All Things Trump: Is it over yet?

Post Reply
User avatar
Tero
Just saying
Posts: 30681
Joined: Sun Jul 04, 2010 9:50 pm
About me: Something something birds
Location: USA
Contact:

Re: All Things Trump: Is it over yet?

Post by Tero » Wed Apr 24, 2019 12:52 pm

CE444E69-259B-44A1-AD22-F13DE95A68E2.jpeg
Asshole president demands equal time for racists.
http://karireport.blogspot.com/ (:_funny_:)
http://esapolitics.blogspot.com/
Dominus vo-bisque'em Et cum spear a tu-tu, oh!

User avatar
rainbow
Posts: 9856
Joined: Fri Jun 08, 2012 8:10 am
About me: Pre-Modernist
Location: Africa
Contact:

Re: All Things Trump: Is it over yet?

Post by rainbow » Wed Apr 24, 2019 12:54 pm

Forty Two wrote:
Wed Apr 24, 2019 12:45 pm
rainbow wrote:
Wed Apr 24, 2019 7:09 am
Forty Two wrote:
Tue Apr 23, 2019 6:14 pm


Is it wrong to do business in Russia, or not? Is it wrong to invest in a building construction in Moscow?

No. It is wrong to divert the direction of this thread with your non-sequitur arguments.
This is a generalized thread -- and not limited to the topics you deem most relevant. If you don't want to talk about Trump-Russia, don't. But, you can hardly say the question of whether it is wrong to do business in Russia is irrelevant to "All things Trump..." thread, given that a major allegation leveled against him, in this thread, is how wrong it is for him to have run for President while his companies had an interest in potentially building a building in Russia.
:fp:
You've never heard of "conflict of interest"?

Not so much with Krispy Kreme, but it becomes a matter of national security when the President, or potentially-the-President becomes involved with shady characters from potential enemies.


:ask: Has this not occurred to you? :ddpan:
aingira usaina duzu

User avatar
Brian Peacock
Tipping cows since 1946
Posts: 25872
Joined: Thu Mar 05, 2009 11:44 am
About me: Ablate me:
Location: Location: Location:
Contact:

Re: All Things Trump: Is it over yet?

Post by Brian Peacock » Wed Apr 24, 2019 1:08 pm

It's not immoral do business in Russia - but that in itself does not address the specific context. It's immoral for a presidential candidate to consistently lie about doing business in Russia, to make cooing noises to Putin from the public campaign platform while in active pursuance of that business, and for others to ignore the inevitable conflict of interests that arises.

It's fallacious to generalise from the particular, and equally to particularise from the general. A fallacy is an error in reasoning - in this case, an error in moral reasoning.

:tea:
Rationalia relies on voluntary donations. There is no obligation of course, but if you value this place and want to see it continue please consider making a small donation towards the forum's running costs.
Details on how to do that can be found here.

.

"It isn't necessary to imagine the world ending in fire or ice.
There are two other possibilities: one is paperwork, and the other is nostalgia."

Frank Zappa

"This is how humanity ends; bickering over the irrelevant."
Clinton Huxley » 21 Jun 2012 » 14:10:36 GMT
.

User avatar
Forty Two
Posts: 14978
Joined: Tue Jun 16, 2015 2:01 pm
About me: I am the grammar snob about whom your mother warned you.
Location: The Of Color Side of the Moon
Contact:

Re: All Things Trump: Is it over yet?

Post by Forty Two » Wed Apr 24, 2019 1:30 pm

rainbow wrote:
Wed Apr 24, 2019 12:54 pm
Forty Two wrote:
Wed Apr 24, 2019 12:45 pm
rainbow wrote:
Wed Apr 24, 2019 7:09 am
Forty Two wrote:
Tue Apr 23, 2019 6:14 pm


Is it wrong to do business in Russia, or not? Is it wrong to invest in a building construction in Moscow?

No. It is wrong to divert the direction of this thread with your non-sequitur arguments.
This is a generalized thread -- and not limited to the topics you deem most relevant. If you don't want to talk about Trump-Russia, don't. But, you can hardly say the question of whether it is wrong to do business in Russia is irrelevant to "All things Trump..." thread, given that a major allegation leveled against him, in this thread, is how wrong it is for him to have run for President while his companies had an interest in potentially building a building in Russia.
:fp:
You've never heard of "conflict of interest"?

Not so much with Krispy Kreme, but it becomes a matter of national security when the President, or potentially-the-President becomes involved with shady characters from potential enemies.


