Mega-Thread: Trump Focused Discussion

[DarkTZeratul]

Gotta say, I really didn't expect James Mattis to come out against Trump. I figured he'd play the professional military man and hold his tongue:
https://www.theatlantic.com/politics...zation/612640/

[Poopymonster]

Gotta say, I really didn't expect James Mattis to come out against Trump. I figured he'd play the professional military man and hold his tongue:
https://www.theatlantic.com/politics...zation/612640/

It's too bad he blew all his capital and reputation staying as long as he did.

[Thekri]

They'll find ways to push their pro-war bullshit no matter who is president, they just notice what the majority of americans view trump as, a conman. And until Trump is no longer part of the equation, the RNC will push Trump because Republicans trying for office that were against Trump, they all lost in 2018. Outside of Romney, but that's because of the mormons, not Trump. So, because all the anti trumpers lost in 2018, the RNC has basically put all their eggs in the Trump basket.

True, but polls have been pretty consistent that Trump has lost almost 20% of the GOP voter base. Now he picked up some of the slack by energizing people that didn't normally vote, but still there are a significant number of Never-Trump conservatives (Now mostly ex-Republicans).

There aren't enough of them to actually win anything with a candidate of their own, but there is enough of them to make a very significant impact by voting for Biden instead of GOP candidate. The margins in a lot of places were razor thin, so a few thousand of them in a given state makes a really big difference. They aren't the reason for really any of the trends we are seeing, but they are taking places that are realistically still several election cycles away from being truly purple, and making them purple right now. Places like Texas, Georgia, and Pennsylvania are really telling for this phenomena. There are still more conservatives then liberals there, but a small, but significant percentage of conservatives are refusing to fall in line, and it is tilting the scale enough to really matter. North Carolina is looking pretty blue these days, and South Carolina only has Trump up by 4, and Lindsey Graham actually dropped below his challenger last week.

So overall, principled conservatives do exist, and do matter, but they really aren't a factor anyone needs to worry about. Most of them are like me, and we are going to hold our nose and vote for any democrat on the ballot anyway, because the alternative is so much worse. The only thing that is worth keeping in mind is many of those votes might go back to a Republican in the future, and are not necessarily a permanent shift. If the GOP ever turns back to people like Bush, most of them will go back.

- - - Updated - - -

Gotta say, I really didn't expect James Mattis to come out against Trump. I figured he'd play the professional military man and hold his tongue:
https://www.theatlantic.com/politics...zation/612640/

I am really torn on Mattis, and always have been. I was harshly critical of him as SECDEF, and I feel completely justified in doing so. He has that weird traditionalist sense of honor that went a lot further then I felt was remotely appropriate. I also disagreed with a lot of his personal decisions, that were separate from the President.

I did however agree with his decision to remain silent after leaving office, for the exact same reasons I have been blasting Milley today. Mattis is permanently linked in the public consciousness with the military, even in retirement, and it is not the place of the military to oppose the Presidents actions any more then it is to endorse them. However, the disgracefulness of Mark Milley's performance this week kind of changed the calculus on him. I think Mattis reached the conclusion that the damaging implications of speaking out were less then the damaging implications of his continued silence. He resigned because Trump chose to betray and abandon our allies, but now Trump has turned on Americans. The militaries duty to remain neutral is rapidly turning into a duty to action, and Mattis is hoping to head it off before it gets to that point.

I never thought I would actually support Mattis unloading on Trump like that. My stance has always been that he isn't the right person to do it. Maybe that is still true... but maybe it isn't, I never liked Mattis, and I still don't, but I do respect him, and I can respect this decision, while hoping it was the right one.

[Breccia]

Gotta say, I really didn't expect James Mattis to come out against Trump. I figured he'd play the professional military man and hold his tongue:

This is a bloodbath.

James Mattis Denounces President Trump, Describes Him as a Threat to the Constitution

James Mattis, the esteemed Marine general who resigned as secretary of defense in December 2018 to protest Donald Trump’s Syria policy, has, ever since, kept studiously silent about Trump’s performance as president. But he has now broken his silence, writing an extraordinary broadside in which he denounces the president for dividing the nation, and accuses him of ordering the U.S. military to violate the constitutional rights of American citizens.

