# Trump will leave if he loses the election



## MrMatt (Dec 21, 2011)

Just to put this up.








Trump backtracks on promise to vacate the White House if Biden wins the Electoral College


Trump has refused to concede the election and continues to claim without evidence that the election was marred by widespread fraud, and he not Biden won it




nationalpost.com





Trump says he'll leave the white house if he loses the election.
Can we drop this now?


----------



## Beaver101 (Nov 14, 2011)

^ Sounds like a made-up blackmail ploy. 

Btw, the majority "we" are ready to move on to see Biden's performance to lead his country.


----------



## andrewf (Mar 1, 2010)

MrMatt said:


> Just to put this up.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Is this meant to dismiss any complaints about the display Trump and co have put on since losing the election? Like with everything else, Trump has set a new low bar for statesmanship. If the election had been Bush-Gore close, he would definitely have tried to steal it. We are only lucky that the outcome was a clear enough victory for Biden that he couldn't plausibly steal it. He still got 40% of the US population to believe that there was massive electoral fraud and that Trump won 'in a landslide'. You can draw false equivalence to the Russia meddling in 2016. Only then, almost no one was suggesting that the votes or counting was fraudulent, only that Russia used disinformation and espionage to influence the outcome, or that Trump's campaign was party to it, both of which there is an abundance of evidence to support. The idea that there were millions of fraudulently cast ballots is ludicrous--there is no evidence to support it and it is a lie to soothe the ego of Trump.


----------



## sags (May 15, 2010)

The latest from the Trumpsters is "if" Biden is elected. It drives them nuts that Biden ignores them and continues to announce his cabinet.

More worrisome is what misdeeds will Trump be up to until Jan 20. News reports of the assination of the top Iranian nuclear scientists are flowing in.

Some military analysts pinpoint Israel and the US as behind the attack. Secretary of State Pompeo was just in Israel and Saudi Arabia.

I think Biden should step up and declare that people will be held accountable for their actions between now and when he takes office.

He should appoint a new AG forthwith and have them also make an announcement pledging to use the full power of the US government to go after traitors.

Threats to the peace and security of the US cannot be ignored because the current President doesn't care.


----------



## MrMatt (Dec 21, 2011)

sags said:


> The latest from the Trumpsters is "if" Biden is elected. It drives them nuts that Biden ignores them and continues to announce his cabinet.


Well since the US hasn't officially elected Biden president, it is an "if".

I'm sorry you find facts so offensive.


----------



## sags (May 15, 2010)

Biden has been elected. The States have confirmed the election results. The Electoral College is just a tradition...........like Santa Claus.


----------



## MrMatt (Dec 21, 2011)

sags said:


> Biden has been elected. The States have confirmed the election results. The Electoral College is just a tradition...........like Santa Claus.


The electoral college is part of the legal process that elects the president.
It is not merely "a tradition". 

Santa Claus is a socio-cultural icon, not a tradition.


----------



## sags (May 15, 2010)

Trump's swan song.........

“And they’re coming to take me away ha-haaa
They’re coming to take me away ho-ho hee-hee ha-haaa
To the funny farm
Where life is beautiful all the time
And I’ll be happy to see those nice young men
In their clean white coats
And they’re coming to take me away ha-haaa!”


----------



## Rusty O'Toole (Feb 1, 2012)

If you know anything about Trump's history you know he is good at cutting his losses and dropping bad deals, and running with the good ones. If it turns out Biden legitimately won the election I expect he will leave the White House without looking back, and go on to the next deal.
As for Trump being impeached or arrested for anything he has done, we have been hearing that song for 4 years and they have come up with nothing.


----------



## Rusty O'Toole (Feb 1, 2012)

Not that it matters to you, but the winner of the election has not been officially announced. The news media may pretend Biden won but we know how much that is worth from the last 4 years of anti Trump mania. Biden can pose in front of a big poster with "Office of the President Elect" on it but there is no such office. It appears Biden is the winner but it's not official and if he is, he will be sworn in on January 10. Until then Trump is President.


----------



## Money172375 (Jun 29, 2018)

Rusty O'Toole said:


> Not that it matters to you, but the winner of the election has not been officially announced. The news media may pretend Biden won but we know how much that is worth from the last 4 years of anti Trump mania. Biden can pose in front of a big poster with "Office of the President Elect" on it but there is no such office. It appears Biden is the winner but it's not official and if he is, he will be sworn in on January 10. Until then Trump is President.


Jan 20


----------



## Rusty O'Toole (Feb 1, 2012)

You are right, it is the 20th


----------



## sags (May 15, 2010)

Biden won the popular vote by over 7 million votes. He won the electoral college with 306 votes. The Individual States have verified the election results.

Biden won the election and Trump will be gone in less than 2 months. On Jan 20 he will not have security clearance to get back into the White House.

He best get his stuff packed up on the U-Haul. He will be Florida's problem then.......NYC doesn't want him back unless he is in handcuffs.


----------



## MrMatt (Dec 21, 2011)

sags said:


> Biden won the popular vote by over 7 million votes. He won the electoral college with 306 votes. The Individual States have verified the election results.
> 
> Biden won the election and Trump will be gone in less than 2 months. On Jan 20 he will not have security clearance to get back into the White House.
> 
> He best get his stuff packed up on the U-Haul. He will be Florida's problem then.......NYC doesn't want him back unless he is in handcuffs.


The Electoral college hasn't cast their votes.

You are making false statements about the US presidential election.


----------



## sags (May 15, 2010)

Sure.....and maybe a meteor will hit the earth and Trump can pretend to be President of whatever is left.

President Biden.........get used to saying it.


----------



## andrewf (Mar 1, 2010)

Rusty O'Toole said:


> Not that it matters to you, but the winner of the election has not been officially announced. The news media may pretend Biden won but we know how much that is worth from the last 4 years of anti Trump mania. Biden can pose in front of a big poster with "Office of the President Elect" on it but there is no such office. It appears Biden is the winner but it's not official and if he is, he will be sworn in on January 10. Until then Trump is President.


Trump posed in front of the exact same poster of 'Office of the President Elect' at a similar point in 2016 (prior to states certifying the counts and the electoral college). Biden is doing nothing that Trump did not do in 2016.


----------



## Joe Black (Aug 3, 2015)

MrMatt said:


> The electoral college is part of the legal process that elects the president.
> It is not merely "a tradition".
> 
> Santa Claus is a socio-cultural icon, not a tradition.


Yah, I remember so well 4 years ago the day after the election he was tweeting out to his followers "Wait guys, you can't call me president yet, we have to wait for the entire legal process to play out." He's so consistent about following the rules, whether they benefit him or not. Oh wait...


----------



## MrMatt (Dec 21, 2011)

Joe Black said:


> Yah, I remember so well 4 years ago the day after the election he was tweeting out to his followers "Wait guys, you can't call me president yet, we have to wait for the entire legal process to play out." He's so consistent about following the rules, whether they benefit him or not. Oh wait...


I don't remember that, doesn't sound very much like Trump.

I think you're making that up too.


----------



## Beaver101 (Nov 14, 2011)

sags said:


> Sure.....and maybe a meteor will hit the earth and Trump can pretend to be President of whatever is left.
> 
> President Biden.........get used to saying it.


 .. don't forget the bunker. There might be a good chance he'll lock himself in there, proclaiming he's the president for life.


----------



## BC Eddie (Feb 2, 2014)

Rusty O'Toole said:


> If you know anything about Trump's history you know he is good at cutting his losses and dropping bad deals, and running with the good ones. If it turns out Biden legitimately won the election I expect he will leave the White House without looking back, and go on to the next deal.
> As for Trump being impeached or arrested for anything he has done, we have been hearing that song for 4 years and they have come up with nothing.


