Trump will win again

Sometimes Yeah said:
Insurance and business lobbies would be pressuring them to prosecute. Also, since the riots are having a negative impact on democrat polls, there might be less foot dragging.
Click to expand...
Would be? The “riots” are happening right now. So are they doing this at this very moment or not? If so, who specifically is specifically doing it?

You do realize that a lot of those lobbies are libertarian-bent and funded by the Koch brothers. They probably would never go for the feds overstepping their boundaries, even if there are short term losses to businesses. They would be pressuring the local DA to prosecute. Not US attorneys for fucks sake.
 
doppy said:
Would be? The “riots” are happening right now. So are they doing this at this very moment or not? If so, who specifically is specifically doing it?

You do realize that a lot of those lobbies are libertarian-bent and funded by the Koch brothers. They probably would never go for the feds overstepping their boundaries, even if there are short term losses to businesses. They would be pressuring the local DA to prosecute. Not US attorneys for fucks sake.
Click to expand...
I said insurance companies.
It's tiring when people don't read.
 
119039280_1027135597716034_2634949113280302906_n.jpg
 
Deleted member 16771 said:
@Reason I'm just wondering - do you think that federalism is working for the United States?

It seems to me, from the outside looking in, that people look to the President and expect him to behave as if he were the leader of a unitary state, and that this is the de facto reality of the country.
Click to expand...
I assume you're asking if federalism does more good than harm? I think so. The states can run things in their own ways and run themselves into the ground without pulling the other states down with them to the same extent they would if they had to all agree on a singular course for all 50 states.
 
Reason said:
I assume you're asking if federalism does more good than harm? I think so. The states can run things in their own ways and run themselves into the ground without pulling the other states down with them to the same extent they would if they had to all agree on a singular course for all 50 states.
Click to expand...
I suppose, yeah.

It's also interesting to see how legal reforms (e.g. legalisation of cannabis) can sweep through the states while bypassing the deadlock of Congress.

I just don't know to what extent people actually look to their governors, or if that's a level of leadership they care about aside from the President. Recent issues seem highly 'national', despite most of the authority (correct me if I'm wrong) for tackling them being vested in the states.
 
Deleted member 16771 said:
I suppose, yeah.

It's also interesting to see how legal reforms (e.g. legalisation of cannabis) can sweep through the states while bypassing the deadlock of Congress.

I just don't know to what extent people actually look to their governors, or if that's a level of leadership they care about aside from the President. Recent issues seem highly 'national', despite most of the authority (correct me if I'm wrong) for tackling them being vested in the states.
Click to expand...
No I think looking to the president to handle local affairs is a low information voter think to do. It misunderstands the role of state and national government in the US.

It's like getting mad at the Queen when parliament passes an unpopular law.
 
Sometimes Yeah said:
I said insurance companies.
It's tiring when people don't read.
Click to expand...
I can read perfectly fine. Can you? You said insurance and business lobbies. In essence, lobbyists like perhaps the Chamber of Commerce... Perhaps you should read your own writing.
 
Reason said:
No I think looking to the president to handle local affairs is a low information voter think to do. It misunderstands the role of state and national government in the US.

It's like getting mad at the Queen when parliament passes an unpopular law.
Click to expand...
The problem is that much of the norms surrounding public health look to the executive branch of the federal gov’t for guidance and coordination. Trump’s administration failed tremendously in this regard. If he wanted to take a hands off approach to everything, he should have made this clear on the day after he won the election instead of waiting until a crisis happened to tell everyone they’re on their own.
 
Reason said:
That's not what I mean but that's a discussion for another time.

tl;dr explanation: Not having the time or ability to look into things is not the same as being unable to think clearly.
Click to expand...
I know, man. I probably missed a contextual 'lol' there, or something.
 
How is this okay? Not even the most ardent Trump supporter can say this is okay. I’d like to hear a good rationale for this one. If a judge allows the DOJ to take over the defense of Trump over a personal matter that has absolutely NOTHING to do with the federal gov’t or American interests whatsoever, I have no words. This is totally indefensible of this administration. Can this nightmare end please?
 
doppy said:
How is this okay? Not even the most ardent Trump supporter can say this is okay. I’d like to hear a good rationale for this one. If a judge allows the DOJ to take over the defense of Trump over a personal matter that has absolutely NOTHING to do with the federal gov’t or American interests whatsoever, I have no words. This is totally indefensible of this administration. Can this nightmare end please?
Click to expand...