“I have watched this week’s unfolding events, angry and appalled,” Mattis writes. “The words ‘Equal Justice Under Law’ are carved in the pediment of the United States Supreme Court. This is precisely what protesters are rightly demanding. It is a wholesome and unifying demand—one that all of us should be able to get behind. We must not be distracted by a small number of lawbreakers. The protests are defined by tens of thousands of people of conscience who are insisting that we live up to our values—our values as people and our values as a nation.” He goes on, “We must reject and hold accountable those in office who would make a mockery of our Constitution.”

“Donald Trump is the first president in my lifetime who does not try to unite the American people—does not even pretend to try. Instead, he tries to divide us,” Mattis writes. “We are witnessing the consequences of three years of this deliberate effort. We are witnessing the consequences of three years without mature leadership. We can unite without him, drawing on the strengths inherent in our civil society. This will not be easy, as the past few days have shown, but we owe it to our fellow citizens; to past generations that bled to defend our promise; and to our children.”

Mattis’s dissatisfaction with Trump was no secret inside the Pentagon. But after his resignation, he argued publicly—and to great criticism—that it would be inappropriate and counterproductive for a former general, and a former Cabinet official, to criticize a sitting president. Doing so, he said, would threaten the apolitical nature of the military. When I interviewed him last year on this subject, he said, “When you leave an administration over clear policy differences, you need to give the people who are still there as much opportunity as possible to defend the country. They still have the responsibility of protecting this great big experiment of ours.” He did add, however: “There is a period in which I owe my silence. It’s not eternal. It’s not going to be forever.”

“When I joined the military, some 50 years ago,” he writes, “I swore an oath to support and defend the Constitution. Never did I dream that troops taking that same oath would be ordered under any circumstance to violate the Constitutional rights of their fellow citizens—much less to provide a bizarre photo op for the elected commander-in-chief, with military leadership standing alongside.”

He goes on to implicitly criticize the current secretary of defense, Mark Esper, and other senior officials as well. “We must reject any thinking of our cities as a ‘battlespace’ that our uniformed military is called upon to ‘dominate.’ At home, we should use our military only when requested to do so, on very rare occasions, by state governors. Militarizing our response, as we witnessed in Washington, D.C., sets up a conflict—a false conflict—between the military and civilian society. It erodes the moral ground that ensures a trusted bond between men and women in uniform and the society they are sworn to protect, and of which they themselves are a part. Keeping public order rests with civilian state and local leaders who best understand their communities and are answerable to them.

Now, the theory we on these forums had at the time, was Mattis intentionally worked with Trump with the ongoing intent to keep him in check. He still can. Earlier, I posted that Trump had just handed Biden an enormous advantage: appearing at George Floyd's funeral. This is a second: Mattis. Mattis endorsing Biden would be damaging in itself. Mattis endorsing Biden and explaining why, with specifics and details, could be politically lethal. What's Trump going to do, sue for breaking the NDA? One, I don't think they're enforceable. Two, I don't think Mattis cares. Three, Trump suing Mattis would be admission Mattis was telling the truth, a morbidly obese mistake. And four, if Trump tried to call him a liar, not only would he be outclassed in the credibility department several times over, but there would be no way to prove it.

Trump might try to handwave him as a disgruntled employee, but how many times can you use that excuse before people say "wow, there sure are a lot of people saying exactly the same thing about Trump for exactly the same reason" before it holds?

By the way, that article links to this one written by a former Admiral/former Joint Chiefs of Staff chairman. I'll quote the first and last paragraphs.

It sickened me yesterday to see security personnel—including members of the National Guard—forcibly and violently clear a path through Lafayette Square to accommodate the president's visit outside St. John's Church. I have to date been reticent to speak out on issues surrounding President Trump's leadership, but we are at an inflection point, and the events of the past few weeks have made it impossible to remain silent.

This is not the time for stunts. This is the time for leadership.