Yeah you are absolutely right Rusty.

And, as I can see from your posts, you are an excellent judge of facts I wonder if you would be interested in a small parcel of swamp land in Florida that the present owner needs to sell due to a recent downturn in their financial situation. It has a quaint name of "Mar-a-logo". Just text me your number and personal details.


----------



## Tostig (Nov 18, 2020)

Here's the update.









Trump backtracks on promise to vacate the White House if Biden wins the Electoral College


Trump has refused to concede the election and continues to claim without evidence that the election was marred by widespread fraud, and he not Biden won it




nationalpost.com





Friday morning Trump backtracks on leaving the White House if he loses the electoral college vote.

Surprise, surprise. How many times has Trump backtracked before? As Canadians, we already know he's back tracked on Aluminum and tried it again with NAFTA.

Now he says "Biden could occupy the White House only if he could prove he did not fraudulently win the election."

As if Trump is the court.

Meanwhile Trump claims of election fraud without any proof presented to the courts, over and over again.

Isn't there some sort of law against a plaintiff continuously filing cases of same nature after repeated losses that just ties up the courts with frivolous cases?

So the answer to the OP's original question :"Can we drop this now?" The answer is "No". Trump won't let it go.


----------



## Retiredguy (Jul 24, 2013)

Decision of the 3rd Circuit Court of Appeal - (3 GOP appointed Judges)

“Calling an election unfair does not make it so,” the 3rd Circuit’s opinion read. “Charges require specific allegations and then proof. We have neither here.” 

Can we drop this now....


----------



## Rusty O'Toole (Feb 1, 2012)

I don't see any backtracking. Trump said from the start that he would leave if he lost the election but not if the election was fraudulent and he is still saying that. A lot of people are seeing irregularities but proving it in court or convincing Democrat governors is another matter. It looks to me that the election stinks to high heaven, the fix is in, Biden will get the electoral votes, and Trump will leave on January 20 when Biden is sworn in.
I have never seen the media so anxious to pretend an election is over when in fact, the official result has not been announced. But it is in line with the "orange man bad" theme they have been harping on for 4 years. I wonder what they will use for clickbait after Trump is gone.


----------



## Joe Black (Aug 3, 2015)

MrMatt said:


> I don't remember that, doesn't sound very much like Trump.
> 
> I think you're making that up too.


Of course I was making it up, I thought the sarcasm was obvious. The point I was making is the hypocrisy of Trump and his supporters. Did they scrupulously follow this "rule" about waiting for the "official" electoral college results in 2016? Of course not! It's only a rule to be followed when it suites them.


----------



## Joe Black (Aug 3, 2015)

Rusty O'Toole said:


> Trump said from the start that he would leave if he lost the election but not if the election was fraudulent and he is still saying that.


Without the slightest shred of proof. I kind of hope he sticks with it though, it would be so fun to see him getting dragged out by the secret service.


----------



## MrMatt (Dec 21, 2011)

Joe Black said:


> Of course I was making it up, I thought the sarcasm was obvious. The point I was making is the hypocrisy of Trump and his supporters. Did they scrupulously follow this "rule" about waiting for the "official" electoral college results in 2016? Of course not! It's only a rule to be followed when it suites them.


Okay, so you have a beef with Trump and his supporters, take it up with them.

Trump most certainly was not president until he was sworn in as president. That's how it works. Anyone who called him President before inauguration was wrong.
It's not a "rule", it's actual reality in law and practice.

To be fair, by US convention they seem to refer to former Presidents as President for some reason.. which I think is quite odd.


----------



## Beaver101 (Nov 14, 2011)

Joe Black said:


> Without the slightest shred of proof. I kind of hope he sticks with it though, *it would be so fun to see him getting dragged out by the secret service.*


 ... I couldn't disagree more ... that would be a first!


----------



## sags (May 15, 2010)

Reports are the Secret Service polled their agents about moving to Florida to protect Trump when he leaves.

Nobody volunteered for the assignment, so they are sending their junior seniority agents.


----------



## andrewf (Mar 1, 2010)

Rusty O'Toole said:


> I don't see any backtracking. Trump said from the start that he would leave if he lost the election but not if the election was fraudulent and he is still saying that. A lot of people are seeing irregularities but proving it in court or convincing Democrat governors is another matter. It looks to me that the election stinks to high heaven, the fix is in, Biden will get the electoral votes, and Trump will leave on January 20 when Biden is sworn in.
> I have never seen the media so anxious to pretend an election is over when in fact, the official result has not been announced. But it is in line with the "orange man bad" theme they have been harping on for 4 years. I wonder what they will use for clickbait after Trump is gone.


You mean, compared to the pressure Gore was under to concede when there was a non-fake case to be made that he actually won?

Trump is the biggest crybaby. Nobody whines better than him


----------



## andrewf (Mar 1, 2010)

Rusty O'Toole said:


> Trump said from the start that he would leave if he lost the election but not if the election was fraudulent and he is still saying that.


Actually, he said he would accept the results of the election if he wins.


----------



## MrMatt (Dec 21, 2011)

andrewf said:


> You mean, compared to the pressure Gore was under to concede when there was a non-fake case to be made that he actually won?
> 
> Trump is the biggest crybaby. Nobody whines better than him


Gore was a quitter, not the guy you want in charge.


----------



## sags (May 15, 2010)

Democrats don't care if Trump says he will leave, exits willingly, or gets dragged out kicking and screaming. In fact, many would prefer the latter.


----------



## sags (May 15, 2010)

Trump is facing serious criminal investigations that have already been litigated at the Supreme Court level over releasing his taxes.

Once Trump leaves office, there is no question about the Constitutionality of charging a sitting President. He will face charges if the evidence is there.

He is also facing numerous lawsuits and accusations of criminal sexual misconduct. Trump is facing a world of pain after he loses immunity from prosecution.

He is desperate to stay as President to avoid prosecution. He lost and is destined to face the courts now. 









Here are some of the lawsuits, criminal probes that await Trump as he leaves office - National | Globalnews.ca


Manhattan District Attorney Cyrus Vance, who enforces New York state laws, has been conducting a criminal investigation into Trump and the Trump Organization for more than two years.




globalnews.ca


----------



## andrewf (Mar 1, 2010)

MrMatt said:


> Gore was a quitter, not the guy you want in charge.


Trump is a charlatan and a fraudster, also not someone you want in charge. Regardless, that's the way the system works.


----------



## Retiredguy (Jul 24, 2013)

sags said:


> Trump is facing serious criminal investigations that have already been litigated at the Supreme Court level over releasing his taxes.
> 
> Once Trump leaves office, there is no question about the Constitutionality of charging a sitting President. He will face charges if the evidence is there.
> 
> ...


I'm a never Trumper but I think your post is just wishful thinking. I wouldn't bet on him suffering much in the way of consequences. Maybe a few relatively small payouts to make some lawsuits go away but thats about it, even a negociated settlement for any IRS issues. Biden would certainly not send the word down to prosecute him (like Trump would/has for others) but will likely send the word down to not prosecute him.


----------



## MrMatt (Dec 21, 2011)

andrewf said:


> Trump is a charlatan and a fraudster, also not someone you want in charge. Regardless, that's the way the system works.


Yup

Biden is a senile old man, also not someone you want in charge. But at least he's not Trump.


----------



## sags (May 15, 2010)

Biden is a one cool dude. He owns several American made Corvettes and has always supported blue collar auto workers.

He fully supports North American made electric cars, including dropping a hint of a future GM Corvette that will hit 200 mph.........yea, baby.

Here is Biden driving one of my favorite cars of all time..... his 1967 Corvette Stingray, which was a wedding gift to him from his father in 1967.

