Author Topic: Trump And His Administration (Day to Day Thread)  (Read 15789 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Re: Trump And His Administration (Day to Day Thread)
« Reply #390 on: September 24, 2017, 08:37:49 PM »

Offline blink

  • Antoine Walker
  • ****
  • Posts: 4335
  • Tommy Points: 271
A quick conflict of interest.

http://www.fortune.com/2017/09/24/donald-trump-nfl-usfl/
where's the conflict ? The USFL hasn't  existed for 30 years, and that article didn't have anything new that people didn't already know. More clickbait from mainstream media... Fortune literally copy and pasted from trumps  wikipedia

Trump always strikes back at anyone he has any perceived slight from. That is Trump's whole agenda. It's like stupid godfather.

Usually so, but regardless of his past involvements I think he would have been happy to pick this particular fight.

I think he's happy picking any fight....
Except with Putin
why exactly does he have to fight putin?
"fight" is probably not the best term.  substitute any of the following: investigate, castigate, sanction. 

instead, he's doing quite the opposite.

I quote a BBC article from August 3:

"US President Donald Trump has signed a significant piece of legislation to punish Moscow for alleged interference in last year's election. [...] Members of the US Congress wanted to turn existing sanctions, and some new ones, into law. Both houses have Republican majorities, the same party as the president.
The bill tightens existing sanctions around the ongoing situation in Ukraine and imposes new measures including some in response to alleged hacking during the 2016 election and others that target key Russian industries such as the railways, shipping, metals and mining. It would also bring in restrictions on companies doing business with the Russian oil industry.
It [the bill] means getting rid of sanctions becomes much harder, and the power to reverse the sanctions effectively moves from the hands of the president to Congress. Previously, the sanctions were introduced as executive orders, which any president has the power to remove instantly.
Under the new law, Congress must approve any request from the president to ease the financial penalties detailed in the bill. In order to waive individual sanctions, a president would need to submit a report to Congress outlining why it is in the national interest to take that action."

btw, the US cannot impose sanctions against the head of another state - although this euphemism is often used in the media. Sanctions are always at the detriment of another country and its people.

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-40720673

Actually it is more nuanced than that blurb.  Trump signed it because he basically had no other choice.  For weeks the white house tried to soften / reduce the sanctions.  So much so, that lawmakers had to add restrictions on the president's ability to remove the sanctions.  Both parties were worried that Trump would ignore all the mounting evidence that Russia was behind the election interference and just remove the sanctions.

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/06/21/world/asia/trump-russia-sanctions.html

Re: Trump And His Administration (Day to Day Thread)
« Reply #391 on: September 24, 2017, 09:18:36 PM »

Offline greece666

  • Paul Silas
  • ******
  • Posts: 6487
  • Tommy Points: 1055
  • Head Paperboy at Greenville
A quick conflict of interest.

http://www.fortune.com/2017/09/24/donald-trump-nfl-usfl/
where's the conflict ? The USFL hasn't  existed for 30 years, and that article didn't have anything new that people didn't already know. More clickbait from mainstream media... Fortune literally copy and pasted from trumps  wikipedia

Trump always strikes back at anyone he has any perceived slight from. That is Trump's whole agenda. It's like stupid godfather.

Usually so, but regardless of his past involvements I think he would have been happy to pick this particular fight.

I think he's happy picking any fight....
Except with Putin
why exactly does he have to fight putin?
"fight" is probably not the best term.  substitute any of the following: investigate, castigate, sanction. 

instead, he's doing quite the opposite.

I quote a BBC article from August 3:

"US President Donald Trump has signed a significant piece of legislation to punish Moscow for alleged interference in last year's election. [...] Members of the US Congress wanted to turn existing sanctions, and some new ones, into law. Both houses have Republican majorities, the same party as the president.
The bill tightens existing sanctions around the ongoing situation in Ukraine and imposes new measures including some in response to alleged hacking during the 2016 election and others that target key Russian industries such as the railways, shipping, metals and mining. It would also bring in restrictions on companies doing business with the Russian oil industry.
It [the bill] means getting rid of sanctions becomes much harder, and the power to reverse the sanctions effectively moves from the hands of the president to Congress. Previously, the sanctions were introduced as executive orders, which any president has the power to remove instantly.
Under the new law, Congress must approve any request from the president to ease the financial penalties detailed in the bill. In order to waive individual sanctions, a president would need to submit a report to Congress outlining why it is in the national interest to take that action."

btw, the US cannot impose sanctions against the head of another state - although this euphemism is often used in the media. Sanctions are always at the detriment of another country and its people.

