The Trump Presidency

[varwoche]

Originally Posted by Skeptic Ginger

Do we have a corruption thread? If not we need one.

I fail to see how a Trump/corruption thread would differ from a Trump catch-all.

[Skeptic Ginger]

Originally Posted by varwoche

I fail to see how a Trump/corruption thread would differ from a Trump catch-all.

You're right.

It is astounding, isn't it. How does the country stop this blatant mess of corruption? The POTUS appoints everyone who could investigate. I wonder how Comey hasn't been replaced yet?

[Foolmewunz]

Originally Posted by skyeagle409

Then, why are you arguing with me? If you truly know what you are talking about, you would know the process when waste and abuse are identified. As a military supervisor and later, a defense contractor supervisor, I have dealt in financially military affairs. You do not understand the specifics of what I am talking about, so don't pretend like you know what you are talking about.

.

You're describing an incurable situation? It can't be fixed, so let's have them buy worthless tanks and continue to be unable to account for a hundred billion at a time? Rather than fix that, you propose we just throw money at it because they an intransigent bureaucracy?

Sorry, we'll have to agree to disagree. You may be too close to the situation to realize that something other than the trial balance needs to be ameliorated.

Your classified evidence is nothing more than anecdotal. If you can't disclose what you know, stop telling us how you know it. I'm bound by NDAs not to tell you how I know what I know, so you'll just have to accept my nearly five decades in logistics, a lot of for certain North American governments, as gospel truth, 'cuz if I was to tell you what I know, I'd have to kill you.

[SezMe]

I am of the opinion that skyeagle409's posts on this sub-topic justify the following amendment.

Originally Posted by Foolmewunz

You may be are too close to the situation to realize that something other than the trial balance needs to be ameliorated.

[skyeagle409]

Originally Posted by Foolmewunz

You're describing an incurable situation?

Not incurable by any means. There are programs that are in use today that have saved hundreds of thousands of dollars. My pressure flapper valves, which used on the Air Force's C-5 has saved the government thousands of dollars and that is just one small example of thousands. DoD personnel can also benefit from identifying fraud, waste and abuse simply are writing a report, but those not in a position to know that are the ones who are claiming the military is basically financially fat. There have been severe cutbacks within the military that have affected military and DoD civilian personnel, which is still in effect today. That is another reason why I am supporting Trump's call to increase military spending even though I did not vote for him. I have said that he is unfit to be president, but in regard to the increase of military spending, I am all for it.

Most Military Families Expect to be Hurt by Defense Spending Cuts

https://www.debt.com/2016/military-f...spending-cuts/

[The Don]

Originally Posted by skyeagle409

Not incurable by any means. There are programs that are in use today that have saved hundreds of thousands of dollars. My pressure flapper valves, which used on the Air Force's C-5 has saved the government thousands of dollars and that is just one small example of thousands. DoD personnel can also benefit from identifying fraud, waste and abuse simply are writing a report, but those not in a position to know that are the ones who are claiming the military is basically financially fat. There have been severe cutbacks within the military that have affected military and DoD civilian personnel, which is still in effect today. That is another reason why I am supporting Trump's call to increase military spending even though I did not vote for him. I have said that he is unfit to be president, but in regard to the increase of military spending, I am all for it.

Most Military Families Expect to be Hurt by Defense Spending Cuts

https://www.debt.com/2016/military-f...spending-cuts/

Military families expecting to be worse off has little or nothing to do with the tens or hundreds of billions of dollars being wasted by the Pentagon.

You seem unable to grasp the fact that is possible for the military to be adequately funded and for people on the ground to be short of equipment.

For example, the UK wasted a fortune developing the Nimrod MRA4 while at the same time forcing UK forces in Afghanistan to use unarmoured "snatch" Land Rovers.

If the DOD get another few tens of billions of dollars, there's no guarantee that conditions will improve for servicemen servicewomen and instead the money will be spent on grandiose multi-billion dollar projects that serve only to line the pockets of defence contractors and their shareholders.

[FenerFan]

Well, Macron beat LaPen decisively in France. I wonder if Trumpy will call to congratulate him as quickly as he called Erdoğan a few weeks ago or if he thinks Macron is a "smart cookie," too.

[WilliamSeger]

Originally Posted by FenerFan

Well, Macron beat LaPen decisively in France. I wonder if Trumpy will call to congratulate him as quickly as he called Erdoğan a few weeks ago or if he thinks Macron is a "smart cookie," too.

Trump only likes leaders who are "smart" so he will probably wait to see if Macron is "smart" enough to imprison or execute his opponents.

