I can't see how he could be charged for anything but contempt of court. The judge won't do it though. He could hold Trump in jail until he apologizes.
2016 US Presidential Elections | Trump Wins
- Thread starter Raoul
- Start date
- Status
I can't see how he could be charged for anything but contempt of court. The judge won't do it though. He could hold Trump in jail until he apologizes.
Didn't someone post an article here about it? I know I've definitely read about it this week. In what I read, the expert opinion given by a few people was that his hands are tied in reality and it's unlikely he'll charge Trump with anything. Not impossible though.
Is it just me or the Don seems a little...skittish this week? WaPo has an article speculating that his businesses are failing due to the backlash from his current run, kind of understandable given how much of his wealth supposedly rest on his 'brand'.
He also isn't taking any advantage of being the presumptive nominee the last 2/3 weeks to prepare for the fall. No visit to battleground state, no campaign expansion, data gathering etc... Not even fundraising much. His schedule still follow the primary calendar. Maybe there's more to this Trump U case than what we know.
He also isn't taking any advantage of being the presumptive nominee the last 2/3 weeks to prepare for the fall. No visit to battleground state, no campaign expansion, data gathering etc... Not even fundraising much. His schedule still follow the primary calendar. Maybe there's more to this Trump U case than what we know.
Hillary's recent polls in Cali are terrible. Barely leading by a point or two.
If she doesn't win handily there, it could get messy as far as party unity goes.
If she doesn't win handily there, it could get messy as far as party unity goes.
This is all becoming such a huge fecking farce anyway. We're all being fooled. There are real problems out there in the US yet the potential leaders are messing around for months with pathetic digs at eachother. I wouldn't want any of those disgusting people to be my president. And the public eats it up. They love it.
Her pledged delegate lead is far too big for any "mess", he can't come close to breaking even there. At best he ends the primary season with 45-47% of pledged delegates, she is still the choice of the people.
Regardless of the CA result, Bernie's only hope if the FBI.
POTUS has sole approval of a nuclear strike, whether after briefs or just angry. Congress has no authority or say*. However, once POTUS declares a nuclear strike all top government officials are notified and there exists a two-man rule to authenticate launch action. Whether just or unjust, a nuclear strike in our lifetime is highly unlikely even with a egotistical nut like Trump holding unilateral power. That said, in Trump we're dealing with a very thin-skinned individual, massively insecure about something in that mind of his.
I posted about the two-man rule on a recent page. SECDEF is the second man but POTUS can fire the SECDEF if he/she does not follow POTUS direction, and so forth until whomever is appointed sides with POTUS. JCS/VJCS and military officers could refuse to carry out the order as well. This assuming the officer holding the "football" doesn't smash the POTUS in the head with it and refuse to give up the codes. The Executive Department heads can vote the POTUS incapacitated and remove him/her from power through the HOUSE, which is more likely. This in such scenario as the POTUS decides after his/her morning cup of coffee to bomb the feck out of some foreigners, not after lengthy strategic briefs and/or after an attack on the US or an ally (*in which case, Congress has likely provided input but still no authority to approve/deny).
But we get it. Hillary is the loose cannon in your view not the man spouting nonsense every day and engaging in social media drama. A seasoned hawk (i.e. one that has been through numerous briefs when nukes have likely been discussed) is more likely to launch nukes over someone that is orange, has a complex, uses elementary vocabulary, and flies off the hinge at the slightest provocation. Makes sense.
A seasoned hawk who will continue the current administration's needling of a nuclear armed Russia, a nation that Trump would likely improve ties with. That's a key point to consider. Trump launching a nuclear strike or any military action because he's angry is a ludicrous Democratic Party lie that, repeated enough, will become truth for Hitlery and her supporters. Fortunately, Trump is no fool and already knows the power of money and a measured response.
All in all both would be disastrous. Clinton is so far in the pockets of Wall St. firms that continued financial crises will be the norm under her watch, the death spiral of America's middle class will continue. The Donald is a big talker but too inexperienced which is why I'd rather see Bernie win it. Too bad idiot dems will pluck for Hitlery instead.
Thanks for the details about nuclear strike protocol, though. It can be tough keeping up with mega threads.
No. She is still going to win the nomination even if she loses CA.
Just that once again, she won't be closing it out with any sort of momentum and will feed into the whole narrative of her being unable to unite the party. Plus, if Bernie gets close or pulls off a shock win it'll give him more leverage to remain an irritant till the convention rather than playing the "team game".
Away from a proven hawk and an impulsive buffoon, here is a candidate with a sensible foreign policy:
If only the American public had seen the wisdom and calm head of Deez Nuts.
If only the American public had seen the wisdom and calm head of Deez Nuts.
Onya Chin would have been a great VP.
And what´s the memo to those who would nominate conman Donald Trump as their standard bearer?
Crooked Hillary is horrendous.
Bernie is crazy
Trump is unstable
Even as a Republican, I am actually worried about the prospect of Trump ordering a nuclear strike. No doubt it's a remote possibility but if somehow -- God forbid! -- the American people are moronic enough to elect this clown I could easily see ISIS bait Trump into a nuclear strike.
