The Trump Administration

867 posts / 0 new
Last post
Paladin1

Michael Moriarity wrote:

As I was saying:

tom tomorrow cartoon

 

Interesting comic Michael.

 

The bottom left caption states that "normal rules" don't apply to him. It then mentions Trump refusing to release his taxes and holdings like every other president. Only thing is the president isn't legally obgligated to release that stuff so him refusing to do that other presidents have elected to do isn't being above normal rules.   I only mention it because I've seen that issue pop up a few times.

Sean in Ottawa

Paladin1 wrote:

Michael Moriarity wrote:

As I was saying:

 

 

Interesting comic Michael.

 

The bottom left caption states that "normal rules" don't apply to him. It then mentions Trump refusing to release his taxes and holdings like every other president. Only thing is the president isn't legally obgligated to release that stuff so him refusing to do that other presidents have elected to do isn't being above normal rules.   I only mention it because I've seen that issue pop up a few times.

Do we need a meta discussion about the difference between law and rule? About how rule can be based on precident? About how when people talk about standard rules they don't mean statutes and may be speaking about what has been traditionally acceptable?

Well maybe.

 

ikosmos ikosmos's picture

Science Fiction author Octavio E. Butler in her Parable of the Talents had a character of hers, a President, note the following ..

A. S. Jarret, US President wrote:
Help us to make America great again.

But they also say that truth is stranger than fiction. It's a disturbingly prescient remark by the late SF author, however.

See Wiki: "Parable of the Talents (1998) (the sequel to Parable of the Sower) tells the story of how, as the U.S. continues to fall apart, the protagonist's community is attacked and taken over by a bloc of religious fanatics who inflict brutal atrocities. The novel is a harsh indictment of religious fundamentalism, and has been compared in that respect to Margaret Atwood's The Handmaid's Tale."

wage zombie

ikosmos wrote:

Quote:
“They have sanctions on Russia — let’s see if we can make some good deals with Russia. For one thing, I think nuclear weapons should be way down and reduced very substantially,” Trump said to the two media outlets.

The Military Industrial Complex won't wait for an impeachment. Donald Trump is a brave man to say these things.

Quote:
US policies came under fire afterward, with Trump branding the US-Iran nuclear agreement “one of the dumbest deals” he’s ever seen, and then calling the invasion of Iraq “possibly the worst decision, ever made in the history of our country. It’s like throwing rocks into a beehive.”

This is impressive. Now let's see what he does and whether he's allowed to ... live.

You are being pandered to by someone who is clearly willing to say anything.

ikosmos ikosmos's picture

Right, unlike shithead Obama who talked about "Hope" and then met with his institutional assassins to decide which wedding party needed a drone strike that week.

wage zombie

So congratulations, you're satisfied with being as sophisticated as an Obama fan.

alan smithee alan smithee's picture

I'm no psychologist but it's clear Trump is mentally ill. At best he has the mind of a child. At worst he should be institutionalized.

ikosmos ikosmos's picture

I don't actually agree with your claim. Trump has stuck to his ground, by and large, defended his new approach to foreign policy, when he could have easily made peace with the neo cons and their cabal of zealots, and  he has fought back against the FakeStream News ferociously.

His predecessor has a great smile, though, and much nicer hair.

 

Sean in Ottawa

ikosmos wrote:

I don't actually agree with your claim. Trump has stuck to his ground, by and large, defended his new approach to foreign policy, when he could have easily made peace with the neo cons and their cabal of zealots, and  he has fought back against the FakeStream News ferociously.

His predecessor has a great smile, though, and much nicer hair.

 

You clearly read selectively. Trump is all over the road with contradictions on foreign policy. The only thing he is consistant on is the use of bully tactics and a desire to suround himself with far right wingers.

Paladin1

Sean in Ottawa wrote:

Do we need a meta discussion about the difference between law and rule? About how rule can be based on precident? About how when people talk about standard rules they don't mean statutes and may be speaking about what has been traditionally acceptable?

Well maybe.

 

There is no rule that states a president must divulge his taxes or holdings. If every other president decided to do it it still doesn't make it a rule.

Rev Pesky

ikosmos wrote:
...Trump is a pragmatist not an ideologue like Clinton (R2P "liberal") or the swarm of neo-cons that she is allied with... 