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-40720673

Actually it is more nuanced than that blurb.  Trump signed it because he basically had no other choice.  For weeks the white house tried to soften / reduce the sanctions.  So much so, that lawmakers had to add restrictions on the president's ability to remove the sanctions.  Both parties were worried that Trump would ignore all the mounting evidence that Russia was behind the election interference and just remove the sanctions.

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/06/21/world/asia/trump-russia-sanctions.html

I posted this bcs someone was disappointed that Trump did not impose sanctions "on Putin", a false claim on two accounts.

I am not interested in taking a stance in favour or against Trump.

Same applies if you think NYT is a better source for information than BBC.

Re: Trump And His Administration (Day to Day Thread)
« Reply #392 on: September 24, 2017, 09:33:21 PM »

Offline blink

  • Antoine Walker
  • ****
  • Posts: 4335
  • Tommy Points: 271
A quick conflict of interest.

http://www.fortune.com/2017/09/24/donald-trump-nfl-usfl/
where's the conflict ? The USFL hasn't  existed for 30 years, and that article didn't have anything new that people didn't already know. More clickbait from mainstream media... Fortune literally copy and pasted from trumps  wikipedia

Trump always strikes back at anyone he has any perceived slight from. That is Trump's whole agenda. It's like stupid godfather.

Usually so, but regardless of his past involvements I think he would have been happy to pick this particular fight.

I think he's happy picking any fight....
Except with Putin
why exactly does he have to fight putin?
"fight" is probably not the best term.  substitute any of the following: investigate, castigate, sanction. 

instead, he's doing quite the opposite.

I quote a BBC article from August 3:

"US President Donald Trump has signed a significant piece of legislation to punish Moscow for alleged interference in last year's election. [...] Members of the US Congress wanted to turn existing sanctions, and some new ones, into law. Both houses have Republican majorities, the same party as the president.
The bill tightens existing sanctions around the ongoing situation in Ukraine and imposes new measures including some in response to alleged hacking during the 2016 election and others that target key Russian industries such as the railways, shipping, metals and mining. It would also bring in restrictions on companies doing business with the Russian oil industry.
It [the bill] means getting rid of sanctions becomes much harder, and the power to reverse the sanctions effectively moves from the hands of the president to Congress. Previously, the sanctions were introduced as executive orders, which any president has the power to remove instantly.
Under the new law, Congress must approve any request from the president to ease the financial penalties detailed in the bill. In order to waive individual sanctions, a president would need to submit a report to Congress outlining why it is in the national interest to take that action."

btw, the US cannot impose sanctions against the head of another state - although this euphemism is often used in the media. Sanctions are always at the detriment of another country and its people.

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-40720673

Actually it is more nuanced than that blurb.  Trump signed it because he basically had no other choice.  For weeks the white house tried to soften / reduce the sanctions.  So much so, that lawmakers had to add restrictions on the president's ability to remove the sanctions.  Both parties were worried that Trump would ignore all the mounting evidence that Russia was behind the election interference and just remove the sanctions.

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/06/21/world/asia/trump-russia-sanctions.html

I posted this bcs someone was disappointed that Trump did not impose sanctions "on Putin", a false claim on two accounts.

I am not interested in taking a stance in favour or against Trump.

Same applies if you think NYT is a better source for information than BBC.

I think the BBC is a fine source for news, and I never said otherwise.  Nothing in the quote that you posted is wrong, but there was more to the story is all.

Re: Trump And His Administration (Day to Day Thread)
« Reply #393 on: September 24, 2017, 11:32:34 PM »

Offline slamtheking

  • Dennis Johnson
  • ******************
  • Posts: 18091
  • Tommy Points: 8808
A quick conflict of interest.

http://www.fortune.com/2017/09/24/donald-trump-nfl-usfl/
where's the conflict ? The USFL hasn't  existed for 30 years, and that article didn't have anything new that people didn't already know. More clickbait from mainstream media... Fortune literally copy and pasted from trumps  wikipedia

Trump always strikes back at anyone he has any perceived slight from. That is Trump's whole agenda. It's like stupid godfather.

Usually so, but regardless of his past involvements I think he would have been happy to pick this particular fight.

I think he's happy picking any fight....
Except with Putin
why exactly does he have to fight putin?
"fight" is probably not the best term.  substitute any of the following: investigate, castigate, sanction. 

instead, he's doing quite the opposite.

