doesn't stop Rs and Fox from bringing it up over and over. This guy is a opinion write and a law professor from Iowa so can guess his political leanings. Dems have had a house member or two object to the election ( never 162) but they never got a Senator to go along with it let alone 7!

[tarcone]

Originally Posted by Galaril

This is a false equivalency and has already been disproved but doesn't stop Rs and Fox from bringing it up over and over. This guy is a opinion write and a law professor from Iowa so can guess his political leanings. Dems have had a house member or two object to the election ( never 162) but they never got a Senator to go along with it let alone 7!

The University of Iowa is as liberal as they come. Growing up there it was considered 10 square miles of liberalism in a sea of conservatism. Shoot, the town had a socialist, feminist, lesbian council member. Every vote on the city council was 6-1. The city used to harass that poor women. This was in the 80s, so you can imagine how she was treated.

[bob]

Originally Posted by Galaril

This is a false equivalency and has already been disproved but doesn't stop Rs and Fox from bringing it up over and over. This guy is a opinion write and a law professor from Iowa so can guess his political leanings. Dems have had a house member or two object to the election ( never 162) but they never got a Senator to go along with it let alone 7!

I wasn’t equivocating - I was just posted an article I thought was interesting because I didn’t realize it had happened before (although it’s not like the ones in 2000 are surprising).

[Galaril]

Originally Posted by tarcone

The University of Iowa is as liberal as they come. Growing up there it was considered 10 square miles of liberalism in a sea of conservatism. Shoot, the town had a socialist, feminist, lesbian council member. Every vote on the city council was 6-1. The city used to harass that poor women. This was in the 80s, so you can imagine how she was treated.

Thanks for the correct my bad

[Galaril]

Originally Posted by bob

I wasn’t equivocating - I was just posted an article I thought was interesting because I didn’t realize it had happened before (although it’s not like the ones in 2000 are surprising).

Sorry for jumping on you.

[ISiddiqui]

Bill Belichick says he won’t accept Presidential Medal of Freedom from Trump
By Cindy Boren

https://www.washingtonpost.com/sport...al-of-freedom/

Well that may hurt Trump the most...

Sent from my Pixel 4 XL using Tapatalk

[miami_fan]

Originally Posted by JPhillips

F Belichick if he accepts the Medal of Freedom from Trump.

New England Patriots coach Bill Belichick won't accept Presidential Medal of Freedom from Donald Trump

Does Belichick hate the President?

Is he a part of Antifa?

Is he a leftist?


WE NEED ANSWERS!

[albionmoonlight]

“We’re on to Biden.”

[NobodyHere]

Originally Posted by miami_fan

New England Patriots coach Bill Belichick won't accept Presidential Medal of Freedom from Donald Trump

Does Belichick hate the President?

Is he a part of Antifa?

Is he a leftist?


WE NEED ANSWERS!

Yeah, being awarded the Presidential Medal of Freedom is now less prestigious than being a Subway spokesman.

[Lathum]

Its like applebees being given a James Beard Award

[GrantDawg]

Reports are saying that Trump did not like being told that if he pardons himself, he opens himself up for civil damages because a pardon is an admission of guilt. He reportedly said that if he can't pardon himself, he's not giving anymore pardons to anyone. I hope this is true.

Sent from my SM-N960U using Tapatalk

[albionmoonlight]

I dislike Trump as much as the next guy.

But I think that a pardon worded along the lines of "I pardon myself for whatever federal crimes I may have committed up until today" would be enough to prevent prosecutions as a practical matter. And would not open him up to liability b/c it isn't really an admission of anything.

No one really knows b/c the answer will be whatever the Supreme Court says when and if they ever get a question about it.

But I see little downside in phrasing it that way.

[GrantDawg]

I don't know if a general pardon is going to stand up in court. It hasn't been challenged before. I also doubt a self pardon is going to stand. I think that statement will probably doubly fail.