The car reminds him of his dad and his son's Beau and Hunter, who rebuilt the 327 cubic inch 300 horse power engine as a gift to him.

Refreshing change to the White House..........light em up Joe !


----------



## Tostig (Nov 18, 2020)

sags said:


> Biden is a one cool dude. He owns several American made Corvettes and has always supported blue collar auto workers.
> 
> He fully supports North American made electric cars, including dropping a hint of a future GM Corvette that will hit 200 mph.........yea, baby.
> 
> ...


If I didn't know better, it looked like Biden is having a mid-life crisis.


----------



## Tostig (Nov 18, 2020)

MrMatt said:


> Yup
> 
> Biden is a senile old man, also not someone you want in charge. But at least he's not Trump.


So far, he looks like he knows what he's doing. Definately not Trump.


----------



## james4beach (Nov 15, 2012)

MrMatt said:


> Gore was a quitter, not the guy you want in charge.


This is bizarre American/Republican reasoning.

Gore did what was in the best interest of the country, and conceded to help maintain a properly functioning country and avoid turmoil. He had the election stolen from him, but he was gracious about it. The American right calls that being a "quitter", say that he wasn't aggressive enough.

Trump, on the other hand, clearly lost the election. There is no basis to believe he can win it after the initial results came out; the margins are huge. And yet, he fights and fights and fights, casts doubt about the legitimacy of the election system, and even tries to overturn democratic outcomes.

And the sick part is that the American right *respects* that. They like it!

What this shows me is that the American right (Republicans) believe in a highly aggressive form of politics where winning is more important than the health of American democracy and even more important than the well-being of the country. This is bad-faith participation in government... they don't respect or believe in American democracy or government.


----------



## MrMatt (Dec 21, 2011)

james4beach said:


> This is bizarre American/Republican reasoning.
> 
> Gore did what was in the best interest of the country, and conceded to help maintain a properly functioning country and avoid turmoil. He had the election stolen from him, but he was gracious about it. The American right calls that being a "quitter", say that he wasn't aggressive enough.
> 
> ...


How is it "bizarre American/Republican reasoning." to want the person who gets the most votes, in accordance with the laws of the election to actually win?
The fact that you think the laws of the election should be followed, and all legal votes counted is "bizarre" is itself bizarre.

It's is wrong that Gore quit early, and it's wrong that Trump is playing these silly games at this point. << That's not a common Republican opinion.


----------



## Beaver101 (Nov 14, 2011)

sags said:


> Democrats don't care if Trump says he will leave, exits willingly, or *gets dragged out kicking and screaming. In fact, many would prefer the latter.*


 .. this is so predictable at the rate the Dump is milking their system.... 51 more days.


----------



## sags (May 15, 2010)

Now Trump is saying the conspiracy involves the Democrats, the Republicans State legislators, the media including Fox News, the Republican Governors, the judges appointed by him, his lawyers, the FBI, CIA, government workers, the Dominion voting machines, and the Department of Justice.

Has Trump now turned to starting a war with Iran ? Why sanction an Israeli assassination of a top Iranian scientist now.........days before he is gone ?

It is getting to be a dangerous situation with an erratic, impulsive, lunatic in charge of the US military. I hope someone has some plans to take over if necessary.


----------



## Rusty O'Toole (Feb 1, 2012)

sags said:


> Now Trump is saying the conspiracy involves the Democrats, the Republicans State legislators, the media including Fox News, the Republican Governors, the judges appointed by him, his lawyers, the FBI, CIA, government workers, the Dominion voting machines, and the Department of Justice.
> 
> Has Trump now turned to starting a war with Iran ? Why sanction an Israeli assassination of a top Iranian scientist now.........days before he is gone ?
> 
> It is getting to be a dangerous situation with an erratic, impulsive, lunatic in charge of the US military. I hope someone has some plans to take over if necessary.


Your "erratic impulsive lunatic" is the only President in living memory NOT to start or escalate a war and has defused a number of explosive situations around the world. Don't worry about Trump, worry about Biden a war monger from way back.


----------



## andrewf (Mar 1, 2010)

MrMatt said:


> Yup
> 
> Biden is a senile old man, also not someone you want in charge. But at least he's not Trump.


I think the senile line of attack doesn't work because it can so easily be disproven. He is the most coherent and well-briefed senile man I have even listened to. And Trump has less understanding and is less coherent than this supposedly senile old man.

I think Biden has a penchant for being kind of creepy. Then again, Trump likes to pose for awkwardly sexual photos with his teenage daughter, so it was a heck of a choice.


----------



## andrewf (Mar 1, 2010)

james4beach said:


> This is bizarre American/Republican reasoning.
> 
> Gore did what was in the best interest of the country, and conceded to help maintain a properly functioning country and avoid turmoil. He had the election stolen from him, but he was gracious about it. The American right calls that being a "quitter", say that he wasn't aggressive enough.
> 
> ...


Clearly the people who called Gore a quitter wanted him to burn the country down to ensure he became president.


----------



## andrewf (Mar 1, 2010)

Rusty O'Toole said:


> Your "erratic impulsive lunatic" is the only President in living memory NOT to start or escalate a war and has defused a number of explosive situations around the world. Don't worry about Trump, worry about Biden a war monger from way back.


We have Trump to thank for Iran being much closer to having nuclear weapons.


----------



## Rusty O'Toole (Feb 1, 2012)

andrewf said:


> I think the senile line of attack doesn't work because it can so easily be disproven. He is the most coherent and well-briefed senile man I have even listened to. And Trump has less understanding and is less coherent than this supposedly senile old man.
> 
> I think Biden has a penchant for being kind of creepy. Then again, Trump likes to pose for awkwardly sexual photos with his teenage daughter, so it was a heck of a choice.


You obviously have not seen any of the Youtube videos of Biden's gaffes, taken from his public appearances and speeches.




And my favorite, how he plans to steal the election




Did he let the truth slip out or is he having a senior moment?


----------



## andrewf (Mar 1, 2010)

Rusty O'Toole said:


> You obviously have not seen any of the Youtube videos of Biden's gaffes, taken from his public appearances and speeches.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


You can take any public figure that speaks as much as a president does and find examples of verbal flubs. Ever do the same with 'Tim Apple' Trump?

The same source for your firs video, on Trump:


----------



## james4beach (Nov 15, 2012)

I think Trump is crazy, as in, actually crazy. Mentally ill.

And look at the people he sticks close to. Rudy Giuliani is also downright nuts. Joe DiGenova, another Trump lawyer, yesterday called for the execution (killing) of a previous DHS official.

Article: Trump lawyer calls for fired cybersecurity chief's execution. "It's not every day that a sitting president's lawyer calls for the execution of a government official who did nothing but capably serve his country."

It seems to me that Trump, Giuliani and DiGenova all have mental illnesses. I am also very suspicious of people who support this crew and think their behaviours are normal.


----------



## andrewf (Mar 1, 2010)

I think those in his orbit may be sharing in his psychosis--that is, even otherwise normal, rational people can get sucked into Trump's orbit and become unhinged and at least give a convincing portrayal for the benefit of the dear leader.


----------



## bgc_fan (Apr 5, 2009)

andrewf said:


> Ever do the same with 'Tim Apple' Trump?


That's an interesting example as it kind of sheds some light on his mindset. I suspect he forgot Tim Cook's last name and just thought: "He's a CEO, his last name must be the same name as his company", so Apple...

