USA Policy positions of Donald Trump; let's see how many he achieves

[carltonchelsea]

There’s never been an Australian politician as flagrantly dishonest as Trump. People keep overlooking his astonishing dishonesty for some reason, yet it’s his defining characteristic as a human being.

ScoMo

 

[carltonchelsea]

Equating a 14 year old constitution with a 240+ year old constitution and the institutions surrounding it isn't making much of a point.

The Old Testament is considered to be around 3000 years old, but it’s still a shitty piece of writing.
Age equates to quality now does it?

 

[SBD Gonzalez]

ScoMo

No way. I mean, I hate Scomo as much as anyone, but he's a rank amateur in the dishonesty stakes compared to Trump.

 

[SBD Gonzalez]

They're not overlooking it, it's being purposefully ignored.

Because they know there's no spinning it.

 

[SBD Gonzalez]

It's because you've got nothing

Apart from Trump's several references to the topic.

But of course, he's the BS artist of all BS artists, so what to believe?

 

[smelly cat]

Apart from Trump's several references to the topic.

But of course, he's the BS artist of all BS artists, so what to believe?

Several references?
Ok that's a start.
Walk me through to the part where elections are cancelled forever.

 

[Satan]

President-elect Donald J. Trump tapped Chris Wright, chief executive of Liberty Energy, a Denver-based fracking company, as his choice for secretary of energy.

Mr. Wright, who calls himself “a tech nerd turned entrepreneur,” is a media-friendly evangelist for fossil fuels who promotes a feel-good message that oil and gas can lift people out of poverty, while disparaging climate science.

A bit more

Trump names fossil fuel executive Chris Wright as energy secretary

President-elect Donald Trump has selected Chris Wright, a campaign donor and fossil fuel executive, to serve as energy secretary after his second administration begins in January.

apnews.com

 

[liz]

On this point though, this ruling was not conjured out of a vacuum. And it shouldn't be portrayed as being part of some over-arching Trump superplan.

It was sought as a legal defence. It couldn't have existed without prosecution.


It occurred in the context of what was perceived as politically motivated pursuit of an ex-president. And will now prevent the sort of retributional tit-for-tat that this partisan climate promotes.

I consider the immunity ruling has resulted more from the conduct of Trump's opponents rather than Trump himself.

What complete and utter bollocks.

The charges - most significant charges - are that:

• he took classified, secret documents from the White House upon ceasing to be President, refused to return them when asked to, boasted about them to civilians, stored them unsecurely in the bathroom of his private residence
• he lied about losing an election and tried to pressure election officials at various states to "find votes", and then inspired his followers to resort to violence to prevent the election result being certified by Congress.

He had not yet been found guilty of these charges and was permitted to defend

• whether he did these things
• whether they were illegal.

Had he not done these things, he would not have been facing trials for them.

To argue that it is the fault of the people who sought to uphold what they believed was the law and brought charges that the SCOTUS concocted presidential immunity is back to front. If it is not permitted to bring charges against a president when it is believed they have committed serious crimes, they effectively have immunity regardless of what SCOTUS says.

 

[smelly cat]

What complete and utter bollocks.

The charges - most significant charges - are that:

• he took classified, secret documents from the White House upon ceasing to be President, refused to return them when asked to, boasted about them to civilians, stored them unsecurely in the bathroom of his private residence
• he lied about losing an election and tried to pressure election officials at various states to "find votes", and then inspired his followers to resort to violence to prevent the election result being certified by Congress.

He had not yet been found guilty of these charges and was permitted to defend

• whether he did these things
• whether they were illegal.

Had he not done these things, he would not have been facing trials for them.

To argue that it is the fault of the people who sought to uphold what they believed was the law and brought charges that the SCOTUS concocted presidential immunity is back to front. If it is not permitted to bring charges against a president when it is believed they have committed serious crimes, they effectively have immunity regardless of what SCOTUS says.

All of this does not change the fact that the immunity ruling was not part of some grand Trumpian plan to allow him to become a dictator.

 

[jatz14]

He can’t change the constitution

The thing about constitutions is, they are a bit of paper with words on them.

They only have substance if the people with power say they do, and maintain the system to enforce them.

The saying about a Bill of Rights also applies to constitutions.

If you really need a good bill of rights, it will not help you.
If a good bill of rights will help you, you don't need one.


On SM-A346E using BigFooty.com mobile app

 

[samFFC]

Several references?
Ok that's a start.
Walk me through to the part where elections are cancelled forever.

Donald Trump repeats controversial ‘You won’t have to vote any more’ claim

Republican presidential nominee denies threatening to stay in office after end of possible second term in Fox interview

www.theguardian.com

 

[samFFC]

All of this does not change the fact that the immunity ruling was not part of some grand Trumpian plan to allow him to become a dictator.

Trump has vowed to be a ‘dictator’ on day one. With this day now coming, what exactly will he do?

www.ussc.edu.au

 

[jatz14]

All of this does not change the fact that the immunity ruling was not part of some grand Trumpian plan to allow him to become a dictator.

How do you know?

Are you in on all the grand Trumpian plans?

On SM-A346E using BigFooty.com mobile app

 

[Satan]

Faux guy under a bit of pressure ?
Pete Hegseth, President-elect Donald Trump’s pick for secretary of defense, paid a woman who accused him of sexual assault as part of a nondisclosure agreement, though he maintained that their encounter was consensual, according to a statement from his lawyer Saturday and other documents obtained by The Washington Post.
Hegseth’s attorney, Timothy Parlatore, said that Hegseth was “visibly intoxicated” at the time of the incident, and maintained that police who were contacted a few days after the encounter by the woman concluded “the Complainant had been the aggressor in the encounter.” Police have not confirmed that assertion.
Hegseth agreed to pay an undisclosed amount to the woman because he feared that revelation of the matter “would result in his immediate termination from Fox,” where he works as a host, the statement said.