I quote a BBC article from August 3:

"US President Donald Trump has signed a significant piece of legislation to punish Moscow for alleged interference in last year's election. [...] Members of the US Congress wanted to turn existing sanctions, and some new ones, into law. Both houses have Republican majorities, the same party as the president.
The bill tightens existing sanctions around the ongoing situation in Ukraine and imposes new measures including some in response to alleged hacking during the 2016 election and others that target key Russian industries such as the railways, shipping, metals and mining. It would also bring in restrictions on companies doing business with the Russian oil industry.
It [the bill] means getting rid of sanctions becomes much harder, and the power to reverse the sanctions effectively moves from the hands of the president to Congress. Previously, the sanctions were introduced as executive orders, which any president has the power to remove instantly.
Under the new law, Congress must approve any request from the president to ease the financial penalties detailed in the bill. In order to waive individual sanctions, a president would need to submit a report to Congress outlining why it is in the national interest to take that action."

btw, the US cannot impose sanctions against the head of another state - although this euphemism is often used in the media. Sanctions are always at the detriment of another country and its people.

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-40720673

Actually it is more nuanced than that blurb.  Trump signed it because he basically had no other choice.  For weeks the white house tried to soften / reduce the sanctions.  So much so, that lawmakers had to add restrictions on the president's ability to remove the sanctions.  Both parties were worried that Trump would ignore all the mounting evidence that Russia was behind the election interference and just remove the sanctions.

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/06/21/world/asia/trump-russia-sanctions.html

I posted this bcs someone was disappointed that Trump did not impose sanctions "on Putin", a false claim on two accounts.

I am not interested in taking a stance in favour or against Trump.

Same applies if you think NYT is a better source for information than BBC.

it's actually not false on any counts.
1) Congress took the action.  Trump signed because he really had no choice.  Congress took that action to prevent Trump from making things easier for Russia.
2) saying "Putin" in this context is saying "Russia".  obviously sanctions are against another country, not an individual. 

Re: Trump And His Administration (Day to Day Thread)
« Reply #394 on: September 25, 2017, 12:15:49 AM »

Offline saltlover

  • Satch Sanders
  • *********
  • Posts: 9811
  • Tommy Points: 2125
A quick conflict of interest.

http://www.fortune.com/2017/09/24/donald-trump-nfl-usfl/
where's the conflict ? The USFL hasn't  existed for 30 years, and that article didn't have anything new that people didn't already know. More clickbait from mainstream media... Fortune literally copy and pasted from trumps  wikipedia

Trump always strikes back at anyone he has any perceived slight from. That is Trump's whole agenda. It's like stupid godfather.

Usually so, but regardless of his past involvements I think he would have been happy to pick this particular fight.

I think he's happy picking any fight....
Except with Putin
why exactly does he have to fight putin?
"fight" is probably not the best term.  substitute any of the following: investigate, castigate, sanction. 

instead, he's doing quite the opposite.

I quote a BBC article from August 3:

"US President Donald Trump has signed a significant piece of legislation to punish Moscow for alleged interference in last year's election. [...] Members of the US Congress wanted to turn existing sanctions, and some new ones, into law. Both houses have Republican majorities, the same party as the president.
The bill tightens existing sanctions around the ongoing situation in Ukraine and imposes new measures including some in response to alleged hacking during the 2016 election and others that target key Russian industries such as the railways, shipping, metals and mining. It would also bring in restrictions on companies doing business with the Russian oil industry.
It [the bill] means getting rid of sanctions becomes much harder, and the power to reverse the sanctions effectively moves from the hands of the president to Congress. Previously, the sanctions were introduced as executive orders, which any president has the power to remove instantly.
Under the new law, Congress must approve any request from the president to ease the financial penalties detailed in the bill. In order to waive individual sanctions, a president would need to submit a report to Congress outlining why it is in the national interest to take that action."

btw, the US cannot impose sanctions against the head of another state - although this euphemism is often used in the media. Sanctions are always at the detriment of another country and its people.

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-40720673

Actually it is more nuanced than that blurb.  Trump signed it because he basically had no other choice.  For weeks the white house tried to soften / reduce the sanctions.  So much so, that lawmakers had to add restrictions on the president's ability to remove the sanctions.  Both parties were worried that Trump would ignore all the mounting evidence that Russia was behind the election interference and just remove the sanctions.

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/06/21/world/asia/trump-russia-sanctions.html

I posted this bcs someone was disappointed that Trump did not impose sanctions "on Putin", a false claim on two accounts.

I am not interested in taking a stance in favour or against Trump.

Same applies if you think NYT is a better source for information than BBC.