But he is just keeping the outrage going to keep sucking in the money: Trump campaign, GOP raised at least $170 million since Election Day pushing baseless election fraud claims


----------



## andrewf (Mar 1, 2010)

bgc_fan said:


> That's an interesting example as it kind of sheds some light on his mindset. I suspect he forgot Tim Cook's last name and just thought: "He's a CEO, his last name must be the same name as his company", so Apple...
> 
> But he is just keeping the outrage going to keep sucking in the money: Trump campaign, GOP raised at least $170 million since Election Day pushing baseless election fraud claims


He insisted after the fact that he said "Tim, from Apple". He makes a habit of lying about easily verified things. It is absolutely crazy-making! Such a simple thing, a normal human would laugh it off and say they mispoke. But a deeply damaged individual like Trump couldn't do it. That is why it became newsworthy, not the verbal misstep itself.


----------



## bgc_fan (Apr 5, 2009)

andrewf said:


> He makes a habit of lying about easily verified things.


I think the best one was the sharpie on the weather map to show that the hurricane was going more inland than announced.
Q: "Did you draw that in yourself?"
Trump: "No, it was like that. Don't know who did it."
Paraphrased as Trump is much less articulate than that.


----------



## Beaver101 (Nov 14, 2011)

james4beach said:


> I think Trump is crazy, as in, actually crazy. Mentally ill. ...


 ... I can only agree (with an apology to the "truly" mentally ill people) if they weren't so devious and conniving as their modus operandi.


----------



## sags (May 15, 2010)

Trump's son in law is in Saudi Arabia. Secretary of State Pompeo recently returned from there. What is going on in Saudi Arabia in the last few days of a Trump administration ?

Trump said he will veto a military spending bill unless Congress removes social media sites from protection from lawsuits. They have nothing to do with each other.

Without a doubt, the US knew about the Israeli attack on the Iranian nuclear scientist. Why would the US agree to such an attack at this late stage in their administration ? Satellite controlled remote control machine guns and a car bomb ?

Some people think Trump is trying to start a war in the Middle East so he can claim emergency powers and try to remain as the President.

The latest is pardons for bribes. It was revealed in an unsealed court document of a Department of Justice that money for pardons is the focus of an investigation.

AG Barr was summoned to the White House. Was it because he said there was no proof of election fraud.........or because there is a DOJ investigation into pardons for cash ?

Trump's pardon to General Flynn covered all past crimes, known and unknown. Some legal experts say it isn't possible to pardon a crime that hasn't been discovered yet.

Is it likely that the Trumpsters like Giuliani and Trump's own family will receive similar pardons of known and unknown crimes ?

I guess all the world can do is hope for the best until January 20. Nobody in the US government with the power to remove Trump appears interested.


----------



## MrMatt (Dec 21, 2011)

james4beach said:


> I think Trump is crazy, as in, actually crazy. Mentally ill.
> 
> And look at the people he sticks close to. Rudy Giuliani is also downright nuts. Joe DiGenova, another Trump lawyer, yesterday called for the execution (killing) of a previous DHS official.
> 
> ...


I don't think he's as much mentally ill, more a delusional narcissist.

I agree, I'd be suspicious of people who actually support these guys.
However the other guys aren't any better, other than Biden, I don't think they're mentally ill, they're simply evil.


----------



## sags (May 15, 2010)

Trump is telling supporters he may run in 2024. Or, maybe he will be pushing one of his kids forward.......Ivanka seems most likely.

The Republican hopefuls won't be able to raise money or mount an election bid while he is still lurking in the background.

The Republicans brought home a baby alligator and everyone thought it was cute. Then the alligator grew into an adult alligator and ate everyone....the end.


----------



## andrewf (Mar 1, 2010)

MrMatt said:


> I don't think he's as much mentally ill, more a delusional narcissist.
> 
> I agree, I'd be suspicious of people who actually support these guys.
> However the other guys aren't any better, other than Biden, I don't think they're mentally ill, they're simply evil.


Narcissistic personality disorder is in DSM-IV, which some would use as a yardstick for characterizing mental illness.


----------



## MrMatt (Dec 21, 2011)

andrewf said:


> Narcissistic personality disorder is in DSM-IV, which some would use as a yardstick for characterizing mental illness.


While I think Trump and Trudeau, are both narcissists, I am not diagnosing them as having narcissistic personality disorder.


----------



## james4beach (Nov 15, 2012)

MrMatt said:


> However the other guys aren't any better, other than Biden, I don't think they're mentally ill, they're simply evil.


Ohh I see, Democrats are evil.

MrMatt are you getting these kooky ideas from Jon Voight? Shown here in a spot produced by far right evangelical Christians.

Let's listen to the wise words of Jon Voight: "This is ... a battle of righteousness versus Satan. Yes, Satan. Because *these leftists are evil*."

Wait a second... could our very own MrMatt actually be Jon Voight?


----------



## MrMatt (Dec 21, 2011)

james4beach said:


> Ohh I see, Democrats are evil.
> 
> MrMatt are you getting these kooky ideas from Jon Voight? Shown here in a spot produced by far right evangelical Christians.
> 
> ...


There are lots of bad ideas in the Republican party as well, I'm sure you can think of several examples.

The problem is that the Biden platform has a lot of plans that are going to hurt a lot of people.
When you spend years building a platform where the obvious and predictable outcome is harm to the citizens of the country, I think that's evil.

It's malevolence or incompetence, are you suggesting that they're incompetent?


----------



## Beaver101 (Nov 14, 2011)

james4beach said:


> ...
> 
> *Wait a second... could our very own MrMatt actually be Jon Voight?*


 ... intriguing question.


----------



## bgc_fan (Apr 5, 2009)

The disconnect with Trump is interesting when you see some of the criticisms of Obama:
Drone strikes: Obama - 1,878 in 8 years, Trump - 2,243 in 2 years (more by now, but the Whitehouse no longer reports the numbers... strange that happens when the Trump government was supposed to be more transparent).
Golf: Obama - 333 days in 8 years, Trump - 268 days in 4 years
Executive orders: Obama - 276 in 8 years, Trump - 193 in 4 years


----------



## MrMatt (Dec 21, 2011)

bgc_fan said:


> The disconnect with Trump is interesting when you see some of the criticisms of Obama:
> Drone strikes: Obama - 1,878 in 8 years, Trump - 2,243 in 2 years (more by now, but the Whitehouse no longer reports the numbers... strange that happens when the Trump government was supposed to be more transparent).
> Golf: Obama - 333 days in 8 years, Trump - 268 days in 4 years
> Executive orders: Obama - 276 in 8 years, Trump - 193 in 4 years


Regarding drone strikes, as long as they were all legitimate targets, good.
Obama dropped some 26k bombs in the last year of his presidency, if they were valid targets, again good for him.

I'm all for the death penalty on sufficiently bad people.

As for golfing, I think Government interference makes things worse, so more days golfing is arguably a good thing.


----------



## james4beach (Nov 15, 2012)

MrMatt said:


> There are lots of bad ideas in the Republican party as well, I'm sure you can think of several examples.
> 
> The problem is that the Biden platform has a lot of plans that are going to hurt a lot of people.
> When you spend years building a platform where the obvious and predictable outcome is harm to the citizens of the country, I think that's evil.
> ...


I don't think the Biden platform has plans that will hurt a lot of people, not at all. I think they have plans to help more people and reduce the harm being caused to citizens.


----------



## james4beach (Nov 15, 2012)

MrMatt said:


> The problem is that the Biden platform has a lot of plans that are going to hurt a lot of people.
> *When you spend years building a platform where the obvious and predictable outcome is harm to the citizens of the country, I think that's evil.*


Have you considered that your analysis may be faulty, and these outcomes you think of are not as "obvious" or "predictable" as you think?

In fact, the outcomes of what the Biden team are working on could be very helpful to the citizens. By your line of thinking, and using your preferred lingo, that would make them good or even "angelic".