Sent from my SM-N960U using Tapatalk

[Bee]

Originally Posted by albionmoonlight

I dislike Trump as much as the next guy.

But I think that a pardon worded along the lines of "I pardon myself for whatever federal crimes I may have committed up until today" would be enough to prevent prosecutions as a practical matter. And would not open him up to liability b/c it isn't really an admission of anything.

No one really knows b/c the answer will be whatever the Supreme Court says when and if they ever get a question about it.

But I see little downside in phrasing it that way.

So there was a discussion yesterday on CNN about the WH counsel and Bill Barr recommending Trump not pardon himself. John Dean basically hypothesized that the reason was that if Trump doesn't pardon himself, there is a chance he doesn't get prosecuted. If Trump does pardon himself, the chances of prosecution actually goes up considerably because the pardon itself violates the DOJ internal memo in the Nixon case. I don't know if that is accurate but I can see the logic and would explain why there are Trump supporters who are recommending against the hail mary pardon.

[albionmoonlight]

I’m starting to wonder if encouraging an armed mob to kill the one person in a position to give him an iron-clad pardon was smart politics.

[Ben E Lou]

Originally Posted by albionmoonlight

I’m starting to wonder if encouraging an armed mob to kill the one person in a position to give him an iron-clad pardon was smart politics.

[NobodyHere]

Originally Posted by GrantDawg

Reports are saying that Trump did not like being told that if he pardons himself, he opens himself up for civil damages because a pardon is an admission of guilt. He reportedly said that if he can't pardon himself, he's not giving anymore pardons to anyone. I hope this is true.

Sent from my SM-N960U using Tapatalk

What "Reports" are these?

I thought it was internet fiction that a pardon requires an admission of guilt.

[ISiddiqui]

The Supreme Court has ruled that a pardon is admission of guilt:

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Burd...n%20of%20it%22.

The Supreme Court ruled in Burdick that a pardon carries "an imputation of guilt, acceptance a confession of it".[2]

Sent from my Pixel 4 XL using Tapatalk

[Vegas Vic]

Looks like the circus is continuing today with Trump flying down to Texas to visit the 450 miles of border wall that was constructed during his presidency. Should provide some good humor. Biden has vowed that not another penny will be spent on the border wall during his watch. Perhaps Joe feels that money could be better used helping Iran to accelerate their nuclear program.

[Qwikshot]

Originally Posted by Vegas Vic

Looks like the circus is continuing today with Trump flying down to Texas to visit the 450 miles of border wall that was constructed during his presidency. Should provide some good humor. Biden has vowed that not another penny will be spent on the border wall during his watch. Perhaps Joe feels that money could be better used helping Iran to accelerate their nuclear program.

I'm sure that's Joe's main platform; that and supporting the rise of the lizard people.

[HerRealName]

Originally Posted by Vegas Vic

Looks like the circus is continuing today with Trump flying down to Texas to visit the 450 miles of border wall that was constructed during his presidency.

I thought it was more like 50 miles including the private land, grift wall that is falling down.

[cuervo72]

Yeah, IIRC that's at least twice now that VV has suggested that Biden is pro-Iran.

[Vegas Vic]

Originally Posted by cuervo72

Yeah, IIRC that's at least twice now that VV has suggested that Biden is pro-Iran.

Probably more than twice, but I don't mean to infer that Biden is "pro Iran". More like "naive on Iran." They'd never admit it publicly, but I'll bet the Iranian leaders are giddy with excitement for the likely upcoming appeasement, so they can get back to the business of developing their nuclear weapons program without all of these obstacles.

[Qwikshot]

Originally Posted by Vegas Vic

Probably more than twice, but I don't mean to infer that Biden is "pro Iran". More like "naive on Iran." They'd never admit it publicly, but I'll bet the Iranian leaders are giddy with excitement for the likely upcoming appeasement, so they can get back to the business of developing their nuclear weapons program without all of these obstacles.

They already have been enriching Uranium under the orange one.