You obviously have a good handle on the protocol required to actually launch a nuclear missile. My knowledge of such things is zero, but I have to believe that if Trump ordered a first nuclear strike that his order would be rejected by military long enough to result in his removal from office either on 25th Amendment incapacitation grounds or through Article II Section 4 impeachment and conviction which, if Congress is in session that day, could happen within hours.
@Dwazza von Moosesteiger If Drumpf IS elected as POTUS, would it be a bannable offence to start a thread guessing how long before he would be assassinated or impeached?
I'm imagining Trump being assassinated as a proper "Who shot Mr. Burns?" scenario.
Considering all the angry white people and deranged nuts out there, and that the current sitting POTUS is still alive despite all this created vile from one side of the political sphere, I do wonder if assassinating a sitting POTUS is actually doable (not advocating, obviously, just questioning the notion of).
Yup, or like the end of the Patrick Swayze classic Roadhouse where the entire town shoots the villain (Brad Wesley iirc) at the end of the film yet when the Police asked, nobody saw or knew a thing.
If Trump is elected, shortly after he will be involved in a terrible accident, or eat some dodgy oysters or suddenly develop a heart problem, or something like that. I don't think the powers that be would even take the risk of allowing him much time. To be perfectly honest, I am absolutely shocked they have allowed it to go this far.
Yup, or like the end of the Patrick Swayze classic Roadhouse where the entire town shoots the villain (Brad Wesley iirc) at the end of the film yet when the Police asked, nobody saw or knew a thing.
Well, Tinker had a polo bear on top of him that clouded his vision. But that was one of the worst scripted films I've watched though I do find it entertaining nonetheless.
Not really the place to discuss it, but I agree, awful film yet thoroughly entertaining and I actually think it could be considered a classic. The ending howeve is exactly how I would imagine the scene after (if) Drumpf got shot. Polar bear and all.
Not really the place to discuss it, but I agree, awful film yet thoroughly entertaining and I actually think it could be considered a classic. The ending howeve is exactly how I would imagine the scene after (if) Drumpf got shot. Polar bear and all.
Biden- "Well, that portrait of Lincoln fell on me."
Just watched the Trump "Look at MY AFRICAN AMERICAN over there" video. Feck me, seriously? There's so much wrong with it I wouldn't know where to start, but yup, people cheered, and they will still vote for him.
I don't buy this stuff about Trump being a danger with the nuclear codes. Yes, he talks crazy rhetoric to win votes but the man isn't actually a lunatic. I still don't understand how he's anywhere near the Presidency though.
Watched the Jake Tapper interview.. if this is any indication of how the media are interviewing him, it's a travesty. It is so weak. Everything Trump says is indeterminate, "people tell me", "people say", "the best lawyers told me", etc etc. How is it that noone is able to say the words "be specific" to him?? Appalling journalism.
Not to mention how the hell he's getting away with insulting a sitting judge AND commenting on a current case he's defending in public as presumptive nominee. Madness piled on top of madness on a madness-tiered cake.
http://edition.cnn.com/videos/polit...ton-judge-jake-tapper-full-interview-lead.cnn
Not to mention how the hell he's getting away with insulting a sitting judge AND commenting on a current case he's defending in public as presumptive nominee. Madness piled on top of madness on a madness-tiered cake.
http://edition.cnn.com/videos/polit...ton-judge-jake-tapper-full-interview-lead.cnn
Last edited:
Replace Trump with Hitler.
There's no knowing with egomaniacs. He's already becoming more unhinged by the day.
For all of Trump's faults, he's really nothing like Hitler though.
Nothing is stretching it. We don't know for sure if he's big on racism as Hitler, but based on his birtherism, current demonisation of 'Mexican', there's something there. Temperament wise, he's even worse. Uncle Adolf, for all his faults, could control himself quite well. Von Clownstick flies off the handle by the slightest of insult. They are even alike in their disdain to smoking/drinking
.And there's also this somewhat harrowing historical evidence.
From 1922 NYT.
the comparison is just silly.
Only in the context of 20/2000000000000 hindsight. What's in that article is the kind of stuff that people are saying about Trump. Sure it's unlikely he'd turn out that way as president, but it's the same excuses being peddled. "I'm sure he's not really that bad, it's just to get votes" etc.
I disagree. I think that he definitely has many mental issues and flaws in his personality. I would just call him a nasty, stupid, cnut, and I honestly don't think he can help it because of a mixture of narcissism, arrogance, stupidity and idiocy and illness. He's certainly too old now to change.
It has nothing to do with hindsight, but historic knowledge. The comparison is misleading. Instead of helping to understand the situation, it (deliberately) obscures. That doesn´t mean, that Trump isn´t dangerous. All protocols and checks/balances aside, someone who is so insecure and emotionally unstable should never be president.
That said I understand where you are coming from. The only convincing argument for Hillary is, that she is not Trump. This is imo a strong and valid argument once the primaries are over. So you already have to talk about Trump being Hitler 2.0 and electability to make a case for her.