I think you'd better get your dictionary and look up the word 'pragmatist'. While you're at it, you could look up 'demagogue'.

There may be a swarm of neo-cons around Clinton, but it's also true the Republican party has provided a home for neo-cons. Certainly many of G. W. Bush's cabinet were neo-con.

What Trump is, is a demagogue. He will say anything if he thinks it will help him at any particular moment. The post I made above shows that.

Ideologues and pragmatists are not opposites. The two can exist quite comfortably in the same person. Trump is neither. He is a populist demagogue, pure and simple. What is he going to do next? Who knows?  

josh
josh

Paladin1 wrote:

Sean in Ottawa wrote:

Do we need a meta discussion about the difference between law and rule? About how rule can be based on precident? About how when people talk about standard rules they don't mean statutes and may be speaking about what has been traditionally acceptable?

Well maybe.

 

There is no rule that states a president must divulge his taxes or holdings. If every other president decided to do it it still doesn't make it a rule.

Yeah, I can just imagine the howling if a Democratic nominee/president refused to disclose.

ikosmos ikosmos's picture

Sean in Ottawa wrote:
You clearly read selectively. Trump is all over the road with contradictions on foreign policy. The only thing he is consistant on is the use of bully tactics and a desire to suround himself with far right wingers.

This is a blatent falsehood. Trump has had to endure unrelenting attack from: the CIA and the "intelligence community" generally, the DNC sore losers, the foaming neo-cons, including those in his own party like John McCain, the MSM in the US and in the UK, the Hollywood multi-millionaire liberals, the UK "intelligence community" (MI5, etc.) .. all over his policy of rapproachment with Russia, his willingness to put the fight against terrorism ahead of the odious, war criminal,  regime-change policy, common to "liberal" DNCers and "conservative" Republicans alike.

He's "stuck to his guns" on this new approach and he may very well end up like JFK for his troubles on this one issue alone. Trump deserves the support of progressives on this one issue .. .even if he deserves our denunciation on most other issues.

alan smithee alan smithee's picture

Trump is a demagogue and a dictator. He's made no secret about it. I suppose that makes him pragmatic.

josh

ikosmos wrote:

Sean in Ottawa wrote:
You clearly read selectively. Trump is all over the road with contradictions on foreign policy. The only thing he is consistant on is the use of bully tactics and a desire to suround himself with far right wingers.

This is a blatent falsehood. Trump has had to endure unrelenting attack from: the CIA and the "intelligence community" generally, the DNC sore losers, the foaming neo-cons, including those in his own party like John McCain, the MSM in the US and in the UK, the Hollywood multi-millionaire liberals, the UK "intelligence community" (MI5, etc.) .. all over his policy of rapproachment with Russia, his willingness to put the fight against terrorism ahead of the odious, war criminal,  regime-change policy, common to "liberal" DNCers and "conservative" Republicans alike.

He's "stuck to his guns" on this new approach and he may very well end up like JFK for his troubles on this one issue alone. Trump deserves the support of progressives on this one issue .. .even if he deserves our denunciation on most other issues.

You've moved from objectively pro-Trump to plain old pro-Trump.

alan smithee alan smithee's picture

Looks like the Breitbart wing of babble is growing.

Mr. Magoo Mr. Magoo's picture

Can we be straightforward and honest just this one time?

The only thing that might make Trump interesting to some is his bromance with Vladimir Putin.  Or else what?

Kaspar Hauser

Why does Babble put up with this Alt Right garbage?

wage zombie

ikosmos has been here for ages and there's nothing alt-right about him, despite his recent postings being cringe-worthy.

Timebandit Timebandit's picture

That's an excellent question, Kaspar. I wish I knew.

ETA: wage zombie, his recent postings indicate some definite alt right tendencies - certainly his support for authoritarian leaders has been ongoing for a while now.

NorthReport

Bingo!

Kaspar Hauser wrote:
Why does Babble put up with this Alt Right garbage?

wage zombie

Trump's certainly changed his tune since March 2014.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=63S6JXJhxzQ

alan smithee alan smithee's picture

Mr. Magoo wrote:

Can we be straightforward and honest just this one time?

The only thing that might make Trump interesting to some is his bromance with Vladimir Putin.  Or else what?

Agreed.

bekayne

wage zombie wrote:

Trump's certainly changed his tune since March 2014.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=63S6JXJhxzQ

Trump's a Russophobe!