How long will Trump hold the military vote? Has he lost it already?

[Jotaux]

Edge is trying to imply Fred Trump was a KKK member. In fact we have no idea what he was doing at the event.

I don't really care either way - Trump's family are assholes. But is does give you an indicative of just how reflexively Edge lies about everything.

Come on, the guy was most likely KKK. However I do not believe in judging someone based on the sins of their father and bringing up his father is a shitty thing to do. Trump is a terrible enough person to be judged on his own.

[Poopymonster]

Come on, the guy was most likely KKK. However I do not believe in judging someone based on the sins of their father and bringing up his father is a shitty thing to do. Trump is a terrible enough person to be judged on his own.

Considering father and son were sued for not renting to blacks, like father like son is appropriate.

[beanman12345]

True, but polls have been pretty consistent that Trump has lost almost 20% of the GOP voter base. Now he picked up some of the slack by energizing people that didn't normally vote, but still there are a significant number of Never-Trump conservatives (Now mostly ex-Republicans).

There aren't enough of them to actually win anything with a candidate of their own, but there is enough of them to make a very significant impact by voting for Biden instead of GOP candidate. The margins in a lot of places were razor thin, so a few thousand of them in a given state makes a really big difference. They aren't the reason for really any of the trends we are seeing, but they are taking places that are realistically still several election cycles away from being truly purple, and making them purple right now. Places like Texas, Georgia, and Pennsylvania are really telling for this phenomena. There are still more conservatives then liberals there, but a small, but significant percentage of conservatives are refusing to fall in line, and it is tilting the scale enough to really matter. North Carolina is looking pretty blue these days, and South Carolina only has Trump up by 4, and Lindsey Graham actually dropped below his challenger last week.

So overall, principled conservatives do exist, and do matter, but they really aren't a factor anyone needs to worry about. Most of them are like me, and we are going to hold our nose and vote for any democrat on the ballot anyway, because the alternative is so much worse. The only thing that is worth keeping in mind is many of those votes might go back to a Republican in the future, and are not necessarily a permanent shift. If the GOP ever turns back to people like Bush, most of them will go back.

Oh yes I do agree with you. Although I don't even think conservatives that are put off are not a factor either, they might be just enough of a factor to tip it towards the dems in 2020. I'm just speaking of the Committee's stratagy in the 2020 cycle, even if Trump bottoms out at 30% or even lower, they'll keep him on, because it'll effect all elections down ticket. There are enough people who are enthusiastic to vote for Trump and down ticket republicans, I don't see much excitement for Pence. So even if Trump loses his race, in key senate races and house races it might be enough for republicans to hold the line. Now if trump loses, then they go back to being the opposition party that they were really good at being in during the obama administration in 2022. At that point, idk what happens, many never trumpers might go back to the party, some might be lost forever due to loss of trust, I have no idea.

[Justank]

I'm trying to grasp what the point of these two photo ops were. I get it's for the evangelical crowd, and I know these kind of things are staged regularly even in other administrations but both of these just feel so transparently fake. It's not some picture of them holding service there despite the damage (COVID aside), it's not a speech about rebuilding it and the rest of America or the importance of the religious community in the area, or anything else at all. He's just... standing there awkwardly waving a bible.

And the one with both of them inside a church is just as bad. They look so sour, it's not even a solemn look, it's just unpleasant. Is that really the best picture they got? Even without the entire shitshow of them getting there and the complicit actions of Milley this was never a good look. It shouldn't feel surprising after three years of this shit but how are they so bad at everything?

[JohnBrown1917]

They'll find ways to push their pro-war bullshit no matter who is president, they just notice what the majority of americans view trump as, a conman. And until Trump is no longer part of the equation, the RNC will push Trump because Republicans trying for office that were against Trump, they all lost in 2018. Outside of Romney, but that's because of the mormons, not Trump. So, because all the anti trumpers lost in 2018, the RNC has basically put all their eggs in the Trump basket.

The point is more that switching out Trump will destroy whatever chance they had or will have for 2020. Most Neo-cons are probably fine with Trump because he mostly does what they want.

