Jump to content
ToS // Contact Info // AVEN Fundraiser and Volunteering

Master Trump Thread

thylacine

By thylacine,
in Philosophy, Politics, and Science

 Share Followers 39
LeChat
Message added by LeChat,

Hi, everyone.

 

I'm just helping chime in, here, doing my Admod duty as the cover Admod for the PPS forum of helping make sure members' discussions remain fair and respectful for everyone.

 

As the TOS and PPS forum rules' threads mention, please, remember that members are allowed to disagree, respectfully, without getting into personal, negative judgments or insults about other members.

 

If it helps, they have some tips and/or advice on how to disagree with other members, respectfully.

 

Thank you!

 

LeChat,

Welcome Lounge, Announcements, and Alternate Language moderator

(covering the PPS forum)

Recommended Posts

ben8884

ben8884

Posted
Posted

As far as I can tell its up to the states. He can run, but depending on the state he could be removed from the ballot-unless the Supreme Court steps in, like they did with Colorado and Maine.

Also, I am not surprised he didn't testify. I think his lawyer was able to explain that, unlike a press conference, lying under oath has consequences. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
daveb

daveb

Posted
Posted

Technically, it's POTUS. PUS looks/sounds too much like something less savory (then again, for this particular ex-pres that might be more fitting; either way, he's bad enough and I can only hope he never gets into office again).

 

I'm not sure what the laws are regarding self-pardons, but he doesn't care about the laws.

 

Yeah, to me it wasn't any surprise he didn't testify. The defense was bad enough without that. :P 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
ben8884

ben8884

Posted
Posted
14 minutes ago, daveb said:

Technically, it's POTUS. PUS looks/sounds too much like something less savory (then again, for this particular ex-pres that might be more fitting; either way, he's bad enough and I can only hope he never gets into office again).

 

I'm not sure what the laws are regarding self-pardons, but he doesn't care about the laws.

 

Yeah, to me it wasn't any surprise he didn't testify. The defense was bad enough without that. :P 

Its an interesting question, can a POTUS pardon himself? In theory, pardons come from this office so, yes. But if a President can do that, what happens to the famous checks and balances? Essentially, if the President is above the law, they cease being President and become an elected Monarch. What I would suggest, is that a pardon for a President can only be granted by a 2/3 majority of Congress.

Link to post
Share on other sites
daveb

daveb

Posted
Posted

Well, Trump has said he will be a dictator (which has been dismissed by some as a joke or some sort of hyperbole or whatever). If it was one of those I say it's still not something I want a president to say. On the other hand, what if he really means it? In any case, I don't trust him and I don't trust anyone to keep him in check if he gets into that level of power again. He has pushed so many limits past the point of them having any meaning or effect, and committed so many violations, without being subjected to any appreciable consequences, and certainly without losing much support from some circles.

 

I am truly concerned about what might happen.

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
Olallieberry

Olallieberry

Posted
Posted
4 hours ago, Tanwen said:

If he's voted in as PUS - I guess he'll just pardon himself.

IF found 'Guilty' does that mean he can't stand for PUS?

It's not federal crimes but a state crime (well, 34 of them) so, no, no Presidential pardon is possible.

And, no, it doesn't mean he can't serve.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Sally

Sally

Posted
Posted

The thing to remember is that if the Constitution doesn't forbid it -- as in serving after being found guilty, etc. -- it can be done, unless Congress is willing to amend the C.  Laws aren't framed in the sense of something CAN be done, they are framed as something CAN'T be done.  The Constitution is silent about too damn many things, which isn't surprising since the country was entirely different when it was put in place.  

Link to post
Share on other sites
ben8884

ben8884

Posted
Posted

The Supreme Court has also made it clear that on this issue, they will not support states rights either

Link to post
Share on other sites
Gentle Giant

Gentle Giant

Posted
Posted

T-rump got booed at the Libertarian convention. Ha! Ha! That was so good!

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
ben8884

ben8884

Posted
Posted

Trump's been found guilty on all counts!

  • Like 5
Link to post
Share on other sites
Karret

Karret

Posted
Posted
11 minutes ago, ben8884 said:

Trump's been found guilty on all counts!

YUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUSSSSSS BRUUUUUHH!!!

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
fragglerock

fragglerock

Posted
Posted

Drain the swamp! 😄

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
Sally

Sally

Posted
Posted

TRUMP GUILTY ON ALL COUNTS

 

OMG!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!    They did it!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!   I can hardly believe it, but the NYT says so and they wouldn't dare lie.   😆😆😆😆😆

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
Sally

Sally

Posted
Posted

From AP -- this is politics in the US now:

 

For another candidate in another time, a criminal conviction might doom a presidential run, but Trump’s political career has endured through two impeachments, allegations of sexual abuse, investigations into everything from potential ties to Russia to plotting to overturn an election, and personally salacious storylines including the emergence of a recording in which he boasted about grabbing women’s genitals.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
daveb

daveb

Posted
Posted

The AP might want to update that blurb. It's not just allegations of sexual abuse, but he was found liable for it in a court of law (see the E. Jean Carroll case).

