Where is/can Donald Trump take US (sic)?

[McLovin]

Let's just see how much $$$ in government contracts goes to his company which of course he will have no control over while he's President but will have when he's not.

The conflict of interest laws in the US do not apply to the President. He could sit in the Oval Office running his company and be totally immune from any prosecution. Nixon famously said "it's not illegal, if the president does it"(turns out it was). He's also refused the long precedent of setting up a blind trust to manage his assets, or even placing management of them in an independent third party.

The President of Argentina called to congratulate Trump, Trump and his daughter pressed the president on some building permits in BA that were taking too long.

 

[luutzu]

There's a doco on airforce one on you tube, it's well documented that the aircraft are very customized and fit for purpose. He's grand standing....likely someone forgot to tell him he's won the election...

GB, what have you got to say regarding the GS hires?

Oh he remembers. Just that Boeing scheduled the delivery in 2024 - way after his terms limit.

So he gotta play hard and pull that schedule back. Gotta enjoy a brand spanking new AFO since his current jet is "better" than the current "aging" AFO.


You know it costs $1M a day to protect his family around Trump Towers? That's about $1.4B over a four year term.

But when he moves to Washington, the security around Trump tower will remain in place since his youngest son - Barron - and his mum want to stay back in NY so that little Barron there can finish his schooling.

If he want to save taxpayers any money, he'd start telling his son that Washington isn't too shabby of a place for a president's son to get some schooling. Save taxpayers some cash while they're at it too.

 

[luutzu]

The conflict of interest laws in the US do not apply to the President. He could sit in the Oval Office running his company and be totally immune from any prosecution. Nixon famously said "it's not illegal, if the president does it"(turns out it was). He's also refused the long precedent of setting up a blind trust to manage his assets, or even placing management of them in an independent third party.

The President of Argentina called to congratulate Trump, Trump and his daughter pressed the president on some building permits in BA that were taking too long.

Trump is going to make the Clinton's $2B "foundation" and hundreds of millions in paid speeches seem like a genuine charity and sharing of wisdom.

 

[Gringotts Bank]

GB, what have you got to say regarding the GS hires?

Nothing much. Look, I know how the super rich are. I know most of them are cheating scum. But I'd still far prefer a president who places some value on his own country and people. And someone who isn't afraid to be himself.

 

[DB008]

Trump is going to make the Clinton's $2B "foundation" and hundreds of millions in paid speeches seem like a genuine charity and sharing of wisdom.

Sure. ok......

 

[Knobby22]

Trump himself is not in it for the money.
He is in it for the glory!

He is 70 years old, why would he want more money?

 

[luutzu]

Sure. ok......

You do realised that I was bashing both the Clintons and the Trumps right?

There's that McLovin reference to Trump's daughter and the Argentine president on building permits.

Just saw some clip about her joining her father in a meeting with Japan's PM Abe. Her own clothing company is negotiating with a Japanese company at the time... and that Japanese company is majority owned by the Japanese gov't.

Watch how the Trump's fortunes will miraculously balloon over the coming years.


But to be fair to Trump, all US presidents and US policies have been to benefit big corporations anyway... Trump is just a whole lot smarter and see nothing wrong with his country, his administration benefiting his family's business too.

It's call efficiency - cut out the middle man. No need for that revolving door, book deals, speaking fees, directorships bs.

If the bin Saud, the Kims, the Comrades, the Tudors ran their little empire for their little clans... what's so special about the US and its First Family?

Real Politiks and what not.

 

[McLovin]

But to be fair to Trump, all US presidents and US policies have been to benefit big corporations anyway... Trump is just a whole lot smarter and see nothing wrong with his country, his administration benefiting his family's business too.

Exactly. That's why I was no fan of Clinton. She'd been around way too long and was too secretive about pretty much everything. I don't buy the whole Mr Smith Goes to Washington thing that Trump is trying to sell either.

If America wasn't America I wouldn't give two sh!ts about who they elect president.