:ask: Has this not occurred to you? :ddpan:
O.k., establish your alleged conflict of interest. What shady characters? And, how was the President involved with them, specifically? (is exploring a real estate deal in Moscow which never went through constitute a conflict of interest due to involvement with shady characters from political enemies?)
“When I was in college, I took a terrorism class. ... The thing that was interesting in the class was every time the professor said ‘Al Qaeda’ his shoulders went up, But you know, it is that you don’t say ‘America’ with an intensity, you don’t say ‘England’ with the intensity. You don’t say ‘the army’ with the intensity,” she continued. “... But you say these names [Al Qaeda] because you want that word to carry weight. You want it to be something.” - Ilhan Omar

User avatar
Tero
Just saying
Posts: 30681
Joined: Sun Jul 04, 2010 9:50 pm
About me: Something something birds
Location: USA
Contact:

Re: All Things Trump: Is it over yet?

Post by Tero » Wed Apr 24, 2019 4:03 pm

9E346960-30B9-4442-BBF0-33413803989F.png
Crooked president fighting The People who want to expose him for the crook that he is!
http://karireport.blogspot.com/ (:_funny_:)
http://esapolitics.blogspot.com/
Dominus vo-bisque'em Et cum spear a tu-tu, oh!

User avatar
Brian Peacock
Tipping cows since 1946
Posts: 25872
Joined: Thu Mar 05, 2009 11:44 am
About me: Ablate me:
Location: Location: Location:
Contact:

Re: All Things Trump: Is it over yet?

Post by Brian Peacock » Wed Apr 24, 2019 4:13 pm

This is a serious constitutional matter - and I can't see the Supreme Court ever ruling in Trump's favour here. Can you imagine the precedent it would set?
Rationalia relies on voluntary donations. There is no obligation of course, but if you value this place and want to see it continue please consider making a small donation towards the forum's running costs.
Details on how to do that can be found here.

.

"It isn't necessary to imagine the world ending in fire or ice.
There are two other possibilities: one is paperwork, and the other is nostalgia."

Frank Zappa

"This is how humanity ends; bickering over the irrelevant."
Clinton Huxley » 21 Jun 2012 » 14:10:36 GMT
.

User avatar
Forty Two
Posts: 14978
Joined: Tue Jun 16, 2015 2:01 pm
About me: I am the grammar snob about whom your mother warned you.
Location: The Of Color Side of the Moon
Contact:

Re: All Things Trump: Is it over yet?

Post by Forty Two » Wed Apr 24, 2019 5:23 pm

Brian Peacock wrote:
Wed Apr 24, 2019 1:08 pm
It's not immoral do business in Russia - but that in itself does not address the specific context. It's immoral for a presidential candidate to consistently lie about doing business in Russia,
I would like to see the quotes of Trump's consistent lies which were about doing business in Russia.


Brian Peacock wrote:
Wed Apr 24, 2019 1:08 pm


to make cooing noises to Putin from the public campaign platform while in active pursuance of that business,
Specific reference, please.
Brian Peacock wrote:
Wed Apr 24, 2019 1:08 pm

and for others to ignore the inevitable conflict of interests that arises.
Lack of foundation - you've not identified an actual conflict of interest. Neither of the above items are that.
Brian Peacock wrote:
Wed Apr 24, 2019 1:08 pm

It's fallacious to generalise from the particular, and equally to particularise from the general. A fallacy is an error in reasoning - in this case, an error in moral reasoning.

:tea:
I'm not generalizing from the particular. I'm deducing from the general. Premise 1 - There is nothing wrong or illegal with seeking out and contemplating a deal to build a building in Russia. Premise 2 -- Any deal that was considered, moreover, was, in fact, off the table in early 2016 at the latest and never proceeded past a letter of intent (which is not a binding contract - it's a letter expressing interest in doing a deal). Conclusion - Therefore, not only does it not constitute a conflict of interest, it doesn't constant wrongful conduct.

Now, if there is some issue of bribery, payoffs, or other schemes in relation to the letter of intent or contemplated deal, that could, of course, constitute some sort of wrong or crime. However, at present the allegation doesn't go beyond "trump's organization was contemplating a deal to build a building in Russia. The deal never went through. It's no longer on the table."