[Firestone]

"Congratulations to Emmanuel Macron on his big win today as the next President of France. I look very much forward to working with him!"

https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/...00169438113793

[pgwenthold]

Originally Posted by WilliamSeger

Trump only likes leaders who are "smart" so he will probably wait to see if Macron is "smart" enough to imprison or execute his opponents.

No, according to Trump, winning makes you smart and successful.

[newyorkguy]

Donnie continues to amaze.

Quote:

William Kristol of the conservative Weekly Standard told The New Yorker, “You kind of knew what you were getting in terms of some of the wackiness," but some Republicans, especially moderate Republicans, say privately they "are a little bit amazed by the lack of policy knowledge,” Kristol said. "Presidents don’t need to know the details of health-care bills and tax bills...But not even having a basic level of understanding?" He added, “Reagan may not have had a subtle grasp of everything, but he read the briefing books and he knew the arguments, basically. And Trump is not even at that level.” Link to article

Meanwhile his approval ratings, briefly up to 43%, are down a bit at 40%. Disapproval is at 54%, both as of polling done Saturday. Link

[AlaskaBushPilot]

Originally Posted by TofuFighter

If only someone had thought to warn you.

Not for me. I wrote Trump off looong ago, the first issue being torture very early on in the campaign. I said that numerous times on this forum. That didn't make Hillary the candidate of choice. This election, in the end, had no candidate I could vote for. The neocons infiltrated the Libertarians, and the the Greens just have to much in their core beliefs for me.

The second matter to me, I also wrote, as if the first were not enough, was his assertions about seizing the oil in the Middle East. Well, sure - we haven't been seizing the oil. If we take that as an objective from now on, we're just criminal gangsters.

From Trump's own book we know he stakes out some absurd opening position and in the ending "Deal" he negotiates down. Some of his politics can be explained that way. But I oppose all the World Police actions no matter who is president, let alone posing the military as a means of brazenly plundering other nations.

In the long run, he's going to regret the cavalier use of the military. That first action in Yemen proved he had too much faith in our special ops people and technology. This missile attack on Syria's airport - while eating Chocolate Cake with the Chinese President: ugh. Letting everyone know what trigger-happy royalty he is.

North Korea. Well by all means, it's exciting adding whole new countries to our successes in Afghanistan, Iraq, Libya, Syria, Somalia, etc.

I see some of his base worked up over Korea and others behind it. It's obviously a horrific dictatorship and among all police actions it would be about the least objectionable. But how about ending two wars for every new war you start like with Trump's idea on regulations?

[Armitage72]

Originally Posted by newyorkguy

Donnie continues to amaze.


Meanwhile his approval ratings, briefly up to 43%, are down a bit at 40%. Disapproval is at 54%, both as of polling done Saturday. Link

Trump didn't need to know anything about policy. He was going to appoint all of the best experts as advisors. Unfortunately, "best" meant "made the biggest contributions" or "was owed favors".

[WilliamSeger]

Originally Posted by Firestone

"Congratulations to Emmanuel Macron on his big win today as the next President of France. I look very much forward to working with him!"

https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/...00169438113793

I don't think Donald is looking forward to working with Macron -- not after this, anyway:

YouTube Video This video is not hosted by the ISF. The ISF can not be held responsible for the suitability or legality of this material. By clicking the link below you agree to view content from an external website.

I AGREE

[Roger Ramjets]

Originally Posted by skyeagle409

Trump is a snake oil salesman who has managed to dupe a number of people to vote for him.

Yep, but the vast majority would have voted for him anyway - simply due to the 'R' next to his name. They didn't really vote for Trump, they voted for all the things he stood for as a Republican - racism, sexism, bigotry, xenophobia, nepotism, crony capitalism, narcissism - and so far they haven't been disappointed.

Donald Trump Job Approval by Party Identification, 2017

Quote:

Republicans:
2017 Apr 24-Apr 30 87%
2017 Mar 27-Apr 2 81%

[thaiboxerken]

Originally Posted by Roger Ramjets

Yep, but the vast majority would have voted for him anyway - simply due to the 'R' next to his name. They didn't really vote for Trump, they voted for all the things he stood for as a Republican - racism, sexism, bigotry, xenophobia, nepotism, crony capitalism, narcissism - and so far they haven't been disappointed.

Donald Trump Job Approval by Party Identification, 2017

Yep, Republicans tend to have a sports team type of mentality. They don't care if their quarterback is cheating, immoral, or breaking laws, as long as they get the W.

[newyorkguy]

Originally Posted by Armitage72

Trump didn't need to know anything about policy. He was going to appoint all of the best experts as advisors. Unfortunately, "best" meant "made the biggest contributions" or "was owed favors".

His problem is, to FTFY a statement made by one of Donnie's Manhattan boosters (Mike Francesa of WFAN sports radio):

Quote:

"He does doesn't do the work."