The difference between the likes of Trump and Bush is that Trump does not care about being subtle with lust for blood and racism. Even with 4 more years, it will be hard for him to do more damage than Bush to the world.

[Jotaux]

Considering father and son were sued for not renting to blacks, like father like son is appropriate.

Well that is something Trump did and should be judged for it. He is not his father.

[Elegiac]

I'm trying to grasp what the point of these two photo ops were. I get it's for the evangelical crowd, and I know these kind of things are staged regularly even in other administrations but both of these just feel so transparently fake. It's not some picture of them holding service there despite the damage (COVID aside), it's not a speech about rebuilding it and the rest of America or the importance of the religious community in the area, or anything else at all. He's just... standing there awkwardly waving a bible.

And the one with both of them inside a church is just as bad. They look so sour, it's not even a solemn look, it's just unpleasant. Is that really the best picture they got? Even without the entire shitshow of them getting there and the complicit actions of Milley this was never a good look. It shouldn't feel surprising after three years of this shit but how are they so bad at everything?

I mean the answer's pretty easy; desperation. What else is he going to point to?

Trade deals? What trade deals.
His handling of COVID? "Intelligence says it's worse than 9/11 times a hundred. Yes, you heard me right; 91,100."
The economy? Fucking lol.

If there's one thing you can ascribe to Trump in terms of cognizance, it's that he's keenly aware that the only thing keeping him from spending the rest of his unnatural life buried in lawsuits if not actively jailed, is reelection. A chance for reelection that looks less likely with each passing day as "Make America Great Again" seems to have turned into "Keep America From Burning Down" - not exactly the sort of thing that flies well when your political career is built on machismo and never being wrong or failing.

So that's why we're getting the 'Law and Order' cosplay and the church photo ops. The Trump Playbook is no longer working, so he's falling back on the traditional GOP Playbook; except he's spent the last four years ripping the pages out to wipe his greasy, orange fingers with with every bite of his triple bypass burger.

Expect more performance art of this sort as November nears. We might actually see him make human contact with Melania, who knows.

[Breccia]

Oh this is funny.

So earlier in the day, Trump insisted he didn't run to go hide in the bunker -- he inspected it for a short time during the day.

This, of course, immediately invalidated any defense anyone offered of Trump, such as "the SS made him do it because there was a credible threat".

And here's the funny part: they were right.

And they still can't use that defense!

WaPo reports that the temporary barricades falling, which yes we knew about, was the trigger. Meaning it happened around 7PM and also the SS made the call, not Trump.

"But Breccia! That means you were wrong!"

Well, sort of. Yes, I said Trump insisted, and I could be wrong -- it could have been mutual, or Trump could have resisted. The SS won't give details and Trump lies, so we'll never know.

But.

Everyone who defended Trump -- "the SS moved him" -- still cannot use that defense. Trump nullified it by contradicting it. I mean, the could admit that Trump is a liar, I suppose. I'd accept that. They could admit "Trump lied and I believed him". Or, for fun, "Trump lied but I didn't believe him". Kind of an odd thing for a Trump supporter to say, but I won't rule it out.

So congratulations to the rabid fanbase members who said "the SS moved Trump". You were right, making you wrong. You still back a lying loser.

And a coward. A coward who uses military force to move peaceful protestors so he can walk to a church, take some pictures, and leave.

And you know it. You know you backed a lying loser. That's why you've been so quiet for the last 24-48. That's why you didn't log on to say "oh, see, he was moved" because, guess what, that invites you to even worse ridicule for pointing out you know Trump lied to defend his poor widdle feewings.

Let us know when you're ready to ditch the snowflake. All hail's breaking loose.

[Stormspark]

How long until Trump finds someone that will do what he wants?

Probably not long. He will find a yes man that will give the go ahead for air strikes on protesters. All we can hope is that everyone involved, from the people giving the orders to the people doing it, face war crimes tribunals when it's over and get executed.

Oh this is funny.

