Mega-Thread: Trump Focused Discussion

[Thekri]

Sigh...

GOP pushes conspiracy theory that coronavirus was Chinese lab-made creation.


-- Sen. Cotton (R-NOAHS-ARK)

EDIT: I don't know where, why, or how Cotton got this information, but I do know it didn't come from Russia. Russia has blamed the USA and WHO with their own conspiracy theories, but is not pushing the "Chinese bio-weapon" angle.

Now even if I was to give someone who (a) has no science degree and (b) comes from fucking Arkansas every ounce of credit he doesn't deserve (yes he went to Harvard, no he didn't study medicine, and he's intentionally basing his assumptions on the lack of evidence) making such declarations as "China is murdering hundreds of its own citizens" can't possibly be good for Phase Two. Hell, it's probably not good for Phase One. Remember, China owes Team Trump nothing and I can't see how being called murderers by Trump's own allies will help. Not that things were going great regardless

So fun fact about these sort of bizzare conspiracy theories, they are actually quite common, and often put forward by members of governments. For instance, a Russian Lawmaker is currently blaming the US for Russian (Lack of) Winter.

Israel gets blamed for controlling all sorts of animals, from using lizards to spy on Iran, to using Sharks to attack Egyptian Tourists, to my personal favorite, which is literally demonic rats to attack Palestinian cats.

While these seem quite funny to us, they are taken very seriously by their intended audiences. What is truly terrifying about remarks like Sen. Cotton's, is that this sort of shit didn't use to come from US Senators. Their ability to spread this sort of garbage without getting laughed out of office is purely the result of a population that has formed that is so isolated from normal information processes that they can get away with spreading such laughable theories.

[Dontrike]

Federal judges' association calls emergency meeting after DOJ intervenes in case of Trump ally Roger Stone

A national association of federal judges has called an emergency meeting Tuesday to address growing concerns about the intervention of Justice Department officials and President Donald Trump in politically sensitive cases, the group’s president said Monday.

Philadelphia U.S. District Judge Cynthia Rufe, who heads the independent Federal Judges Association, said the group “could not wait” until its spring conference to weigh in on a deepening crisis that has enveloped the Justice Department and Attorney General William Barr.

“There are plenty of issues that we are concerned about,” Rufe told USA TODAY. “We’ll talk all of this through.”

Rufe, nominated to the bench by President George W. Bush, said the group of more than 1,000 federal jurists called for the meeting last week after Trump criticized prosecutors' initial sentencing recommendation for his friend Roger Stone and the Department of Justice overruled them.

The unusual concern voiced by the judges’ group comes in the wake of an equally unusual protest. Sunday, more than 2,000 former Justice Department officials called on Barr to resign, claiming his handling of the Stone case "openly and repeatedly flouted" the principle of equal justice.

"Although there are times when political leadership appropriately weighs in on individual prosecutions, it is unheard of for the department’s top leaders to overrule line prosecutors, who are following established policies, in order to give preferential treatment to a close associate of the president, as Attorney General Barr did in the Stone case," the letter reads.

Every time a group of well known people come together to say Trump, or someone in his administration, is doing something stupid or wrong it will be ignored and every Trumpster will try and make it sound like these people have no idea what they are talking about.

[Cizr]

Let's put it this way: someone steals a car in your town. I HYPOTHETICALLY say "Hey, someone stole a car in a town that Cizr lives in. Does that seem like a coincidence? I think we should investigate Cizr for this crime and learn the truth." Now, I didn't say you did it. I said we should investigate you for doing it. Would you be so charitable then?

- - - Updated - - -

If I was known for stealing cars in the past (China lying about SARS in 2003) and if I was trying to silence people who knew about the stolen car (China silencing people who knew about the virus https://edition.cnn.com/2020/02/03/a...hnk/index.html) then they should investigate me for sure, no ?

- - - Updated - - -

Didn't that guy used to have a nazi symbol as his avatar? Of course he's gonna deny a hate group for what they are, facts are irrelevant.

Nope, never. This lie was repeated by a guys who believe that anyone with different opinion is nazi. Same guys who claim that Ben Shapiro or Steven Crowder are nazis

[Poopymonster]

Of course now that FEMA camps are actual active no one on the right seems to care :P :P :P

To be fair, they were right. They said if Obama won we'd get FEMA camps. Notice both things happened in that order? /s

[Waniou]

If I was known for stealing cars in the past (China lying about SARS in 2003) and if I was trying to silence people who knew about the stolen car (China silencing people who knew about the virus https://edition.cnn.com/2020/02/03/a...hnk/index.html) then they should investigate me for sure, no ?

But China didn't manufacture SARS so that's not a relevant comparison.

[Orbitus]

No they are not hate group just because Southern Poverty Law Center claim that they are. SPLC is well known for falsely accusing groups and people of being hate groups.

- - - Updated - - -



They literally state that it needs to be investigated and not that it started there.