Greece, I think the problem is you don't have a complete understanding of how the US government works in general, and what specifically happened in this situation.  The BBC article gives some info from the day he signed the law, but it does not offer context about what happened up to that point, and what Trump's options were.

Congress, on its own initiative, passed that law with over 99% voting for it.  That's an extraordinarily high percentage voting for any law in the US.  Despite that 99%, the Trump administration had been actively telling them to not vote for it.  They voted for it in spite of him.

Once Congress sent it to him, he had three choices:

1) Sign it
2) Veto it (in which case it would require 2/3 of Congress to override him, but again, 99% voted for it in the first place over his objections, so that would have happened)
3) Wait 10 days.  If Congress adjourned before 10 days and he hadn't yet signed it, the bill would be dead.  If 10 days passed and Congress stayed in session, the bill would become law without his signature.

After Congress passed the bill, there was confusion as to what he was going to do.  For a couple of days, the White House claimed that they didn't receive the bill from Congress, which was a very weird claim, to which Congress responded "Um, yes, we sent it to you.  Stop lying."  Then they had the bill, and they started the waiting game (option 3 above).  Congress was scheduled to go on vacation, but a couple members stayed behind to keep the session active so he couldn't use that loophole (called a "pocket veto" in the US.)

Eventually, when it became clear that he couldn't get a pocket veto, and a regular veto would be overridden, he signed the bill.  But when he signed the bill, he also issued a statement saying A) he didn't like it, and B) he didn't think it was Constitutional.  These statements have been used in the past by Presidents to set up an argument that says they don't have to enforce portions of the law that they're signing.  It in unclear at this time as to whether Trump will do something similar in this case.  He's said he wouldn't, but he doesn't have the most trustworthy reputation.

So at the end of the day, yes, he did sign the law, but not before trying very hard to not have the bill passed, and then only after it was going to become law no matter what, and even then not without objection.

Here's an article from when the bill passed the Senate and was sent to Trump.  Both Republicans and Democrats felt he might veto it.  And also note he waited 6 days to sign it, despite, again, 99% of Congress supporting it.

http://thehill.com/policy/international/russia/344221-senate-sends-russia-sanctions-bill-to-trumps-desk

He deserves virtually no credit for signing this bill.  He was forced to do so, and complained about iit.

Re: Trump And His Administration (Day to Day Thread)
« Reply #395 on: September 25, 2017, 12:29:29 AM »

Offline greece666

  • Paul Silas
  • ******
  • Posts: 6487
  • Tommy Points: 1055
  • Head Paperboy at Greenville
@slamtheking

1. If so, your original message makes no sense.

2. If you want Russians not to have money for medicine and basic food products you might as well call them by their name.

I stop here because this thread is for domestic policies. If you want to continue the conversation, I will be (sincerely) happy if you send a PM.









Re: Trump And His Administration (Day to Day Thread)
« Reply #396 on: September 25, 2017, 12:55:04 AM »

Offline Beat LA

  • Paul Silas
  • ******
  • Posts: 6674
  • Tommy Points: 701
  • Mr. Emoji
Trump doubles down on NFL with another tweet this morning. Guy is just clueless.

https://mobile.twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/911904261553950720?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw&ref_url=https%3A%2F%2Fd-15686216753506223698.ampproject.net%2F1506041909031%2Fframe.html

"If NFL fans refuse to go to games until players stop disrespecting our Flag & Country, you will see change take place fast. Fire or suspend!"

Sounds like "repeal and replace" - NFL Edition. ::) :laugh:

Re: Trump And His Administration (Day to Day Thread)
« Reply #397 on: September 25, 2017, 01:05:02 AM »

Offline CelticsElite

  • NCE
  • Antoine Walker
  • ****
  • Posts: 4576
  • Tommy Points: 297
I'm with trump. I'm Boycotting nfl games. Tired of anti-police anti-flag kneeling

Kaepernick, who is currently without a team, told NFL Media last August: "I am not going to stand up to show pride in a flag for a country that oppresses black people and people of color."


I wonder if he knows what affirmative action, and how its the opposite of oppression

Re: Trump And His Administration (Day to Day Thread)
« Reply #398 on: September 25, 2017, 06:35:43 AM »

Offline Celtics4ever

  • Cedric Maxwell
  • **************
  • Posts: 14893
  • Tommy Points: 946
Quote
I'm with trump. I'm Boycotting nfl games. Tired of anti-police anti-flag kneeling

Kaepernick, who is currently without a team, told NFL Media last August: "I am not going to stand up to show pride in a flag for a country that oppresses black people and people of color."