So earlier in the day, Trump insisted he didn't run to go hide in the bunker -- he inspected it for a short time during the day.

This, of course, immediately invalidated any defense anyone offered of Trump, such as "the SS made him do it because there was a credible threat".

I'm going to just start calling them the SS now. It's very appropriate.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Schutzstaffel

[Breccia]

Well that is something Trump did and should be judged for it. He is not his father.

Now before you continue this line of thinking, I want you to ask yourself: is there any time at all, even a single time, that Trump has attacked an opponent based on what one of their relatives did? A wife, a child, a sibling, a parent?

Because you have, oh I don't know, 10 minutes to denounce those actions too. Otherwise you're a hypocrite.

[Thekri]

Now, the theory we on these forums had at the time, was Mattis intentionally worked with Trump with the ongoing intent to keep him in check. He still can. Earlier, I posted that Trump had just handed Biden an enormous advantage: appearing at George Floyd's funeral. This is a second: Mattis. Mattis endorsing Biden would be damaging in itself. Mattis endorsing Biden and explaining why, with specifics and details, could be politically lethal. What's Trump going to do, sue for breaking the NDA? One, I don't think they're enforceable. Two, I don't think Mattis cares. Three, Trump suing Mattis would be admission Mattis was telling the truth, a morbidly obese mistake. And four, if Trump tried to call him a liar, not only would he be outclassed in the credibility department several times over, but there would be no way to prove it.

Trump might try to handwave him as a disgruntled employee, but how many times can you use that excuse before people say "wow, there sure are a lot of people saying exactly the same thing about Trump for exactly the same reason" before it holds?

By the way, that article links to this one written by a former Admiral/former Joint Chiefs of Staff chairman. I'll quote the first and last paragraphs.





How long will Trump hold the military vote? Has he lost it already?

He lost the officer corps a long time ago. Within months of taking command. The enlisted are likely still behind him, but they will be more loyal to their chain of command then they are to him.

Depending on how far Trump wants to push this by using the military against his own people, voting might be the least of his worries. It is the duty of the military to remain neutral, but when they are ordered against their own people, that duty changes to protecting the people from all enemies foreign and domestic. It is becoming harder every day to describe Trump as anything else.

Mattis isn't alone in the tone of his letter. Mike Mullen wrote a similar article yesterday. I would not be surprised to see one released by Martin Dempsey tonight or tomorrow, Dunford likely will as well, as I would be stunned if they haven't already discussed this. This is as staggering in its implication as it is unprecedented. This is breaking the most sacred taboo of American military tradition, because those men feel that Trump already broke that trust. If they hold those opinions, you can guarantee that the Generals and Admirals that have not yet retired hold the same ones.

This is looking incredibly bad, a showdown between the military and the White House has no winners. Trump will probably be the one that loses the most, but it damages the foundations of this nation like nothing else will. That people like Mullen and Mattis are willing to step out is astonishing, because they believe this is the least bad path they can take.

[Jotaux]

Now before you continue this line of thinking, I want you to ask yourself: is there any time at all, even a single time, that Trump has attacked an opponent based on what one of their relatives did? A wife, a child, a sibling, a parent?

Because you have, oh I don't know, 10 minutes to denounce those actions too. Otherwise you're a hypocrite.

Of course I would denounce those actions. I don't have a single good thing to say about Trump, that does not mean I would stoop to his level and criticize him for what his father was.

[Breccia]

Ladies and gentlemen, the President of the United States.

Let me begin by acknowledging that, although all of us have been feeling pain, uncertainty, disruption, some folks have been feeling it more than others. Most of all the pain that’s been experienced by the families of George and Breonna and Ahmaud, Tony and Sean, and too many others to mention, those that we thought about during that moment of silence. To those families who’ve been directly affected by tragedy, please know that Michelle and I and the nation grieve with you, hold you in our prayers. We’re committed to the fight of creating a more just nation in memory of your sons and daughters.