I'd agree with him being a deeply egoistic and flawed individual, but I don't think he's actually a raving madman. I don't think he's a great businessman but he's not a complete failure either, for example. The truth is somewhere in the middle I think.
Still, we can both agree he shouldn't even be in the running for President.
Ugh, been reading up on the Trump University case. Can't stand how he's dressing the case, totally unopposed by interviewers as in the one above. Here's what actually happened in relation to the change of plaintiff, which he says happened because "she gave a great review of the Trump University and they wanted to change her".
http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/...-trump-university-lawsuit-20160322-story.html
His characterisation of her now saying that Trump University is great is beyond vile.
And how about all of those "thousands of tremendous reviews"
http://www.salon.com/2016/03/11/tru...o_write_glowing_reviews_its_absolutely_a_con/
http://www.nytimes.com/2016/03/12/us/politics/donald-trump-trump-university.html?_r=0
http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/...-trump-university-lawsuit-20160322-story.html
His characterisation of her now saying that Trump University is great is beyond vile.
And how about all of those "thousands of tremendous reviews"
http://www.salon.com/2016/03/11/tru...o_write_glowing_reviews_its_absolutely_a_con/
http://www.nytimes.com/2016/03/12/us/politics/donald-trump-trump-university.html?_r=0
Sickening and just shows how despicable the man is. There really is no depth he wold not sink to just for a quick profit. Seriously, he has to be found out sooner or later, something has to stick and bring the clown down!
Nothing is stretching it. We don't know for sure if he's big on racism as Hitler, but based on his birtherism, current demonisation of 'Mexican', there's something there. Temperament wise, he's even worse. Uncle Adolf, for all his faults, could control himself quite well. Von Clownstick flies off the handle by the slightest of insult. They are even alike in their disdain to smoking/drinking
And there's also this somewhat harrowing historical evidence.
From 1922 NYT.
I normally don't like the use of the word "fascist". Bush (W) was called a "fascist" by liberal Democrats and conservative Republicans like to refer to "liberal fascism". Both are disgraceful misuses of a word which describes an ideology which has led to so much human suffering.
I'm not going to brand Trump a "fascist" yet but he clearly believes in the inherent superiority of whites over blacks and Mexicans, at least is comfortable using rhetoric that denigrates blacks and Mexicans (and women, but that's another "ism"). David Duke is a great admirer of Trump.
According to wiki (I know), fascism is a radical form authoritarian nationalism. We normally think of Nazism when we think of fascism and when we normally think of total war and death camps when we think of Nazism. But if you can extract total war and death camps from your mind when you think of fascism you're left with the elements of a regime that's not too many steps removed away from where Trump wants to take us, should the American people be so insane as to elect this toxic waste pit of a human being.
No one believes that even Trump is capable of creating a network of death camps, but he's already advocated rounding up 11 million human beings, including American citizen children, to send them back to Mexico. He believes Mexicans are unfit to serve as federal judges. He has called for a national religious registry in order to track the movements of Muslims in the United States. He has pledged to order his generals to war crimes. He does not rule dropping nuclear weapons on Europe. He admires Putin and wants to cut a great deal with North Korea that would include removing our troops from the DMZ. He proposes unilateral abrogation of our military and economic treaties as he sees fit.
We can confidently assert that Trump is an authoritarian nationalist, but we can't yet claim that he's a fascist. Yet.
Nothing is stretching it. We don't know for sure if he's big on racism as Hitler, but based on his birtherism, current demonisation of 'Mexican', there's something there. Temperament wise, he's even worse. Uncle Adolf, for all his faults, could control himself quite well. Von Clownstick flies off the handle by the slightest of insult. They are even alike in their disdain to smoking/drinking
And there's also this somewhat harrowing historical evidence.
From 1922 NYT.
Trump is basically the lovechild of Hitler and Bozo the Clown.
Yeah, that´s a pretty good description. The Hitler guff and the finger-on-the-nuke stuff is over the top. He´s simply got the douchey qualities all megalomaniacs have. His lack of filter on what he says is cause for hilarity and disgust and occasional valid points, making him great in the reality show age, hence his popularity.
Shit just actually got real.
http://www.bostonglobe.com/news/pol...dential-nod/3FSrNJlAhqRoiWt6iQMK7J/story.html
I've always thought it unlikely, but Warren's recent Twitter war with Drumpf, her camp constant contact with the Clinton's (acknowledged by Clinton's aides) seem to suggest that this story got legs.
Clinton knows she's too conventional and jaded in the electorate eyes, and with demographics looking safe, she might just go for broke to get a landslide, and the house.
http://www.bostonglobe.com/news/pol...dential-nod/3FSrNJlAhqRoiWt6iQMK7J/story.html
I've always thought it unlikely, but Warren's recent Twitter war with Drumpf, her camp constant contact with the Clinton's (acknowledged by Clinton's aides) seem to suggest that this story got legs.
Clinton knows she's too conventional and jaded in the electorate eyes, and with demographics looking safe, she might just go for broke to get a landslide, and the house.
The trouble with Liz being the VP is half the Democratic base will be secretly hoping Hillary accidentally chokes on a pork chop.
- Status