No, they are a hate group because they hate everything that isn't white.

[Elegiac]

I mean yeah it's all B.S. But the conoravirus is an excellent opportunity to illustrate China's utter lack of fitness as a major global player.

A major health crisis appears in nature that sickens tens of thousands of their own people and kills nearly 2000s, and as always the first concern of the Communist Party is "how does this effect our monopoly of power here"? They protect Xi Jinping. They obfuscate the scale of the problem. They refuse the necessary cooperation with the CDC, which are the world's experts on this type of thing. It's so typical of an authoritarian regime.

That's nice. Now do HIV.

[Edge-]

That's nice. Now do HIV.

What does that have to do with anything?

[Elegiac]

What does that have to do with anything?

I'm saying it's in very bad taste to be tossing out the handling of an epidemic as an indicator for fitness of being a global player considering the US' handling of the HIV crisis.

[Breccia]

In the wake of the DoJ handling of the Roger Stone case, an emergency meeting of 1,100 federal judges was called.

Philadelphia U.S. District Judge Cynthia Rufe, president of the group, told USA Today that it “could not wait” until its spring conference to discuss the recent decisions made within the department and that its executive committee would convene a conference call on Tuesday after the department backtracked on its recommendation for Stone's sentence.

“There are plenty of issues that we are concerned about,” Rufe, who was nominated by former President George W. Bush, told the newspaper, noting that the group called for the meeting after Trump railed against the initial sentencing recommendation Stone received.

As a reminder, the backtracking on Stone's sentencing at Trump's direct order caused four of the federal prosecutors on the case to leave the case, and one of them flat-out quit.

Semi-related, Bolton is now flat-out saying Trump is trying to censor his book. He also expressed concern Trump would just flat-out declare half the book classified info just to silence him.

He was also very clear that the Ukraine call was in the book. Specifically, Chapter 14.

As before, if the book is actually false -- yes, Trump has tweeted that the book is "untrue" -- why not go after him for slander and/or libel? Or, you know, because the call was perfect, why not release the transcript? We still don't have it, and the only people who have testified under oath have said it's not perfect, but if Trump claims it's fine, why not just release the transcript during the slander trial? "Here, Your Honor, this proves Bolton is lying," his lawyer could say, and Bolton would be sued, possibly jailed, the book would be immediately objectively discredited, and that would be that. Why not do that?

Yeah, you all know the answer. Some of you will even admit it.

[Elegiac]

Yeah, you all know the answer. Some of you will even admit it.

I'm gonna take a wild guess and say it's the opposite of "hot milky".

[Breccia]

Wait, there's more.

This is an open letter signed by over two thousand former DoJ officials.

Trump and Attorney General Barr have openly and repeatedly flouted this fundamental principle, most recently in connection with the sentencing of President Trump’s close associate, Roger Stone, who was convicted of serious crimes. The Department has a long-standing practice in which political appointees set broad policies that line prosecutors apply to individual cases. That practice exists to animate the constitutional principles regarding the even-handed application of the law. Although there are times when political leadership appropriately weighs in on individual prosecutions, it is unheard of for the Department’s top leaders to overrule line prosecutors, who are following established policies, in order to give preferential treatment to a close associate of the President, as Attorney General Barr did in the Stone case. It is even more outrageous for the Attorney General to intervene as he did here — after the President publicly condemned the sentencing recommendation that line prosecutors had already filed in court.

A person should not be given special treatment in a criminal prosecution because they are a close political ally of the President. Governments that use the enormous power of law enforcement to punish their enemies and reward their allies are not constitutional republics; they are autocracies.

Hey, remember when Trump got elected and the rabid fanbase were all "oh, stop whining, it's not like he's Hitler"?

There is a term for intentionally interfering with the prosecution process. The term is "Obstruction of Justice".

[Edge-]

I'm saying it's in very bad taste to be tossing out the handling of an epidemic as an indicator for fitness of being a global player considering the US' handling of the HIV crisis.

40 years ago, under wildly different circumstances.

Come back to reality, dude.

[Dontrike]

Wait, there's more.

This is an open letter signed by over two thousand former DoJ officials.



Hey, remember when Trump got elected and the rabid fanbase were all "oh, stop whining, it's not like he's Hitler"?

There is a term for intentionally interfering with the prosecution process. The term is "Obstruction of Justice".

Don't worry he'll grow into the role, learn his lesson, and be a grown up about it all soon.

Wonder why no trumpsters are calling Trump out on this

[Flarelaine]

Yes, though he kept claiming it was a "pagan symbol".

Well, it was, originally. Just like, you know, the swastika.

[Bodakane]

Wait, there's more.

This is an open letter signed by over two thousand former DoJ officials.



Hey, remember when Trump got elected and the rabid fanbase were all "oh, stop whining, it's not like he's Hitler"?

There is a term for intentionally interfering with the prosecution process. The term is "Obstruction of Justice".

Is it time to call his rapid fanbase Stormtrumpers?