I think players have a right to express themselves, but I think folks have a right to leave or not watch their antics. 

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/sliding-nfl-ratings-could-throw-networks-for-a-loss/

Still, I read online, that the league viewership are down 13% and 26% of those are to the protests or 3% of audience.  It is having an effect but not a huge one unless we have one of those situations  where people are not polling like they truly feel which has happened before with Pres. Trump.
 

Re: Trump And His Administration (Day to Day Thread)
« Reply #399 on: September 25, 2017, 08:28:09 AM »

Offline nickagneta

  • Global Moderator
  • Red Auerbach
  • *******************************
  • Posts: 31008
  • Tommy Points: 5167
@slamtheking

1. If so, your original message makes no sense.

2. If you want Russians not to have money for medicine and basic food products you might as well call them by their name.

I stop here because this thread is for domestic policies. If you want to continue the conversation, I will be (sincerely) happy if you send a PM.
Actually this thread is for anything having to do with Trump. If its Trump policy its okay to discuss even if it has to do with his international policy

Re: Trump And His Administration (Day to Day Thread)
« Reply #400 on: September 25, 2017, 08:41:18 AM »

Offline slamtheking

  • Dennis Johnson
  • ******************
  • Posts: 18091
  • Tommy Points: 8808
@slamtheking

1. If so, your original message makes no sense.

2. If you want Russians not to have money for medicine and basic food products you might as well call them by their name.

I stop here because this thread is for domestic policies. If you want to continue the conversation, I will be (sincerely) happy if you send a PM.
you're putting too much time and effort into picking apart a two line post for semantics.  I was only offering other words that could be substituted in someone else's post besides 'fight' when mentioning Putin.

Re: Trump And His Administration (Day to Day Thread)
« Reply #401 on: September 25, 2017, 09:37:49 AM »

Offline indeedproceed

  • In The Rafters
  • James Naismith
  • *********************************
  • Posts: 41489
  • Tommy Points: 2305
  • You ain't the boss of the freakin' bedclothes.
This whole football controversy would've been mind-blowing Pre-Trump. With all the scandals ongoing and the legitimate crisis around the world, this feels like the sequel nobody asked for. This is the Mannequin 2 of political gaffes.

"You've gotta respect a 15-percent 3-point shooter. A guy
like that is always lethal." - Evan 'The God' Turner

Re: Trump And His Administration (Day to Day Thread)
« Reply #402 on: September 25, 2017, 09:39:37 AM »

Offline Vermont Green

  • Ray Allen
  • ***
  • Posts: 3636
  • Tommy Points: 283
Trump continues to play on people's fears by trying to make this into a them against the flag thing.  I feel that people are way overreacting to this as a sign of disrespect to the flag.  People are kneeling, sometimes locking arms, placing hands on hearts.

This is miles short of burning flags which has been deemed constitutional but is clearly far more disrespectful than kneeling.  Trump once said flag burners should be deported, a bit extreme.  Now if players were running around with burning flags before the game, I would be outraged.

Trump is just doing this to fire up his base and make this more about him.

Re: Trump And His Administration (Day to Day Thread)
« Reply #403 on: September 25, 2017, 09:48:51 AM »

Offline indeedproceed

  • In The Rafters
  • James Naismith
  • *********************************
  • Posts: 41489
  • Tommy Points: 2305
  • You ain't the boss of the freakin' bedclothes.
Trump is just doing this to fire up his base and make this more about him.

There was a guy on the radio today that theorized Trump got into this whole mess because he wanted to tell a bunch of people in the deep south who already liked him something they wanted to hear, and picked a target he knew would play. Then...he took it too far.

"You've gotta respect a 15-percent 3-point shooter. A guy
like that is always lethal." - Evan 'The God' Turner

Re: Trump And His Administration (Day to Day Thread)
« Reply #404 on: September 25, 2017, 10:39:40 AM »

Offline saltlover

  • Satch Sanders
  • *********
  • Posts: 9811
  • Tommy Points: 2125
Shifting gears a bit: why is there virtually no response from the Trump Administration with regards to Puerto Rico? It is a true disaster that makes what Houston has gone through look tame by comparison (and that's not intended to downplay what Houston residents are experiencing).  There is essentially no way off the island, and basic services (power, water) will be out months even with an immediate and full-fledged response -- and it could be a year or more without it.

Is it because it's a territory?  Trump signals he'd be willing to go to war over threats to Guam, which is a much smaller and more distant territory, so maybe not.  Something else?