If you think about this a bit more, I think you will quickly find that the Biden team could actually be angelic forces of righteousness. You're welcome @MrMatt no need to thank me.

You must feel better now that you realize that the Democrats could actually be righteous or angelic. In fact I think I did see a bit of an angelic glow around Kamala Harris... she literally wards off evil.


----------



## MrMatt (Dec 21, 2011)

james4beach said:


> I don't think the Biden platform has plans that will hurt a lot of people, not at all. I think they have plans to help more people and reduce the harm being caused to citizens.











Joe Biden for President: Official Campaign Website


We are in a battle for the soul of this nation. Join our campaign to elect Joe Biden for President of the United States.




joebiden.com





I think many of the ideas are well intentioned, but they amount to little more than "I'll hike taxes to give you more".

Unfortunately there are also a number of simply bad ideas.


----------



## MrMatt (Dec 21, 2011)

james4beach said:


> Have you considered that your analysis may be faulty, and these outcomes you think of are not as "obvious" or "predictable" as you think?
> 
> In fact, the outcomes of what the Biden team are working on could be very helpful to the citizens. By your line of thinking, and using your preferred lingo, that would make them good or even "angelic".
> 
> ...


I can't accept the idea that the party of racism and sexism is righteous or good.
They are blatantly advocating for systematic racism, right there in their platform.

Racism is bad. I thought that was obvious. If you think racism is "angelic" I don't think we have any thing to discuss.


----------



## fstamand (Mar 24, 2015)

MrMatt said:


> They are blatantly advocating for systematic racism, right there in their platform.


Please point out where exactly there is racism in his platform.

Racism goes against the grain of liberal values.


----------



## andrewf (Mar 1, 2010)

^It is bizzaro-world racism and sexism because there is positive discrimination in favour of some disadvantaged minorities and women. I am sympathetic to this view to a point. I think we should really be addressing socioeconomic inequality, not using race or gender as a proxy. There are many poor white folks that could use a leg up as well. In some contexts, such positive racism disadvantages some POC over others. See how Asians are discriminated against at some universities for admissions.


----------



## MrMatt (Dec 21, 2011)

andrewf said:


> ^It is bizzaro-world racism and sexism because there is positive discrimination in favour of some disadvantaged minorities and women. I am sympathetic to this view to a point. I think we should really be addressing socioeconomic inequality, not using race or gender as a proxy. There are many poor white folks that could use a leg up as well. In some contexts, such positive racism disadvantages some POC over others. See how Asians are discriminated against at some universities for admissions.


I agree, we should address problems, and not use race and gender as a proxy.

I'm glad you seem to understand that racism is bad, but you still seem to think that "sometimes it's ok".

The real thing is that using proxies to solve problems with racist/sexist quotas, you're looking at symptoms, you're failing to understand the real reasons for the inequality, which are varied and complex.

Thomas Sowell wrote a decent book on this, which thoroughly discredits that inequality is due to race.

The problem is lets say we have a group of 10 people.
8 group A, 2 group B
They are all good, everyone is happy, everyone pulls their weight.

Someone decides there isn't enough group B representation. Why? Because apparently feature X matters. If X is a protected characteristic, and isn't related to job performance, I don't think it should be a consideration.

The problem is that a lot of people assume equality, and assume discrimination, which may or may not be the case.
I hold that in some cases it is discrimination, in other cases it's something else.
In my experience people gravitate towards fields suited to their personality and abilities.

I think widescale social engineering to encourage people into fields that they may or may not be interested in could be problematic.


"Positive discrimination" doesn't address problems that aren't, at their root, discrimination.
Secondly I don't think there is such a thing as "Positive discrimination". 
It's like saying "oh no they're the good racists".
BLM and the KKK want the same things.


----------



## 5Lgreenback (Mar 21, 2015)

^ Its also a way to exacerbate racial tensions and ensure we keep looking at everything through a lens of racial discrimination. Clever, but ultimately evil policy / ideology I agree, even if many subscribers have good intentions.


----------



## MrMatt (Dec 21, 2011)

5Lgreenback said:


> ^ Its also a way to exacerbate racial tensions and ensure we keep looking at everything through a lens of racial discrimination. Clever, but ultimately evil policy / ideology I agree, even if many subscribers have good intentions.


Actually the leaders of these groups benefit from racial tension. It's harmful to the group, but the leader see no problems exploiting them for their benefit.

I think ordinary uninformed people see the headline and think it's good, while remaining ignorant of the problems.
Which is exactly my point with the Biden platform, bad ideas that sound good to the uninformed.


----------



## 5Lgreenback (Mar 21, 2015)

MrMatt said:


> Actually the leaders of these groups benefit from racial tension. It's harmful to the group, but the leader see no problems exploiting them for their benefit.


Exactly. 

This is not to say I don't think there are issues of racism that we as a society need to work on. But the rise of a certain political ideology of seeing (creating) racism everywhere and implementing horrible policies to "combat racism" needs to be called out and held accountable.


----------



## sags (May 15, 2010)

The problem with that theory is that it assumes people in those racial or gender groups are not included because they lack the merit or qualifications to be there.

As President - elect Biden assembles a diverse administration reflective of the general population, the critics say he is discriminating and meritocracy should prevail.

But as James Clyburn said.......he personally knows 10 well qualified candidates from diverse backgrounds very capable of filling those positions.

The problem with meritocracy is that it is highly subjective to the person making the appointments.


----------



## MrMatt (Dec 21, 2011)

sags said:


> The problem with that theory is that it assumes people in those racial or gender groups are not included because they lack the merit or qualifications to be there.
> 
> As President - elect Biden assembles a diverse administration reflective of the general population, the critics say he is discriminating and meritocracy should prevail.
> 
> ...


Well that's the point.
You as an outsider have no way of knowing if the reason they were selected was because of merit, ability, or discrimination.

People who demand quotas are basically assuming that the problem is always discrimination.

I personally haven't said his appointments are meritless, I just feel that someone who trumpets that they hit diversity targets was likely aiming for those targets, and as such was likely discriminating to hit the targets.


----------



## andrewf (Mar 1, 2010)

I would hate to be a woman, be appointed to a job, and have my boss brag about the fact that I am a woman. It's saying that you're a token, and at least part of the reason you were picked is some immutable characteristic of yours, and not your merit.


----------



## MrMatt (Dec 21, 2011)

andrewf said:


> I would hate to be a woman, be appointed to a job, and have my boss brag about the fact that I am a woman. It's saying that you're a token, and at least part of the reason you were picked is some immutable characteristic of yours, and not your merit.


What is even worse is when everyone who is new to working with you, checks with your coworkers asks if you're any good.


----------



## sags (May 15, 2010)

Republicans aren't complaining that Biden's diverse picks aren't qualified. They are complaining because they are Democrats.

If Biden picked an all black Republican administration, the Republicans would be cheering the diversity.........LOL.


----------



## Beaver101 (Nov 14, 2011)

'If I lost, I'd be a very gracious loser,' Trump said during a rally where he falsely claimed he won an election that he lost

... LMAO


----------



## andrewf (Mar 1, 2010)

What a clown. I don't understand the people who worship him.


----------



## james4beach (Nov 15, 2012)

andrewf said:


> What a clown. I don't understand the people who worship him.


I don't understand it either, but one big group which supports him are fundamentalist Christians

Some evangelical leaders have strongly suggested that Trump is a kind of messiah who will save the world


----------



## james4beach (Nov 15, 2012)

Trump released a video tonight in which he said: "*Maybe the next administration will be ME*"

So this isn't over. He's suggesting he might still do an illegal takeover of the US Government. The possibility of a coup is back on the table.