[Santti]

Is it time to call his rapid fanbase Stromtrumpers?

Trumphadi is still the preferred one, in my opinion. It really speaks of the radicalization. Stromtrumper too, but anything Hitler has that "cartoonish" ring to it, that is quickly dismissed. Trumphadi on the hand, is a proper kick in the goulies. It's also more relevant to Americans of today.

[Paranoid Android]

Obama pushes Trump’s button on economy. Trump responds: "Did you hear the latest con job?" https://t.co/UOTW5HDQ55

https://twitter.com/washingtonpost/s...086844417?s=19

This is great. Great way to trigger Trump. First it's true. Second Trump doesn't get to take credit, plus Obama.

[Breccia]

Great way to trigger Trump. .

Easily topped. Trump took to Twitter because of course he did, and did the following:
1) Threatened to sue over the Mueller investigation.

"Wait, sue who, exactly?"

The threat was in all caps.

"But on what grounds would -- "

THE THREAT WAS IN ALL CAPS.

2) Lied that the Mueller investigation was illegal, and therefore, everything found should be thrown out. That's more of the "you shouldn't know about the stuff I did" than "I didn't do it".

3) Lied that the Mueller prosecutors ran the Stone case. Two of the four were on Mueller's team, the other two were not.

4) Lied that Mueller wanted the FBI job and lied that Mueller was sore he didn't get it.

5) Once again, directly interfered with the Stone case, despite even Barr begging him not to in public. Because Trump doesn't listen, and Trump doesn't learn.

But back to your topic: if you look at the overall averages, Obama's second term had a GDP growth rate of 2.3% and Trump now has 2.5%. Incidentally, both are below both of Reagan's and both of Clinton's, and both are below 3%. Trump's GDP numbers are actually falling -- Boeing, Apple, and the coronavirus aren't exactly helping matters -- and Trump could shuffle into November looking at numbers objectively worse than Obama's second term, despite running against it.

But even using the current, more favorable numbers: the difference between 2.3% and 2.5% GDP growth over the last 3 years would be about $111 billion dollars. Yes, that's a big amount of money. Buuuuuuut the deficit in 2019 was ten times that alone, so --

"Hey wait a minute, that's not fair! You can't blame Trump for every single dollar of the deficit!"

Well, he signed it, so, yes I can. But just to humor you, hypothetical naysayer, the deficit in 2017 was $665 billion, and in 2019 it's $1.1 trillion. So even if Trump only gets credit for half the increase, that's still double the GDP change between Obama's 2.3% and Trump's 2.5%.

The tax cut for the rich isn't paying for itself. It's anti-paying for itself, and that's --

"That's still not fair! You need to look at these numbers in the most fair way to Trump as possible, and by 'fair' of course I mean leaning in his direction."

Well leaning in Trump's direction should be easy, he's fat enough to have gravitational force. But, fine. Federal revenue went up from $3.26 trillion to $3.46 trillion from 2017 to 2019, a jump of $200 billion --

"HAH! And that's the tax cut for the rich paying for itself! MAGA!"

-- while corporate tax revenue dropped.

"..wait, what?"

Yeah, corporate income tax revenue is dropping fast. The CBO predicts that, by 2021, corporations will pay half total what they paid in 2018. In 2018, it's already down to 6% of the federal revenue, while in 2015 it was 11%.

Which, again, means the US is shifting the tax burden to individuals from companies, and also, not seeing the gains that were promised.

"But that higher revenue from individuals, surely that means the rich are paying their share?"

Hmm. Hey, remember when we were talking about tax cut for the rich and we were talking about 'pass-through' businesses? What was that referring to?

"People incorporating themselves to save on GOD DAMMIT that's exactly what happened, isn't it?"

Also, considering companies celebrated the tax cut by spending $800 billion on themselves, the GDP growth rate is actually pretty misleading anyhow. Oh, and then there's Quantitative Easing.

Trump is a serial failed businessman, and we're seeing that in action. The US is paying companies more and getting less in return. And, based on current visible trends, he'll still end up with GDP numbers like Obama's, again, the ones he said were the worst ever and campaigned and ran against.

Are we tired of winning yet?

[Skroe]

That's nice. Now do HIV.

We're talking about poisoning the well on the One Belt Road Initiative and taking a hammer to China's global power, and you want to be fair about it. How quaint.

Sure, I'll do HIV.

The US never paid a price for mishandling the domestic and international spread of HIV in the 1980s and at this point, it never will. But it's also been the one country in the world that's done more combat the spread of it, and make drug cocktails available in the developing world, since that time.

I don't get what's with progressives and foreign policy. Everything is honorable combat with them, when foreign policy is always and forever about sneaking up on the other dude and then shanking him.

The US has a golden opportunity to send the enduring message "trade a lot with China and get sick", and you want to talk about a systemic and intentional policy failure - once I've talked about before you'll recall - 35 years ago.

Heh... gimme a break.