Reagan read the briefing books. Donnie can't be bothered.

[Firestone]

From a fundraising email from the "not running in 2020" John Kasich:

Clipboard01.jpg

[TofuFighter]

Originally Posted by AlaskaBushPilot

Not for me. I wrote Trump off looong ago, the first issue being torture very early on in the campaign. I said that numerous times on this forum. That didn't make Hillary the candidate of choice. This election, in the end, had no candidate I could vote for. The neocons infiltrated the Libertarians, and the the Greens just have to much in their core beliefs for me.

The second matter to me, I also wrote, as if the first were not enough, was his assertions about seizing the oil in the Middle East. Well, sure - we haven't been seizing the oil. If we take that as an objective from now on, we're just criminal gangsters.

From Trump's own book we know he stakes out some absurd opening position and in the ending "Deal" he negotiates down. Some of his politics can be explained that way. But I oppose all the World Police actions no matter who is president, let alone posing the military as a means of brazenly plundering other nations.

In the long run, he's going to regret the cavalier use of the military. That first action in Yemen proved he had too much faith in our special ops people and technology. This missile attack on Syria's airport - while eating Chocolate Cake with the Chinese President: ugh. Letting everyone know what trigger-happy royalty he is.

North Korea. Well by all means, it's exciting adding whole new countries to our successes in Afghanistan, Iraq, Libya, Syria, Somalia, etc.

I see some of his base worked up over Korea and others behind it. It's obviously a horrific dictatorship and among all police actions it would be about the least objectionable. But how about ending two wars for every new war you start like with Trump's idea on regulations?

That's true, I remember clearly your position rejecting Trump's comments about torture and oil. I still had the impression you'd vote for him. I don't know you personally, so I don't know how much you'd stand on principle, but I've heard from pleeenty of Trump voters who said "I don't really like him, or the x and y things he says, but..."

Based on Trump's track history of staying true to any number of issues, it puzzles me that anyone would be surprised when the rug gets pulled.

[Darat]

If only Macron had managed a huge majority like Trump did!

[Darat]

Originally Posted by newyorkguy

His problem is, to FTFY a statement made by one of Donnie's Manhattan boosters (Mike Francesa of WFAN sports radio):


Reagan read the briefing books. Donnie can't be bothered.

There is little evidence he can read. Especially without his glasses!

[Darat]

Originally Posted by Armitage72

Trump didn't need to know anything about policy. He was going to appoint all of the best experts as advisors. Unfortunately, "best" meant "made the biggest contributions" or "was owed favors".

That's rather unfair, there is a third group.... People he wants to owe him a favour in the future!

[ponderingturtle]

Originally Posted by skyeagle409

I am not pro pork. However, there are programs that DoD personnel and contractor use to report abuses and waste, but what I am saying is that without proper equipment, safety gear and spare parts, don't expect anything to get done. There are also benefits to be gained for DoD civilians, DoD contractors and military personnel who can save the government money and I am one of the recipients of such a program.

I might add that high-tech research is not cheap, but it has paid off in the past, the present and will in the future. Case in point:


ONE BOMB KILLS 40 TANKS US Air Force CBU 105 cluster bomb new

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5RtNvyemGx0


US Navy To Go Full Star Trek With New Laser Weapons

http://dailycaller.com/2017/01/25/us...laser-weapons/

Now if only we were at war with people who have 40 tanks.

I know we need to spend more on the military than the rest of the planet combined, and then it will still not be enough.

And how do you know that the budget increases will do anything to get needed supplies to the people who don't have them and instead be big ticket items to fight theoretical enemies instead of giving our troops the tools they need to fight the enemies we are currently fighting?

[Fast Eddie B]

Originally Posted by TofuFighter

That's true, I remember clearly your position rejecting Trump's comments about torture....

Torture is bad enough, but don't forget he said he'd be for targeting the families of terrorists.

But we should all know by now "he just says stuff".

[Armitage72]

I don't know if this would be more appropriate in the US/Canada Trade War thread, but it turns out that members of the White House staff had to call a foreign power in to stop Trump from doing something stupid.

Quote:

White House staff called the Prime Minister’s Office last month to urge Justin Trudeau to persuade President Donald Trump not to tear up the North American Free Trade Agreement, according to multiple Canadian government sources.

The unconventional diplomatic manoeuvre — approaching the head of a foreign government to influence your own boss — proved decisive, as Trump thereafter abandoned his threat to pull out of NAFTA unilaterally, citing the arguments made by Trudeau and Mexican President Enrique Pena Nieto as pivotal.

I guess he found some intelligent people for his staff after all.