In a video from the White House, Trump once more suggests he won't let go of the presidency, saying maybe the next administration 'will be me'


Trump has recently floated calling for a special counsel investigation into the election and implementing martial law.




www.businessinsider.com





Over the last few days, he's repeatedly met with Michael Flynn (retired general who pleaded guilty to crimes) and Sidney Powell (a conspiracy theory nut). So he's surrounding himself with extremists and lunatics. Giuliani too.

He has been firing everyone who does not do what he demands. He fired all the top Pentagon staff and fired the Attorney General (who leaves his post tomorrow). Remember, the AG said there was no election fraud and has not cooperated with Trump's attempt to grab power.

These are far right extremists who are trying to overthrow the USA.


----------



## AltaRed (Jun 8, 2009)

There appears to be a lot more to come from this drama. A lot of damage can be done if Trump really does a 'hail mary' with a scorched earth policy. Even after Congress cements Joe Biden's win on Jan 6th, Trump is still president for 14 days. It may well come down to a mutiny of brave Departmental souls, if not Cabinet secretaries, to defy (not carry out) certain Trump orders. You couldn't write a movie script for this.


----------



## MrMatt (Dec 21, 2011)

Yeah, I think he's more narcistic than anyone gave him credit for.
I don't think anyone expected him to be this much of a sore loser.

Fortunately there are a number of checks on the presidents power. 
I really hope this serves as a warning to never give the government, or any one particular person too much power. It's dangerous.

For any Pro-Trump people out there who think he should have this power, do you really want Biden to have these powers?


----------



## kcowan (Jul 1, 2010)

Now that they realize the risks inherent in their system, they should make corrections to the safeguards.


----------



## MrMatt (Dec 21, 2011)

kcowan said:


> Now that they realize the risks inherent in their system, they should make corrections to the safeguards.


I wish we had some of those safeguards.


----------



## andrewf (Mar 1, 2010)

MrMatt said:


> Yeah, I think he's more narcistic than anyone gave him credit for.
> I don't think anyone expected him to be this much of a sore loser.
> 
> Fortunately there are a number of checks on the presidents power.
> ...


I knew how narcissistic he was in 2017 and I am not surprised. Reminds of Bill Maher telling everyone for years that Trump is not leaving if he loses. This was predictable.


----------



## sags (May 15, 2010)

Trump is a danger to America and the world until Biden takes over.

He just pardoned 4 men who were members of the Blackwater private security firm in Iraq (owned by the brother of Trump's Education Secretary Betsy DeVos) when they slaughtered 17 Iraqi men, women and children sitting in their cars at a road intersection. They were convicted in Federal court after 30 witnesses were brought to testify in America from Iraq. They were all found guilty and sentenced to long prison sentences, including a life sentence. Now they walk, and basically tell Iraqis their lives are worthless. One father had to scrape the brains of his child off the sidewalk.

Pardons for others.......General Flynn, and some involved in lying to the FBI and other crimes. Trump is likely to pardon more of his felon friends like Giuliani.

White House insiders are so worried about his rantings and crazy behavior that they are worried about what he might do in the remaining days.

Some experts say the military and cabinet will refuse illegal orders from Trump. I hope they are right.


----------



## Eclectic12 (Oct 20, 2010)

MrMatt said:


> Yeah, I think he's more narcistic than anyone gave him credit for.
> I don't think anyone expected him to be this much of a sore loser ...


That the thread exists as well as the comment "can we drop it now" seems pretty clear evidence that some are not that surprised and were talking about it a fair amount.


Cheers


----------



## james4beach (Nov 15, 2012)

MrMatt said:


> For any Pro-Trump people out there who think he should have this power, do you really want Biden to have these powers?


This is an extremely important consideration and I wish MAGA thought about this more.


----------



## MrMatt (Dec 21, 2011)

james4beach said:


> This is an extremely important consideration and I wish MAGA thought about this more.


But they didn't, just like the DNC didn't when Obama was in power.

Then Trump tried to get more power, and the Republicans supported it.

Now with Biden in power the Democrats will support more power grabs.

Then when the Republicans gain power... 
Politicians almost never surrender power.

It's what makes the Royal family granting Parliment so much power so astonishing.


----------



## Beaver101 (Nov 14, 2011)

james4beach said:


> Trump released a video tonight in which he said: "*Maybe the next administration will be ME*"
> 
> So this isn't over. He's suggesting he might still do an illegal takeover of the US Government. The possibility of a coup is back on the table.
> 
> ...


 ... let's see if the competent one with his band can carry this out. There is a first for everything.

This will just prove to the world as just how democratic that "country (if still) is / will be" ... the United States of America (to be renamed) governed by one man and his gang.


----------



## Beaver101 (Nov 14, 2011)

AltaRed said:


> There appears to be a lot more to come from this drama. A lot of damage can be done if Trump really does a 'hail mary' with a scorched earth policy. Even after Congress cements Joe Biden's win on Jan 6th, Trump is still president for 14 days. It may well come down to a mutiny of brave Departmental souls, if not Cabinet secretaries, to defy (not carry out) certain Trump orders.* You couldn't write a movie script for this.*


 ... except someone thinks he is still on a (his) reality show.


----------



## sags (May 15, 2010)

Republicans.........behold what you created.


----------



## james4beach (Nov 15, 2012)

sags said:


> Republicans.........behold what you created.


And they still stand by him.

Trump is currently pardoning every crook and war criminal he can find. He just pardoned some child murderers. He pardoned his relative, Kushner's father, who is a total scumbag.

This is the Republican Party... corrupt at the core, no morals, no belief in America, no belief in democracy. Run by a circle of elites who only care about installing themselves in positions of power. The crooked capitalists constantly embezzle money, cheat the tax system, steal from the USA and steal from the public.

Families like the Kushners (extremely wealthy) are basically the modern American aristocracy, and The Republicans are the gang which cement their power and influence.

And how stupid the American public is, to vote in such aristocratic power and think that a circle of billionaire elites can possibly represent their interests.


----------



## sags (May 15, 2010)

The good news is the SDNY investigations aren't covered by Presidential pardons and Giuliani, Trump and some of those pardoned are going to be appearing in courts there soon.

Civil cases are also not affected by Presidential pardons and Trump is facing a bunch of those.


----------



## james4beach (Nov 15, 2012)

sags said:


> The good news is the SDNY investigations aren't covered by Presidential pardons and Giuliani, Trump and some of those pardoned are going to be appearing in courts there soon.
> 
> Civil cases are also not affected by Presidential pardons and Trump is facing a bunch of those.


I am still hopeful that New York state is going to destroy Trump and his crooked family.

He's also engaged in repeated obstruction of justice. Even the pardons may qualify as obstruction as justice, because he is clearly using them as rewards *for not testifying against him*. His henchmen who kept their mouths shut and didn't cooperate with prosecutors are now getting pardons - that's a loyalty reward.

Obstructing justice is not a legal or permitted use of presidential pardons.


----------



## sags (May 15, 2010)

Yup......and pardons don't give immunity from future charges either.

The top prosecutor said on CNN that the Mueller team believed Trump had signaled that pardons were coming so they planned accordingly.

He said Manafort spent 2 years in prison and still faces confiscation of his wealth and possible future charges and civil lawsuits.

If new evidence pops up.......these felons could be facing new investigations and charges into different crimes.

The prosecutors may not be "stable geniuses" but they knew what they were doing.


----------



## MrMatt (Dec 21, 2011)

sags said:


> Yup......and pardons don't give immunity from future charges either.
> 
> The top prosecutor said on CNN that the Mueller team believed Trump had signaled that pardons were coming so they planned accordingly.
> 
> ...


Actually they can pardon before charges are brought.









Can Trump pardon himself before he leaves the White House?