So, where is the conflict of interest in that?
“When I was in college, I took a terrorism class. ... The thing that was interesting in the class was every time the professor said ‘Al Qaeda’ his shoulders went up, But you know, it is that you don’t say ‘America’ with an intensity, you don’t say ‘England’ with the intensity. You don’t say ‘the army’ with the intensity,” she continued. “... But you say these names [Al Qaeda] because you want that word to carry weight. You want it to be something.” - Ilhan Omar

User avatar
Seabass
Posts: 4840
Joined: Sun Jan 30, 2011 7:32 pm
About me: :sigh:
Location: Ex-democracy
Contact:

Re: All Things Trump: Is it over yet?

Post by Seabass » Wed Apr 24, 2019 7:39 pm

Definitely the kind of behavior you want to see from your commander in chief. But if it isn't, it's no better or worse than what you'd get from any other president, right?
In Push for 2020 Election Security, Top Official Was Warned: Don’t Tell Trump

WASHINGTON — In the months before Kirstjen Nielsen was forced to resign, she tried to focus the White House on one of her highest priorities as homeland security secretary: preparing for new and different Russian forms of interference in the 2020 election.

President Trump’s chief of staff told her not to bring it up in front of the president.

Ms. Nielsen left the Department of Homeland Security early this month after a tumultuous 16-month tenure and tensions with the White House. Officials said she had become increasingly concerned about Russia’s continued activity in the United States during and after the 2018 midterm elections — ranging from its search for new techniques to divide Americans using social media, to experiments by hackers, to rerouting internet traffic and infiltrating power grids.

But in a meeting this year, Mick Mulvaney, the White House chief of staff, made it clear that Mr. Trump still equated any public discussion of malign Russian election activity with questions about the legitimacy of his victory. According to one senior administration official, Mr. Mulvaney said it “wasn’t a great subject and should be kept below his level.”

Even though the Department of Homeland Security has primary responsibility for civilian cyberdefense, Ms. Nielsen eventually gave up on her effort to organize a White House meeting of cabinet secretaries to coordinate a strategy to protect next year’s elections.

As a result, the issue did not gain the urgency or widespread attention that a president can command. And it meant that many Americans remain unaware of the latest versions of Russian interference.


continued:
https://www.nytimes.com/2019/04/24/us/p ... trump.html
The demagogue is one who preaches doctrines he knows to be untrue to men he knows to be idiots. ―H.L. Mencken

Bad government is the natural product of rule by those who believe government is bad. —Thomas Frank

Nationalism is an infantile disease. It is the measles of mankind. —Einstein
I’m a nationalist. —Trump

The people can always be brought to the bidding of the leaders. That is easy. All you have to do is tell them they are being attacked and denounce the pacifists for lack of patriotism and exposing the country to danger. It works the same way in any country. —Hermann Göring

User avatar
Tero
Just saying
Posts: 30681
Joined: Sun Jul 04, 2010 9:50 pm
About me: Something something birds
Location: USA
Contact:

Re: All Things Trump: Is it over yet?

Post by Tero » Wed Apr 24, 2019 8:29 pm

Lock him up!
1883258F-4C7F-4D0B-BCF4-DC4AFFA40D0E.jpeg
"The obvious reason the Trump administration doesn't want to help stop the Russian interference is that they believe that it benefits them. This is in line with what the Mueller report showed, which is that Trump and his campaign staff repeatedly tried to conspire with the Russian government's efforts, but were unsuccessful due only to incompetence. Which is to say, this is a passive form of collusion, similar to a pawn shop that pretends not to know that they're fencing stolen goods.

Similarly, the efforts at obstructing justice not only are ongoing, but seem to be multiplying in response to the increased pressure from newly empowered Democrats. As the Washington Post reported Tuesday evening, Trump "is opposed to current and former White House aides providing testimony to congressional panels" and his administration plans to launch all-out legal warfare against any effort to subpoena witnesses and obtain documents.


This echoes the behavior recorded by Mueller, who laid out an eye-poppingly extensive campaign by Trump to hide information, lie to prosecutors, and otherwise obstruct federal investigations into any potential misdeeds by Trump or his allies. Trump continues to — publicly, shamelessly — do everything in his power to obstruct justice and evade any efforts to learn more about his conflicts of interest and potential crimes.

Trump not only gleefully missed Tuesday's deadline to release his tax returns, but his plan is to use a bunch of pointless and likely doomed litigation maneuvers as a stalling mechanism to prevent the release of his financial information. On Monday, Trump sued both his own accounting firm and Rep. Elijah Cummings, D-M.D., to block the subpoena from the House Oversight Committee, which Cummings chairs, into Trump's financial records."
http://karireport.blogspot.com/ (:_funny_:)
http://esapolitics.blogspot.com/
Dominus vo-bisque'em Et cum spear a tu-tu, oh!