Kaspar Hauser

The celebration of Putin in this forum leaves me scratching my head. Which other right wing authoritarians is babble cool with valorizing these days? Duterte? Pinochet?

What does it mean to say that a discussion board is "progressive" when such a huge chunk of its bandwidth is taken up with apologetics for a right wing authoritarian?

Michael Moriarity Michael Moriarity's picture

Kaspar Hauser wrote:
The celebration of Putin in this forum leaves me scratching my head. Which other right wing authoritarians is babble cool with valorizing these days? Duterte? Pinochet? What does it mean to say that a discussion board is "progressive" when such a huge chunk of its bandwidth is taken up with apologetics for a right wing authoritarian?

Well, there are very few posters who "celebrate" Putin. A lot of us think that most Western leaders are almost as bad as Putin is. I personally think that Putin is an authoritarian thug, but also a skilled statesman, and not really a serious threat to peace, if Russia were to be treated with respect (which the U.S. has sneeringly refused to do). But even combining all these deviationist posts, it still is probably less than 1% of all babble bandwidth, which is scarcely a "huge chunk".

Mr. Magoo Mr. Magoo's picture

Quote:
But even combining all these deviationist posts, it still is probably less than 1% of all babble bandwidth, which is scarcely a "huge chunk".

In other words, about one in one hundred posts here is about poor Mother Russia?

OK.

Michael Moriarity Michael Moriarity's picture

Mr. Magoo wrote:

Quote:
But even combining all these deviationist posts, it still is probably less than 1% of all babble bandwidth, which is scarcely a "huge chunk".

In other words, about one in one hundred posts here is about poor Mother Russia?

OK.

Actually, the 1% I used was actually what is technically known as a "wild ass guess" with no foundation in facts, other than those inside my own cranium.Laughing

Sean in Ottawa

Paladin1 wrote:

Sean in Ottawa wrote:

Do we need a meta discussion about the difference between law and rule? About how rule can be based on precident? About how when people talk about standard rules they don't mean statutes and may be speaking about what has been traditionally acceptable?

Well maybe.

 

There is no rule that states a president must divulge his taxes or holdings. If every other president decided to do it it still doesn't make it a rule.

Please argue with Merriam https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/rule

I am getting fed up with having to repeat things for people purposefully choosing to ignore.

https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/rule

Definition of rule (among other definitions)

  1.  c :  an accepted procedure, custom, or habit

So yes there is a rule -- as a rule they do and have for some time made these disclosures. It is an accepted standard (even more than a procedure, custom or habit. It is not codified in law but sure, it is most definitely a practice that has become an expectation of those who run.

The Cambridge dictionary defines rule as:

an accepted principle or instruction that states the way things are or should be done. Example:

There's an unwritten rule that you don't wear jeans to work.

Oxford puts it this way:

Rule: One of a set of explicit or understood regulations or principles governing conduct or procedure within a particular area of activity.

Note the distinction between explicit and understood AND the concept of principles.

****

So yes if everyone else agrees to do it and it becomes a normal expectation  -- it does become a rule.

Timebandit Timebandit's picture

I'm guessing that posts having something to do with Russia and/or Putin would come to about 50% lately, and that's a charitable guess.

bekayne

Kaspar Hauser wrote:
The celebration of Putin in this forum leaves me scratching my head. Which other right wing authoritarians is babble cool with valorizing these days? Duterte? Pinochet? What does it mean to say that a discussion board is "progressive" when such a huge chunk of its bandwidth is taken up with apologetics for a right wing authoritarian?

Actually, some here have taken a shine to him.

 

Martin N.

Sean, like "social license"?

Michael Moriarity Michael Moriarity's picture

Timebandit wrote:

I'm guessing that posts having something to do with Russia and/or Putin would come to about 50% lately, and that's a charitable guess.

If you mean in this thread, then yes, I can see that, but surely not in babble as a whole. In this thread, both the Russian dossier and the Trump/Putin bromance are big news stories, so naturally, quite a few posts are about them.

Sean in Ottawa

Martin N. wrote:
Sean, like "social license"?

You mean a rule?

No social license is a consensus of favourable opinion in favour of something to give it legitimacy.

A Rule is established practice and expectation or an agreed framework or law. That is a lot different than social license which can be had with a single occurance.