As U.S. President Donald Trump's time in the White House nears its end, experts explain how he can use his presidential powers to pardon himself for crimes he hasn't even been charged with yet.




www.ctvnews.ca




"""
According to an 1866 U.S. Supreme Court ruling, the president's pardon power "extends to every offence known to the law, and may be exercised at any time after its commission, either before legal proceedings are taken, or during their pendency, or after conviction and judgment." 

David Dyzenhaus, a law professor at the University of Toronto, explained that the president's power to pre-emptively pardon someone means that person is forgiven for any crime that may have been committed during the time set out in the pardon.
"The president can pardon people for offences that no one has yet to allege," he said during a telephone interview with CTVNews.ca on Wednesday.
"""


----------



## sags (May 15, 2010)

_"You cannot be pardoned for future crimes and each of those people, Roger Stone, Paul Manafort, Michael Flynn, has evidence in their head," he said. 
"They have information that a grand jury could seek, they can all be given grand jury subpoenas, required to testify in the grand jury."
Michael Flynn, the president's first national security adviser, was pardoned in November having been convicted for twice lying to prosecutors about his contacts with Russia.

Mr Weissman added: "If they then lie before the grand jury, which is a new crime, and that happens after 20 January, there is no president Trump at that point to give them a get out of jail free card.
"And so all of this effort by the president to shield his friends and allies and potential conspirators will be for nought.

"Because all of these people can be in that trick box of being put before the grand jury where they either have to tell the truth or they risk being prosecuted for a new crime of perjury and obstruction of justice"._









Manafort and Stone may be hauled back to court despite Trump pardon, says top Mueller probe prosecutor


‘You cannot be pardoned for future crimes,’ says Andrew Weissman




www.independent.co.uk


----------



## Retiredguy (Jul 24, 2013)

sags said:


> Yup......and pardons don't give immunity from future charges either.
> 
> The top prosecutor said on CNN that the Mueller team believed Trump had signaled that pardons were coming so they planned accordingly.
> 
> ...


I saw that interview and I believe what he said was that they contemplated that T would give him a pardon so they made the seizures, forfeitures and fines civil in addition to being criminal consequence's of his convictions and pleas because T can't pardon civil forfeitures. These amounted to several M$. In other words the financial consequences to Manafort cannot be undone by T's pardon, only the criminal can. Also of course he actually was in jail for 2 years and that too can't be undone, _only_ the remaining jail sentence and criminal record gets wiped clean.

I'll be surprized if T or any of his criminal cronies/family ever get what I'd wish for. Biden and Washington will just want to move on and try and fix the damage and memory of the T era.


----------



## sags (May 15, 2010)

True.......but none of them are protected against future crimes, which may be difficult to avoid for career criminals.


----------



## sags (May 15, 2010)

Colonel Lawrence Wilkerson said on MSNBC that the US military could "recall" General Flynn to active duty and then court martial him with a charge of sedition.

That..........would be way off the charts, but shows the depth of anger at General Flynn for how much he dishonored the military.

Like so many others, General Flynn went from a person with a high reputation to a common criminal.....just by being in Trump's orbit.

As one Trump biographer said a long time ago.....Trump is toxic and poisons everyone around him.


----------



## MrMatt (Dec 21, 2011)

I hope the Democrats realize that there is a real danger prosecuting political opponents when they are out of power.

I'm not saying anyone is innocent, or that I particularly care for any of these people, but if it's seen as a politically motivated attack, it will just increase divisiveness and partisanship.


----------



## andrewf (Mar 1, 2010)

Kind of went out the window when Trump was leading chants of "lock her up", or said to Clinton that she would be in jail if he were in charge.


----------



## james4beach (Nov 15, 2012)

No president before Trump has ever pardoned murderers. Then he comes along and pardons 6 murderers, including child-killers.


Michael Behenna: convicted for murdering an Iraqi detainee

Clint Lorance: convicted of murdering three men in Afghanistan who posed no threat

Slatten, Slough, Liberty and Heard: these four mercenaries (not soldiers) massacred 14 civilians including two little boys. Slatten was convicted of first-degree murder, and started the shooting. The initial sentences were life in prison for Slatten and 30 year sentences for the others.


Trump has not only been a terrible president, but is a downright evil person. These pardons are also angering Iraqis and it's exactly this kind of thing which fuels hatred towards Americans (and allies) in the middle east. If you ever wonder what fuels rebels and next generations of terrorists, here you go. Military people are already saying that Trump's pardons are putting US troops in danger and jeopardizing the entire US/Iraq relationship.


----------



## MrMatt (Dec 21, 2011)

andrewf said:


> Kind of went out the window when Trump was leading changes of "lock her up", or said to Clinton that she would be in jail if he were in charge.


That was a bad idea too, fortunately it was dropped once he won.

The divisiveness in modern politics is getting pretty scary.


----------



## andrewf (Mar 1, 2010)

Don't worry, the democrats are pretty feckless and not as ruthless as the Republicans. Obama let the bush 2 administration skate on some pretty serious accusations.


----------



## Retiredguy (Jul 24, 2013)

The ultimate test of Biden will be *IF* the investigation known to be happening leads to charges, conviction, jail, for his son. For senior it's a no win as even if the investigation concludes with no wrong doing it will be trumpeted that dad interferred (_obstructed_). As we know even if there is no evidence of wrongdoing, its a easy sell to the millions of Retrumplicans who gleefully believe their messiah. This whole thing will be a major distraction and the soon to be former President will drive it.


----------



## sags (May 15, 2010)

The Hunter Biden laptop could be a big problem for the Joe Biden Presidency, or it could be a big problem for Rudy Giuliani if the hard drive was tampered with.

It will be interesting to see the results of the investigation and who ends up with charges laid against them.


----------



## Tostig (Nov 18, 2020)

sags said:


> The Hunter Biden laptop could be a big problem for the Joe Biden Presidency, or it could be a big problem for Rudy Giuliani if the hard drive was tampered with.
> 
> It will be interesting to see the results of the investigation and who ends up with charges laid against them.


Depends if Trump really does go through with the investigation. With 25 days to go until the inauguration, I don't think the investigation will be complete. Then President Biden can cancel the investigation. If the investigation does lead to charges, Trump has set a precedent in which Joe Biden can pardon Hunter Biden.


----------



## Tostig (Nov 18, 2020)

Tostig said:


> Depends if Trump really does go through with the investigation. With 25 days to go until the inauguration, I don't think the investigation will be complete. Then President Biden can cancel the investigation. If the investigation does lead to charges, Trump has set a precedence in which Biden can pardon his son.


----------



## Retiredguy (Jul 24, 2013)

What do u mean if Trump goes thru with the investigation? It's already ongoing and has been for some months. Biden has repeatedly said he will not direct or interfere with the DOJ. But it could be Biden's AG that appts a special prosecutor if the investigation requires it and it may well require it to show greater independence. Yes we all know t has set repulsive precedents.... that's why it's a no win for P46. Also why its an ultimate test for a father, with a pardon in his pocket. I suggest Barr be appt as spl prosecutor. If nothing results their boy cleared him.


----------



## andrewf (Mar 1, 2010)

Retiredguy said:


> I suggest Barr be appt as spl prosecutor. If nothing results their boy cleared him.


They only have one boy: Trump. Everyone else is a traitor if they don't do as the Don commands.


----------



## sags (May 15, 2010)

Even if a special prosecutor found evidence of a crime that they considered could be proven beyond a reasonable doubt in a court of law,..... good luck finding a jury that would unanimously convict Hunter Biden.

There would almost surely be jurors who wouldn't convict him regardless of the evidence, just because they hate Trump that much.

Trump has turned everything upside down, including the justice system.


----------



## sags (May 15, 2010)

I think it likely a special prosecutor would conclude they couldn't proceed to trial citing they lacked a reasonable prospect of conviction........and end it there.