[thesloppy]

That line of reasoning might sound sane if Biden hadn't been part of an administration that crafted an explicit, direct policy around Iran's nuclear weapons program & Trump's administration hadn't blow it up entirely, but I'm sure you've got some alternate version of history you're dying to tell everybody.

[ISiddiqui]

They've been enriching more uranium under the orange one than they did under the deal which allowed independent observers. You can't tell some people that, but pulling out of the Iran deal was a complete disaster.

Sent from my Pixel 4 XL using Tapatalk

[Kodos]

Huh. Usually Trump's policies have been so well thought out...

[sterlingice]

Never mind that Biden was part of an administration that (allegedly) did the best, most elegant thing I'd seen to screw with Iran and couldn't really be traced back to them: Stuxnet.

SI

[albionmoonlight]

Iran, I am sure, prefers the administration that talks tough but has no idea how to stop them over the administration that has a documented history of containing them.

[Vegas Vic]

Originally Posted by thesloppy

That line of reasoning might sound sane if Biden hadn't been part of an administration that crafted an explicit, direct policy around Iran's nuclear weapons program

Agree wholeheartedly. On paper, it was an explicit policy, that in theory would be fine if the Iranians had followed through with it on good faith. On second thought, maybe we need to give them more time. I'm sure they'll get around to doing the right thing eventually.

[Qwikshot]

Originally Posted by Vegas Vic

Agree wholeheartedly. On paper, it was an explicit policy, that in theory would be fine if the Iranians had followed through with it on good faith. On second thought, maybe we need to give them more time. I'm sure they'll get around to doing the right thing eventually.

Maybe Trump’s love letter campaign with North Korea will work ‘em.

[thesloppy]

And again, you might sound sane if you were applying the same level of analysis & judgment (or any at all) towards the past four full years.

[JPhillips]

Originally Posted by Vegas Vic

Agree wholeheartedly. On paper, it was an explicit policy, that in theory would be fine if the Iranians had followed through with it on good faith. On second thought, maybe we need to give them more time. I'm sure they'll get around to doing the right thing eventually.

You have evidence of prohibited Iranian work on nuclear weapons during the timeframe that the treaty was active? You should publish that because it would be really huge news.

[Thomkal]

Heh Pompeo cancels trip to Luxembourg because the country and EU officials refused to meet with him

[Edward64]

I certainly don't think Obama/Biden were pro-Iranian but they were definitely not near as anti-Iranian or as pro-Israeli as Trump is. And I think this is what VV is trying to communicate with his statement on "naive" in an earlier post.

Nevertheless, I agree with the Obama/Biden approach to Iran back then (but not sure it'll work now with the past 4 years).

[Atocep]

Originally Posted by Edward64

I certainly don't think Obama/Biden were pro-Iranian but they were definitely not near as anti-Iranian or as pro-Israeli as Trump is. And I think this is what VV is trying to communicate with his statement on "naive" in an earlier post.

Nevertheless, I agree with the Obama/Biden approach to Iran back then (but not sure it'll work now with the past 4 years).

Every administration is going to handle foreign countries differently. As you said, Trump was arguably tougher on Iran but he gave Russia a free pass for 4 years, did nothing when the country that orchestrated 9/11 killed Khashoggi and then turned around and sold them $300 billion in weapons. All while eroding the trust of our traditional allies and passing love letters back and forth with KJU.

Doom and glooming over Biden and Iran makes little sense to me when he was at least part of an administration that made concrete attempts to reel Iran's nuclear capabilities.

[NobodyHere]

Originally Posted by ISiddiqui

The Supreme Court has ruled that a pardon is admission of guilt:

400 Bad Request.



Sent from my Pixel 4 XL using Tapatalk

Not quite. The the judge in that case was remarking that accepting a pardon would lead to the perception of guilt by the public. Not that he's actually guilty of anything.

Just like if someone "pleads the fifth". You probably think that they have something to hide.