User avatar
Tero
Just saying
Posts: 30681
Joined: Sun Jul 04, 2010 9:50 pm
About me: Something something birds
Location: USA
Contact:

Re: All Things Trump: Is it over yet?

Post by Tero » Wed Apr 24, 2019 10:47 pm

Will Trump end at Supreme Court?
CNN:
"We need to take this to the courts," Rep. Ro Khanna, a Democratic member of the House Oversight Committee, told CNN. "Congress' power is at its peak when there are credible allegations of executive misconduct, such as in these cases. I have no doubt we will prevail in court."

Khanna added: "The problem is this is a cynical strategy by the Trump administration to delay any investigation and attempt to run out the clock before 2020."

Democrats are still holding out hope that their subpoenas — and contempt proceedings — will help them obtain information in the numerous investigations underway into the President's finances, possible obstruction of justice and other matters in the Trump administration. They also say that former officials don't have to follow the White House's demands not to testify. And they've targeted private financial institutions like Deutsche Bank and President Donald Trump's accounting firm Mazars USA, where they could have more success obtaining documents than from the administration.

But lawmakers and legal experts say that Democrats' best chance of success lies with the judicial branch, although it will take time to win in court.
http://karireport.blogspot.com/ (:_funny_:)
http://esapolitics.blogspot.com/
Dominus vo-bisque'em Et cum spear a tu-tu, oh!

User avatar
Brian Peacock
Tipping cows since 1946
Posts: 25872
Joined: Thu Mar 05, 2009 11:44 am
About me: Ablate me:
Location: Location: Location:
Contact:

Re: All Things Trump: Is it over yet?

Post by Brian Peacock » Wed Apr 24, 2019 10:57 pm

Forty Two wrote:
Wed Apr 24, 2019 5:23 pm
Brian Peacock wrote:
Wed Apr 24, 2019 1:08 pm
It's not immoral do business in Russia - but that in itself does not address the specific context. It's immoral for a presidential candidate to consistently lie about doing business in Russia,
I would like to see the quotes of Trump's consistent lies which were about doing business in Russia.
You know, I sometimes feel you slip in here from another dimension or a parallel universe.



Forty Two wrote:
Wed Apr 24, 2019 5:23 pm
Brian Peacock wrote:
Wed Apr 24, 2019 1:08 pm


to make cooing noises to Putin from the public campaign platform while in active pursuance of that business,
Specific reference, please.

Forty Two wrote:
Wed Apr 24, 2019 5:23 pm
Brian Peacock wrote:
Wed Apr 24, 2019 1:08 pm

and for others to ignore the inevitable conflict of interests that arises.
Lack of foundation - you've not identified an actual conflict of interest. Neither of the above items are that.
Trump was aware of the possible conflict even as you seek to play the matter down.
Forty Two wrote:
Wed Apr 24, 2019 5:23 pm
Brian Peacock wrote:
Wed Apr 24, 2019 1:08 pm
It's fallacious to generalise from the particular, and equally to particularise from the general. A fallacy is an error in reasoning - in this case, an error in moral reasoning.

:tea:
I'm not generalizing from the particular. I'm deducing from the general.
Indeed, I didn't suggest you were generalizing from the particular but that you had particularised from the general when you asked us to infer, that; as there is generally nothing illegal about doing business in Russia then Trump's particular business activity in Russia cannot submit to the charge of a conflict of interests because it was not illegal.
Forty Two wrote:
Wed Apr 24, 2019 5:23 pm
Premise 1 - There is nothing wrong or illegal with seeking out and contemplating a deal to build a building in Russia. Premise 2 -- Any deal that was considered, moreover, was, in fact, off the table in early 2016 at the latest and never proceeded past a letter of intent (which is not a binding contract - it's a letter expressing interest in doing a deal). Conclusion - Therefore, not only does it not constitute a conflict of interest, it doesn't constant wrongful conduct.
P1 - a fair premise.

P2 - a bold assertion, an arbitrary condition, and a conclusion. Factually inaccurate in its incompleteness. Mueller shows negotiations on a possible Moscow Trump Tower proceeding on multiple fronts during the campaign and after, with contacts between members of the Trump campaign, transition, and administration, business associates, and family members, with Russian actors attempting to reach out to the First Lady about land dealings as late as July 2018.