 

[SirRumpole]

If the bin Saud, the Kims, the Comrades, the Tudors ran their little empire for their little clans... what's so special about the US and its First Family?

Real Politiks and what not.

Democracies expect higher standards and the press may well tar and feather him if he goes too far.

 

[luutzu]

Exactly. That's why I was no fan of Clinton. She'd been around way too long and was too secretive about pretty much everything. I don't buy the whole Mr Smith Goes to Washington thing that Trump is trying to sell either.

If America wasn't America I wouldn't give two sh!ts about who they elect president.

The US, like any other nations, cannot retain its wealth and power if its masses are living in poverty. And that's where it's heading in a real hurry.

With wealth and influence extremely concentrated at the very top; with over-extended military and constant wars... if it manage to quell the internal rebellion that bubbling, it'll just be another failed state in the not too distant future. May become just another Russia.

We tend to forget that the US have already been through two civil wars since its founding. The Civil War in the 1860s; then the Civil Rights Movement in the 1950s/60s. There was also a potential rebellion in the 1930s when the Great Depression was about to bring communism - or at least whatever else but "capitalism" on itself.

There was also a real potential civil uprising in the late 60s, early 70s that scare the bejesus out of US planners that they have to end the war in VN so that they would have enough troops at home to potentially suppress any rebellion.

Lincoln managed to win the first civil war - though no much of a win given some 1/4 of the population was dead; FDR managed to save the capitalists with that socialist Deal New programmes; Johnson solved that segregation uprising peacefully... Obama could have done a second New Deal but instead drove the country right into an idiot like Trump.

Maybe the American will just put up with it. Maybe Trump will just start a few more wars and extend the national spirit a few more years.

Time to either invest in the military industrial complex, or a canned food company.

 

[luutzu]

Democracies expect higher standards and the press may well tar and feather him if he goes too far.

That fourth estate has long been bought and owned by people like him, by people whose interests he's apparently setting out to pleased.

So I wouldn't put too much faith in the mainstream media. I mean, no honest media or journalist would ever see what's going on in US domestic and foreign policies and still sing praises of its greatness.

The state gov't of Michigan appealed a court ruling that it delivered drinking water to Americans without safe drinking water in Flint. It bloody appeal a judge's order that American citizens have the right to clean drinking water, and have that delivered - 1 case per family per week - because the gov't screwed up and poisoned an entire city and still haven't bothered to do anything about fixing it.

It's been over two years since they know kids are being lead poisoned; know the pipes are rusted and full of bacteria... nothing has been done but that one pack of water Band-Aid; and even that they argued is just too much trouble.

Are the news all over that kind of bs?

Are there any mainstream reporters out there reporting that Nestle' is pumping water from the city's aquafer - for practically free - sell that all over the country; but the people whose water are poisoned are just abandoned?

 

[luutzu]

Trump himself is not in it for the money.
He is in it for the glory!

He is 70 years old, why would he want more money?

You obviously aren't a greedy sociopath.

You know who wants glory?

Teddy Roosevelt; Hitler; Napoleon; Caesar; Alexander; Genghis Khan...

Those crazy warmongers doesn't care much for money - hence they never get into commerce and defraud people out of their money.

They simply want to overthrow countries, destroy cities to re-dedicate it to the glory of their ancestors and call it a day.

Guys like Trump only want money and what it could buy - fame, women, nice big brass houses.. .and if more money mean having to read some speeches and having access to intelligence briefing and the nuclear launch code... why not.

 

[Logique]

Any questions? The DJIA has risen a little over +10% since the election.

 

[pixel]

He spends 10's of millions of his own money on a campaign, he refuses to be paid for the job. If that doesn't spell commitment to his country, I don't know what does.

I'm still very apprehensive about this "commitment to his country" business. At the extreme that Trump takes it to, disregarding how it alienates and disadvantages the 95% non-US citizens of the World, he crosses the line into dangerous Nationalism and economic Imperialism. History is full of precedents. Sadly, only very few learn anything from History and tend to repeat the same mistakes.