Not sure some here know what you're talking about.
Some context...

The Department of Justice has filed a motion to take over as Trump’s defense in a defamation suit brought against him by columnist E. Jean Carroll, who has alleged that Trump sexually assaulted her decades ago.
The DOJ gives legal representation to federal employees who get sued for actions that they take within the scope of their employment, so the department is now claiming that Trump was acting “within the scope” of his job as president when he called Carroll a liar, claimed he never met her, accused her of making up the assault to sell her book, and asserted that he would not have assaulted her because “she’s not [his] type."
There is no low too low for Bill Barr’s DOJ.
He has turned the department into the president’s personal law firm — and stuck taxpayers with the bill.
And the DOJ’s filing that Trump was acting in his official capacity when he denigrated E. Jean Carroll is not only legally ludicrous, it’s utterly repulsive. Trump and Barr’s corruption knows no bounds.

We as taxpayers shouldn't have to pay the personal legal fees of rapes possibly committed by the President.
Are we expected to pay for the settlement if there is one too?
Sad.
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/arti...-over-trump-defense-in-e-jean-carroll-lawsuit
 
  • Like
Reactions: acd
Skarekrow said:
Not sure some here know what you're talking about.
Some context...

The Department of Justice has filed a motion to take over as Trump’s defense in a defamation suit brought against him by columnist E. Jean Carroll, who has alleged that Trump sexually assaulted her decades ago.
The DOJ gives legal representation to federal employees who get sued for actions that they take within the scope of their employment, so the department is now claiming that Trump was acting “within the scope” of his job as president when he called Carroll a liar, claimed he never met her, accused her of making up the assault to sell her book, and asserted that he would not have assaulted her because “she’s not [his] type."
There is no low too low for Bill Barr’s DOJ.
He has turned the department into the president’s personal law firm — and stuck taxpayers with the bill.
And the DOJ’s filing that Trump was acting in his official capacity when he denigrated E. Jean Carroll is not only legally ludicrous, it’s utterly repulsive. Trump and Barr’s corruption knows no bounds.

We as taxpayers shouldn't have to pay the personal legal fees of rapes possibly committed by the President.
Are we expected to pay for the settlement if there is one too?
Sad.
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/arti...-over-trump-defense-in-e-jean-carroll-lawsuit
Click to expand...
Thanks for the context, I was in a rush and wanted to post that story. I figured that putting the link there would be good enough.

But yes, why should the taxpayers pay for something that his personal lawyers should handle? You know why he doesn’t want anyone to see his tax returns? It’s probably because he’s FUCKING BROKE and doesn’t want anyone to know that he is. The puzzle pieces are coming together now.
 
doppy said:
Thanks for the context, I was in a rush and wanted to post that story. I figured that putting the link there would be good enough.

But yes, why should the taxpayers pay for something that his personal lawyers should handle? You know why he doesn’t want anyone to see his tax returns? It’s probably because he’s FUCKING BROKE and doesn’t want anyone to know that he is. The puzzle pieces are coming together now.
Click to expand...

Oh, I see...I missed where you had linked the article.
:)
Yes...it's really getting old.
I have nothing but pure distain for the man.
Bill Barr should be impeached and disbarred...possibly thrown in prison.
And yes, the Trump v Vance ruling is going to force him to disclose his finances and tax returns.
Not only the fraudulent finances of his family "business" but his BS claims of how much he is worth.
He definitely owes a whole lot of money to Russia and China that is going to be due here really soon.
I wouldn't be surprised if Russia was using that as leverage to manipulate him.
119002975_3604005846278652_4913369212355007831_n.jpg

A record setting fail.


.​
 
New drawing by Jim Carrey.

jim.webp



_______________________________________________


118777217_3392886037443260_7150642546473406087_o.webp​
 
Ef_Tvp2UwAIqTd9
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top