 

The trumpistas are already coming out to defend him and parrot his lies about this election fraud case, the judge, etc. The media needs to do a better job of calling him and his cronies out on the lies.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
fragglerock

fragglerock

Posted
Posted
6 minutes ago, daveb said:

The AP might want to update that blurb. It's not just allegations of sexual abuse, but he was found liable for it in a court of law (see the E. Jean Carroll case).

 

The trumpistas are already coming out to defend him and parrot his lies about this election fraud case, the judge, etc. The media needs to do a better job of calling him and his cronies out on the lies.

The Washington Post has been good, on his most egregious lies, like that the election was stolen and the trial was directed by Biden, it says things like "Trump claimed falsely" etc. It seems like real news places are on that boat about the 2020 election lies.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
daveb

daveb

Posted
Posted
1 minute ago, Fraggle Underdark said:

The Washington Post has been good, on his most egregious lies, like that the election was stolen and the trial was directed by Biden, it says things like "Trump claimed falsely" etc. It seems like real news places are on that boat about the 2020 election lies.

Yeah, I still think most news media needs to stress it more. To me, it feels almost like it's often tossed out as an afterthought, or sort of neutrally like "he said" (kind of normalizing the lying as just something he does, like other people say something).

 

Be that as it may, I guess we will see now how far his supporters are willing to go.

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest

Guest

Posted
Posted

I might ask chat-gpt about how this will affect the civil w** rhetoric. AI assisted political repression will definitely be a thing soon 😕 IMVHO

Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest

Guest

Posted
Posted

It may sound too sci-fi to be a thing, but I was reading an article on AI uses in tracking people smuggling or similar, and you can surely expect that if it can be used for that then it can be used against political dissent, for social control etc..  For now, I would assume that only select government departments will have enough clout to mess with our privacy etc. enough, but all it takes is a shift up on the political compass and...

 

Weird, cos it could be the making of authoritarian populism (we're in forever) or its undoing (who wants that?)

Link to post
Share on other sites
fragglerock

fragglerock

Posted
Posted
14 minutes ago, doot said:

It may sound too sci-fi to be a thing, but I was reading an article on AI uses in tracking people smuggling or similar, and you can surely expect that if it can be used for that then it can be used against political dissent, for social control etc..  For now, I would assume that only select government departments will have enough clout to mess with our privacy etc. enough, but all it takes is a shift up on the political compass and...

 

Weird, cos it could be the making of authoritarian populism (we're in forever) or its undoing (who wants that?)

Definitely an interesting topic, but probably want to start a new thread for it as it's a far more general topic than Trump.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
Nick2

Nick2

Posted
Posted

He gets sentenced on July 11th at 10am.  That is my birthday.  Best birthday present ever.

  • Like 4
Link to post
Share on other sites
Olallieberry

Olallieberry

Posted
Posted
 

I might ask chat-gpt about how this will affect the civil w** rhetoric. AI assisted political repression will definitely be a thing soon 😕 IMVHO

Chat-GPT probably hasn't heard of it yet. It doesn't scour the live internet for material to train on, they load up each new version with material up to a certain point in time and then start training it before they release the new version.

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
Sally

Sally

Posted
Posted
 

The media needs to do a better job of calling him and his cronies out on the lies.

The mainstream reporters can't take sides; they simply report and are doing so.  Columnists and opinion writers can and are doing so.  

Link to post
Share on other sites
daveb

daveb

Posted
Posted
 

The mainstream reporters can't take sides; they simply report and are doing so.

It's not taking sides to report facts and to report when someone is not telling the truth.

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
Sally

Sally

Posted
Posted
1 hour ago, daveb said:

It's not taking sides to report facts and to report when someone is not telling the truth.

They can't say that so  plainly because their employers don't allow them to do so (and reporters have good reasons now to worry about losing their jobs, because so many are.  I've talked with several reporters in Seattle who are really concerned about the viability of their profession.).  What they can -- and some do -- say is that "Trump said -- without evidence -- blahblah."  But not all news stories concern situations where there are obvious facts or non-facts.  Most politiucal articles concern reporting what various people say, and media are on tight timelines and their employers don't have fact checkers anymore. 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
Calligraphette_Coe

Calligraphette_Coe

Posted
Posted

I think someone should ask Matt Walsh "What is a convicted felon?"

Link to post
Share on other sites
Olallieberry

Olallieberry

Posted
Posted
7 minutes ago, Calligraphette_Coe said:

I think someone should ask Matt Walsh "What is a convicted felon?"

"I'll take President 45 for $1000, Alex"

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
 Share
Followers 39
Go to topic listing
×
×
  • Create New...