P3 - This isn't reason, this is a moral justification issued by fiat that rests on an act of wrong doing not being wrong if one attempts it but ultimately fails to execute it successfully. If this were a moral principle to take seriously then we'd have to consider that attempting to murder someone is not an act of wrong doing - only succeeding is wrong. Or, in light of what we know from the Mueller report, we'd have to consider that ordering someone to undertake an act of wrong doing is not wrong if that order is ignored.
Forty Two wrote:
Wed Apr 24, 2019 5:23 pm
Now, if there is some issue of bribery, payoffs, or other schemes in relation to the letter of intent or contemplated deal, that could, of course, constitute some sort of wrong or crime. However, at present the allegation doesn't go beyond "trump's organization was contemplating a deal to build a building in Russia. The deal never went through. It's no longer on the table."

So, where is the conflict of interest in that?
Erm, that's your characterisation - you support it. Personally I don't think a conflict of interests rests on criminal wrong doing, but I can understand why you might.

Let's acknowledge that during the campaign Trump denied that he any business dealings in Russia - "I have no deals in Russia ... I have no deals that could happen in Russia, because we have stayed away ... We could make deals in Russia very easily if we wanted to, I just don't want to because I think that would be a conflict...". It's interesting that you dismiss even the possibility of a conflict of interests before casting about for comment on that asserted impossibility. Nonetheless, I'll frame my response as a sceptical challenge: Was Trump's constant campaign advocacy of Putin as a fine example of modern political manhood and his declared eagerness to 'get along' with Russia intended to lubricate his business interests or were those entreaties normal campaign policy proposals made prospectively on behalf of the American people? Do you think a conflict arises if a specific US foreign policy, or change in policy, specifically benefits Trump and/or his businesses financially?
Rationalia relies on voluntary donations. There is no obligation of course, but if you value this place and want to see it continue please consider making a small donation towards the forum's running costs.
Details on how to do that can be found here.

.

"It isn't necessary to imagine the world ending in fire or ice.
There are two other possibilities: one is paperwork, and the other is nostalgia."

Frank Zappa

"This is how humanity ends; bickering over the irrelevant."
Clinton Huxley » 21 Jun 2012 » 14:10:36 GMT
.

User avatar
Tero
Just saying
Posts: 30681
Joined: Sun Jul 04, 2010 9:50 pm
About me: Something something birds
Location: USA
Contact:

Re: All Things Trump: Is it over yet?

Post by Tero » Wed Apr 24, 2019 11:10 pm

49F6C836-60A1-4AC1-809E-1B166F9D779A.jpeg
Trump and Betsy DeVos funnel tax money into Christian schools
http://karireport.blogspot.com/ (:_funny_:)
http://esapolitics.blogspot.com/
Dominus vo-bisque'em Et cum spear a tu-tu, oh!

User avatar
Tero
Just saying
Posts: 30681
Joined: Sun Jul 04, 2010 9:50 pm
About me: Something something birds
Location: USA
Contact:

Re: All Things Trump: Is it over yet?

Post by Tero » Wed Apr 24, 2019 11:11 pm

C0A1999C-A44B-4E9B-8267-4228009A1CC0.jpeg
http://karireport.blogspot.com/ (:_funny_:)
http://esapolitics.blogspot.com/
Dominus vo-bisque'em Et cum spear a tu-tu, oh!

User avatar
rainbow
Posts: 9856
Joined: Fri Jun 08, 2012 8:10 am
About me: Pre-Modernist
Location: Africa
Contact:

Re: All Things Trump: Is it over yet?

Post by rainbow » Thu Apr 25, 2019 6:25 am

Forty Two wrote:
Wed Apr 24, 2019 1:30 pm
O.k., establish your alleged conflict of interest. What shady characters? And, how was the President involved with them, specifically? (is exploring a real estate deal in Moscow which never went through constitute a conflict of interest due to involvement with shady characters from political enemies?)
I would think that this a job for the US Congress to decide based on the Mueller Report.
...since I don't have access to the unredacted report, I can only speculate.

But we have a saying: "If it smells of fish, it must be herring"
aingira usaina duzu

User avatar
Tero
Just saying
Posts: 30681
Joined: Sun Jul 04, 2010 9:50 pm
About me: Something something birds
Location: USA
Contact:

Re: All Things Trump: Is it over yet?

Post by Tero » Thu Apr 25, 2019 12:26 pm

trump 2020 russia.jpg
http://karireport.blogspot.com/ (:_funny_:)
http://esapolitics.blogspot.com/
Dominus vo-bisque'em Et cum spear a tu-tu, oh!

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Google [Bot], Majestic-12 [Bot] and 2 guests