Not all rules even have social license and certainly social license does not require a rule (a history).

Being a rule (or a law) can aid social license but it does not replace it. The agreed framework (one way of creating a rule) certainly can involve social licence.

However, having social license can become a rule.

So I would say these are different yet overlapping concepts, one as important as the other in many contexts.

 

iyraste1313

The only thing that might make Trump interesting to some is his bromance with Vladimir Putin.  Or else what?

...how about the fact that he`s taken on the deep state policed by the CIA and various ad nauseum intelligence? services, that he`s taken on the drug industry, that he`s preparing to challenge the reign of the financial elites controlling the US Fed?

The guy`s due for a fall, no doubt, as he does not understand what he`s up against, but give him his due...he`s got guts...unlike the cowardly neocon fake leftists who often get into power somewhere only to cave almost every time!

alan smithee alan smithee's picture

Here's another dog whistle. Let me make an opinion known. Fuck Putin. Fuck Trump. Fuck Duterte and fuck all authoritarians. This authoritarian apologist horde is as offensive as any other oppressive shit that goes against babble policy.

josh

Russian President Vladimir Putin accuses outgoing US administration of trying to undermine Trump's legitimacy. 

https://twitter.com/AP/status/821347521771569152  

 

 

voice of the damned

The homophobia on some of those anti-Putin/Trump memes is unhelpful, to say the least. Not as bad as the homophobia that Trump's congressional allies want to inflict upon the whole country, but still not the route anyone should be taking.

josh

he's someone who has been involved with beauty contests for many years and has met the most beautiful women in the world," Putin said. "I find it hard to believe that he rushed to some hotel to meet girls of loose morals, although ours are undoubtedly the best in the world." 

https://www.bloomberg.com/politics/articles/2017-01-17/putin-says-he-doesn-t-believe-trump-met-prostitutes-in-russia

 

 

 

voice of the damned

josh wrote:

he's someone who has been involved with beauty contests for many years and has met the most beautiful women in the world," Putin said. "I find it hard to believe that he rushed to some hotel to meet girls of loose morals, although ours are undoubtedly the best in the world." 

https://www.bloomberg.com/politics/articles/2017-01-17/putin-says-he-doesn-t-believe-trump-met-prostitutes-in-russia

 

 

 

 

In fairness, given that Putin, or at least the government he heads, are at the centre of these allegations, it is not out of bounds for him to talk about them. Those particular comments don't reallly qualify as interference.

Now, whether you think his denials are credible is another story.

NDPP

The Issue Is Not Trump. It Is Us   -   by  John Pilger

http://www.counterpunch.org/2017/01/17/the-issue-is-not-trump-it-is-us/

"...The obsession with Trump, is a cover for many of those calling themselves 'left/liberal', as if to claim political decency. They are not 'left', neither are they especially liberal.

When will a genuine movement of opposition arise? Angry, eloquent, all-for-one-and-one-for-all.

Until real politics return to people's lives, the enemy is not Trump, it is ourselves."

 

kropotkin1951 kropotkin1951's picture

Rev Pesky wrote:

ikosmos wrote:
Clinton has been prevented from starting WW3 and annihilating life on Planet Earth...

This is possibly the most ridiculous statement I've ever heard. No rational capitalist is going to start a nuclear war. All capital really wants is a stable environment for investments. 

I disagree with this analysis. Just look at Libya and what is happening to Syria. I tend to agree with much of the analysis of the Shock Doctrine instead of the myth of the ideal capitalism.

Quote:

 The Shock Doctrine is the gripping story of how America’s “free market” policies have come to dominate the world-- through the exploitation of disaster-shocked people and countries. 

At the most chaotic juncture in Iraq’s civil war, a new law is unveiled that would allow Shell and BP to claim the country’s vast oil reserves…. Immediately following September 11, the Bush Administration quietly out-sources the running of the “War on Terror” to Halliburton and Blackwater…. After a tsunami wipes out the coasts of Southeast Asia, the pristine beaches are auctioned off to tourist resorts.... New Orleans’s residents, scattered from Hurricane Katrina, discover that their public housing, hospitals and schools will never be reopened…. These events are examples of “the shock doctrine”: using the public’s disorientation following massive collective shocks – wars, terrorist attacks, or natural disasters -- to achieve control by imposing economic shock therapy. Sometimes, when the first two shocks don’t succeed in wiping out resistance, a third shock is employed: the electrode in the prison cell or the Taser gun on the streets. 

http://www.naomiklein.org/shock-doctrine

 

wage zombie

iyraste1313 wrote:

...how about the fact that he`s taken on the deep state policed by the CIA and various ad nauseum intelligence? services, that he`s taken on the drug industry, that he`s preparing to challenge the reign of the financial elites controlling the US Fed?