[Jim_MDP]

Originally Posted by Armitage72

I don't know if this would be more appropriate in the US/Canada Trade War thread, but it turns out that members of the White House staff had to call a foreign power in to stop Trump from doing something stupid.




I guess he found some intelligent people for his staff after all.

I thought he wasn't going to outsource.
You know, all that "hire American, buy American".

[thaiboxerken]

Originally Posted by Armitage72

I don't know if this would be more appropriate in the US/Canada Trade War thread, but it turns out that members of the White House staff had to call a foreign power in to stop Trump from doing something stupid.




I guess he found some intelligent people for his staff after all.

This is just more evidence that having Trump as POTUS is dangerous to the world.

[logger]

Uh oh leftists. Trump is nominating 10 lower court judges!

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2017...rsuch-win.html

[The Great Zaganza]

Originally Posted by logger

Uh oh leftists Americans. Trump is nominating 10 lower court judges!

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2017...rsuch-win.html

FTFY

[Fast Eddie B]

Originally Posted by The Great Zaganza

FTFY

Not sure about your fix.

A broad swath of America prefers right-leaning judicial appointments - it was a major selling point of Trump's campaign.

[Argumemnon]

Originally Posted by logger

Uh oh leftists.

Uh, oh, fellow humans!

It's like you have no respect for anyone's life, happiness or values but your own.

[phiwum]

Trump has the right to nominate judges, though of course McConnell's partisanship is to blame for why there are so many vacancies. The Senate dragged their feet in the last year of Obama's presidency, purposely failing to have votes on many of his nominees in the hopes that they would win the presidency.

It worked. It was a dirty tactic in my book, but it worked. As a result, Trump will leave quite a mark on the judiciary.

(I believe I heard about this tactic on Morning Edition or All Things Considered, but am not certain.)

[Fast Eddie B]

I personally think if cloning was possible, and we had a Supreme Court composed of 9 Antonin Scalias, this could lead to a dark, dystopian future with both intended and unintended consequences we would all come to regret.

But I also feel if cloning was possible, and we had a Supreme Court composed of 9 Ruth Baden Ginsbergs, this could lead to a dark, dystopian future with both intended and unintended consequences we would all come to regret.

What some fail to see it's the balance that makes it work. It's a pendulum that swings left and right, indirectly pushed by the will of the electorate. Unbridled in either direction is not a desireable end state.

[ponderingturtle]

Originally Posted by Fast Eddie B

Not sure about your fix.

A broad swath of America prefers right-leaning judicial appointments - it was a major selling point of Trump's campaign.

Exactly they want to be able to lose their jobs if they will not die for their employer. It's called loyalty people.

[Argumemnon]

Originally Posted by Fast Eddie B

I personally think if cloning was possible, and we had a Supreme Court composed of 9 Antonin Scalias, this could lead to a dark, dystopian future with both intended and unintended consequences we would all come to regret.

But I also feel if cloning was possible, and we had a Supreme Court composed of 9 Ruth Baden Ginsbergs, this could lead to a dark, dystopian future with both intended and unintended consequences we would all come to regret.

If _anyone_ were cloned and nominated like this, it would lead to such a future.

Quote:

What some fail to see it's the balance that makes it work. It's a pendulum that swings left and right, indirectly pushed by the will of the electorate. Unbridled in either direction is not a desireable end state.

The pendulum isn't the solution. It's the moderation; the compromise.

[ponderingturtle]

Originally Posted by Argumemnon

If _anyone_ were cloned and nominated like this, it would lead to such a future.



The pendulum isn't the solution. It's the moderation; the compromise.

Exactly the constant shifting rightward and removal of the hellish socialist government of the 1950's. When they are talking about america being great they really mean before Teddy Roosevelt.

[Argumemnon]

Originally Posted by ponderingturtle

Exactly the constant shifting rightward and removal of the hellish socialist government of the 1950's.

That's what you think I meant when I said "moderation and compromise"?

[ponderingturtle]

Originally Posted by Argumemnon

That's what you think I meant when I said "moderation and compromise"?

That is what it means for the past 40 years in the US. That is why we are finally getting to levels of wealth inequality that the right wing really wants, as shown by their policies.

[Argumemnon]

Originally Posted by ponderingturtle

That is what it means for the past 40 years in the US. That is why we are finally getting to levels of wealth inequality that the right wing really wants, as shown by their policies.

I see, so it had nothing to do with the post you were responding to. Good to know.

[ponderingturtle]

Originally Posted by Argumemnon

I see, so it had nothing to do with the post you were responding to. Good to know.

It was about what the nature of compromise for the past 40 years has been in the US. Shifting to the right. I mean no matter how Reagan is viewed as a saint by the right wing, in his politics he would now be a pure RINO, if not an outright democrat.