Trump's predecessor as "Time Mag Person of the Year" (78 years ago) didn't have much of his own money to spend; but he spent jail time for his conviction and "commitment to his country". Did it qualify him for the job?

Let's revisit this topic in 2 years' time, maybe 6, and compare the outcomes... For our children's and grandkids' sake, let's pray that History DOES NOT repeat itself.

 

[McLovin]

The CIA has concluded in a secret assessment that Russia intervened in the 2016 election to help Donald Trump win the presidency, rather than just to undermine confidence in the U.S. electoral system, according to officials briefed on the matter.

Intelligence agencies have identified individuals with connections to the Russian government who provided WikiLeaks with thousands of hacked emails from the Democratic National Committee and others, including Hillary Clinton’s campaign chairman, according to U.S. officials. Those officials described the individuals as actors known to the intelligence community and part of a wider Russian operation to boost Trump and hurt Clinton’s chances.

“It is the assessment of the intelligence community that Russia’s goal here was to favor one candidate over the other, to help Trump get elected,” said a senior U.S. official briefed on an intelligence presentation made to U.S. senators. “That’s the consensus view.”

A foreign power actively trying to influence an electoral outcome, and Trump's response...

The Trump transition team dismissed the findings in a short statement issued Friday evening. “These are the same people that said Saddam Hussein had weapons of mass destruction. The election ended a long time ago in one of the biggest Electoral College victories in history. It’s now time to move on and ‘Make America Great Again,’ ” the statement read.

Trump has consistently dismissed the intelligence community’s findings about Russian hacking.

“I don’t believe they interfered” in the election, he told Time magazine this week. The hacking, he said, “could be Russia. And it could be China. And it could be some guy in his home in New Jersey.”

So it would seem he trusts Putin more than he trusts his own intelligence agencies. That cannot be good.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/worl...d324840106c_story.html?utm_term=.e86b51b00e58

 

[SirRumpole]

A foreign power actively trying to influence an electoral outcome, and Trump's response...




So it would seem he trusts Putin more than he trusts his own intelligence agencies. That cannot be good.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/worl...d324840106c_story.html?utm_term=.e86b51b00e58

Any provision to annul the election based on external interference ?

 

[luutzu]

A foreign power actively trying to influence an electoral outcome, and Trump's response...




So it would seem he trusts Putin more than he trusts his own intelligence agencies. That cannot be good.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/worl...d324840106c_story.html?utm_term=.e86b51b00e58

Are those WikiLeaks emails and documents false?

If not, then so what if Russia was behind the hack?

Are there things about Trump that voters don't already know about to not like him? If there are, you can bet the Clinton campaign would have released it. For one, they know a guy who know a few other guys working in the NSA and Homeland Security and everywhere.


And why are the US so surprised and indignant about other states trying to influence their elections? They never does it? They don't hack into or spy on other states? It's just part of what states all do since ever, right?

Did they hack into some sort of weapons labs or nuclear launch sites or fired some missiles to get Trump in, and with Trump's consent? Nope.

They just hacked into Clinton's private server - which btw, you might not want to have state secrets on in the first place. That and Podesta's gmail.

With careless, and apparently legal, mishandling of classified info like that; maybe they should be the one the CIA ought to get tough on.

 

[McLovin]

Are those WikiLeaks emails and documents false?

If not, then so what if Russia was behind the hack?

My point was you would expect the President-elect to back his own government rather than a quasi-democratic foreign government.

 

[McLovin]

Any provision to annul the election based on external interference ?

Don't think so, and unless they could prove vote tampering I doubt the US Supreme Court would annul the election based on a foreign government leaking emails. Trump won pretty comprehensively. It was really only California that gave Clinton the win in the popular vote.

 

[luutzu]

My point was you would expect the President-elect to back his own government rather than a quasi-democratic foreign government.

True. Good point. I get it now.

So he could have said something like... the Russia did this? Our intelligence agencies said they're behind attempts to influence our democracies? That's outrages.

Yea, that would have been smarter.

But then he's Trump. Anyone who help him win isn't so bad.