I guess that must be why Goldman Sachs stock has surged since the election.

https://www.thestreet.com/quote/GS.html

josh

wage zombie wrote:

iyraste1313 wrote:

...how about the fact that he`s taken on the deep state policed by the CIA and various ad nauseum intelligence? services, that he`s taken on the drug industry, that he`s preparing to challenge the reign of the financial elites controlling the US Fed?

I guess that must be why Goldman Sachs stock has surged since the election.

https://www.thestreet.com/quote/GS.html

 

Yeah, don't pay attention to what Trump says.  Pay attention to what he does.  Like appointing the wealthiest and most right-wing cabinet in history. 

kropotkin1951 kropotkin1951's picture

Michael Moriarity wrote:

But that would be judgement call, not a logical necessity. One might, contrariwise, argue that the risk of empowering a person with the emotional maturity of a 5 year old and with serious personality issues to make decisions of war and peace is greater than that with a hawkish but rational adult.

It seems both of them know enough of the billionaire's club that Trump has found people to surround himself with that are in the mainstream of US Republican politics. Of course that mainstream is extremely right wing. I don't think Trump's leash is going to be much longer than Clinton's would have been. The appointments seem to point to the war machine and the financial regime not being affected so the real rulers will be happy.

Trump will be very Republican in his attacks on minorities.  Lets not forget that the American voters not only elected Trump but a shit storm load of Senators and Congress Reps who spouted similar racist, misogynist and anti-government rhetoric. Trump may be the ugliest rash caused by this right wing virus but many other US "lawmakers" have the same rash only not as orangey red.

Sean in Ottawa

iyraste1313 wrote:

The only thing that might make Trump interesting to some is his bromance with Vladimir Putin.  Or else what?

...how about the fact that he`s taken on the deep state policed by the CIA and various ad nauseum intelligence? services, that he`s taken on the drug industry, that he`s preparing to challenge the reign of the financial elites controlling the US Fed?

The guy`s due for a fall, no doubt, as he does not understand what he`s up against, but give him his due...he`s got guts...unlike the cowardly neocon fake leftists who often get into power somewhere only to cave almost every time!

Wall to wall bullshit.

There are a lot of distrubing things that are "interesting" about Trump . That you want to ignore them is your right or problem. There is no requirement that we use the whitewash you do.

There is loads wrong with Trump and you pretending otherwise on a progressive board begs the question of why you are here. You contradict just about every value this board stands for when you try to defend Trump. Then you load all kinds of insults to people here and others who while pretending Trump is not what we can all see he is.

Sean in Ottawa

alan smithee wrote:

Here's another dog whistle. Let me make an opinion known. Fuck Putin. Fuck Trump. Fuck Duterte and fuck all authoritarians. This authoritarian apologist horde is as offensive as any other oppressive shit that goes against babble policy.

Yep

Sean in Ottawa

kropotkin1951 wrote:

Michael Moriarity wrote:

But that would be judgement call, not a logical necessity. One might, contrariwise, argue that the risk of empowering a person with the emotional maturity of a 5 year old and with serious personality issues to make decisions of war and peace is greater than that with a hawkish but rational adult.

It seems both of them know enough of the billionaire's club that Trump has found people to surround himself with that are in the mainstream of US Republican politics. Of course that mainstream is extremely right wing. I don't think Trump's leash is going to be much longer than Clinton's would have been. The appointments seem to point to the war machine and the financial regime not being affected so the real rulers will be happy.

Trump will be very Republican in his attacks on minorities.  Lets not forget that the American voters not only elected Trump but a shit storm load of Senators and Congress Reps who spouted similar racist, misogynist and anti-government rhetoric. Trump may be the ugliest rash caused by this right wing virus but many other US "lawmakers" have the same rash only not as orangey red.

Yes -- well said

josh

Pages

Topic locked