We can’t forget that even as we’re confronting the particular acts of violence that led to those losses, our nation and the world is still in the midst of a global pandemic that’s exposed the vulnerabilities of our healthcare system, but also the disparate treatment and, as a consequence the disparate impact that exists in our healthcare system, the unequal investment, the biases that have led to a disproportionate number of infections and loss of life in communities of color. In a lot of ways, what has happened over the last several weeks is challenges and structural problems here in the United States have been thrown into high relief. They are the outcomes not just of the immediate moments in time, but they’re the result of a long history of slavery and Jim Crow and red lining and institutionalized racism that too often have been the plague, the original sin of our society.

In some ways, as tragic as these past few weeks have been, as difficult and scary and uncertain as they’ve been, they’ve also been an incredible opportunity for people to be awakened to some of these underlying trends. They offer an opportunity for us to all work together to tackle them, to take them on, to change America and make it live up to its highest ideals.

Part of what’s made me so hopeful is the fact that so many young people have been galvanized and activated and motivated and mobilized because historically so much of the progress that we’ve made in our society has been because of young people. Dr. King was a young man when he got involved. Cesar Chavez was a young man. Malcolm X was a young man. The leaders of the feminist movement were young people. Leaders of union movements were young people. The leaders of the environmental movement in this country and the movement to make sure that the LGBT community finally had a voice and was represented were young people. When sometimes I feel despair, I just see what’s happening with young people all across the country and the talent and the voice and the sophistication that they’re displaying, and it makes me feel optimistic. It makes me feel as if this country is going to get better.

Full transcript here.

The word "Trump" does not appear once.

- - - Updated - - -

Of course I would denounce those actions.

Okay, that'll do.

Trump revives rumor linking Cruz's father to JFK assassination

Now, you're allowed to say "don't sink to his level". And rightly so. But I think it's worth reminding everyone what that level is. Personally? I think, if he can dish it, he can expect to take it. That's why I call him a fat obese bigly fatass tubby tubby two-by-four every chance I get. He called a political opponent too ugly to vote for, so my usual rules about body shaming ("No.") don't apply, because he invited it on himself.

Thanks for clarifying, though. We'll just disagree on that one.

[pathora44]

Ladies and gentlemen, the President of the United States.



Full transcript here.

The word "Trump" does not appear once.

Woah, that is what a speech would sound like from a real president during a time of crisis. Not a "president" who turned off the lights of the White House, hid under the bed in the bunker, while tweeting out he was going to call in the military to kill all the protestors because people were yelling means things about him outside of the window.

[Breccia]

Number of Presidents directly or indirectly calling out Trump rises to four.

Also known as "all of them". Every living President has spoken up.

So, one final time, the President of the United States.

Rosalynn and I are pained by the tragic racial injustices and consequent backlash across our nation in recent weeks. Our hearts are with the victims' families and all who feel hopeless in the face of pervasive racial discrimination and outright cruelty. We all must shine a spotlight on the immorality of racial discrimination. But violence, whether spontaneous or consciously incited, is not a solution.

As a white male of the South, I know all too well the impact of segregation and injustice to African Americans. As a politician, I felt a responsibility to bring equity to my state and our country. In my 1974 inaugural address as Georgia's governor, I said: "The time for racial discrimination is over." With great sorrow and disappointment, I repeat those words today, nearly five decades later. Dehumanizing people debases us all; humanity is beautifully and almost infinitely diverse. The bonds of our common humanity must overcome the divisiveness of our fears and prejudices.

Since leaving the White House in 1981, Rosalynn and I have strived to advance human rights in countries around the world. In this quest, we have seen that silence can be as deadly as violence. People of power, privilege, and moral conscience must stand up and say "no more" to a racially discriminatory police and justice system, immoral economic disparities between whites and blacks, and government actions that undermine our unified democracy. We are responsible for creating a world of peace and equality for ourselves and future generations.

We need a government as good as its people, and we are better than this.

[pathora44]

Number of Presidents directly or indirectly calling out Trump rises to three.

Also known as "all of them". Every living President has spoken up.

So, one final time, the President of the United States.

Has Bill Clinton really not said anything? Because I am 99% sure Bush Jr. denounced Trump's actions.