----------



## sags (May 15, 2010)

Trump is now calling for a massive protest of his supporters in Washington DC on Jan 6th....the day that the Congress counts the electoral votes and declares Biden as President.

_Be there, will be wild._......is what Trump has tweeted, and it probably will be. Trump is openly trying to forcefully subvert the election results now.

He has even talked to people in the last few days about declaring martial law.

This isn't about raising money anymore. He has already done that. This is about the level of fear that Trump has about losing Presidential immunity from crimes he is facing and trying to force President - elect Biden to negotiate a full pardon for him and his family at all levels of government.

Trump is trying to force a total blanket of immunity for anything he did at any time in any place......ever.


----------



## james4beach (Nov 15, 2012)

sags said:


> Trump is now calling for a massive protest of his supporters in Washington DC on Jan 6th....the day that the Congress counts the electoral votes and declares Biden as President.
> 
> _Be there, will be wild._......is what Trump has tweeted, and it probably will be. Trump is openly trying to forcefully subvert the election results now.


He is trying to overthrow the government


----------



## Beaver101 (Nov 14, 2011)

^^ In any case, he should lock himself inside the WH's bunker and never come out.


----------



## sags (May 15, 2010)

Biden should be escorted into the White House while Trump is in Florida. He should be named "acting President" of the US.

Then all the political, intelligence, and military leaders should hold a press conference together and state they stand behind Biden as President.

They should also warn that any violence or uprising from the Trump mob will be put down swiftly by any force necessary.

They cannot allow Trump to continue for another 25 days on his drug fueled rampage against America and the people.


----------



## sags (May 15, 2010)

So Trump finally signs the $2.4 Trillion dollar spending bill, so now he can focus on encouraging a white nationalist riot in Washington DC on Jan 6.


----------



## MrMatt (Dec 21, 2011)

sags said:


> Biden should be escorted into the White House while Trump is in Florida. He should be named "acting President" of the US.
> 
> Then all the political, intelligence, and military leaders should hold a press conference together and state they stand behind Biden as President.
> 
> ...


Wow, you're literally advocating for a coup of a democratically elected leader.


----------



## MrMatt (Dec 21, 2011)

sags said:


> Trump is now calling for a massive protest of his supporters in Washington DC on Jan 6th....the day that the Congress counts the electoral votes and declares Biden as President.
> 
> _Be there, will be wild._......is what Trump has tweeted, and it probably will be. Trump is openly trying to forcefully subvert the election results now.
> 
> ...


Hey you don't like something, you should protest.
That's part of democracy.

I personally think Trump has gone too far, and people should knock it off. But I'm not out protesting.

I said the same thing when they brought charges against Chauvin, and the riots continued. 

Personally I think non-violent protests should be allowed, and violent riots should not.

That being said, I specifically don't advocate for a coup to overthrow the democratically elected president. That is the unlawful overthrow of Trump, or any unlawful acts to disrupt Biden taking office.

As bad as I think Biden is, and as bad as I think Trump is, I don't think an illegal overthrow of either is a good thing. 
I hope everyone sees this and a new non-partisan effort to implement a more effective system of checks and balances is a good idea.


----------



## Money172375 (Jun 29, 2018)

Trump and Pence should both resign.....let's get on with it. If you were going to be "fired" in 3 weeks, wouldn't you just quit?


----------



## sags (May 15, 2010)

MrMatt said:


> Wow, you're literally advocating for a coup of a democratically elected leader.


A democratically elected leader who has gone insane........yes, I am.

It is Trump who is advocating for a coup by encouraging riots in the streets and talking about martial law.

The loyalty is to the country....not to the President.


----------



## MrMatt (Dec 21, 2011)

Okay, I didn't misunderstand.
I would suggest that you are clearly violating the terms of use.
" including without limitation any transmissions constituting or encouraging conduct that would constitute a criminal offense, "

You've called for a coup to overthrow a democratically elected leader, and confirmed that was the intent of your post.
That is "encouraging conduct that would constitute a criminal offense"
People have been banned for less.


----------



## Tostig (Nov 18, 2020)

MrMatt said:


> As bad as I think Biden is, and as bad as I think Trump is, I don't think an illegal overthrow of either is a good thing.
> I hope everyone sees this and a new non-partisan effort to implement a more effective system of checks and balances is a good idea.


"Either"? I hope your word choice was just an oversight. Trump was LEGALLY overthrown. It's called an election. And as shown in court over 50 times, there was nothing illegal about it.


----------



## MrMatt (Dec 21, 2011)

Tostig said:


> "Either"? I hope your word choice was just an oversight. Trump was LEGALLY overthrown. It's called an election. And as shown in court over 50 times, there was nothing illegal about it.


No Trumps successor was voted in. Biden legally takes over on the 20th 

Sags is suggesting that Biden take over immediately. That's the illegal action I'm refering to.

They should not illegally overthrow either.

There is a legal process to remove Trump, several in fact. Just as there are several legal ways to prevent Biden from taking office.
If there are legitimate concerns, use the process.

Lets be clear, the only person advocating treason is SAGS, and I would hope everyone on this forum will denounce such a act, but you know most won't.

Use a legal process, protest, mass protest, civil disobedience... all on the table, no matter how wacky your position.

Violence, coups and treason. No.


----------



## sags (May 15, 2010)

The US Constitution didn't anticipate this situation, therefore the duly elected political leaders need to step up and appoint Biden as "acting" President today.

The Congress can claim "power of attorney" because Trump is no longer mentally capable of making decisions.

There are NO legal ways to prevent Biden from taking office. Trump is done and trying to burn down America with him.

Trump spends his days on the golf course, tweeting and emailing fund raisers, calls for riots in Washington DC.......and ponders "what would Stalin do".


----------



## MrMatt (Dec 21, 2011)

sags said:


> The US Constitution didn't anticipate this situation, therefore the duly elected political leaders need to step up and appoint Biden as "acting" President today.
> 
> The Congress can claim "power of attorney" because Trump is no longer mentally capable of making decisions.
> 
> ...


No Congress can't declare him unfit. That's why they tried the impeachment thing.

Cabinet and the VP can under the 25th amendment.








The 25th Amendment, explained: how a president can be declared unfit to serve


If the vice president and the Cabinet conclude a president is unwell, they can legally do something about it.




www.vox.com





As far as Biden, there are a number of ways, for one, he could be found unfit before he takes office.

Finally you're calling for a coup. I find it unacceptable that you call for overthrow of a democratically elected government, and remain here, unapologetic.
I am willing to accept a lot of opposing viewpoints, but for you to unabashedly advocate treason is beyond the pale.

To blatantly argue for the commission of a serious criminal act is not acceptable, and I don't believe such discussions, or people advocating for criminal action (such as sags) belong here.

People have been banned for far less.


----------



## sags (May 15, 2010)

The Constitution has deep flaws in it that can be addressed in the future. Until then Biden can move to the White House and take over command immediately.


----------



## Retiredguy (Jul 24, 2013)

As despicable as T is, I agree with MM on this one. I had similar thoughts when I first read post #122.


----------



## moderator2 (Sep 20, 2017)

Tostig said:


> Trump was LEGALLY overthrown. It's called an election. And as shown in court over 50 times, there was nothing illegal about it.





Retiredguy said:


> As despicable as T is, I agree with MM on this one. I had similar thoughts when I first read post #122.


I've reviewed the posts. I don't think that anything written in #122 violates terms of use or is supporting illegal activity. Biden is the democratically elected leader AND they have the extremely unusual situation of a current lame-duck president (Trump) who is actively planning an undemocratic coup. There really isn't any precedent for what to do in this situation.


----------



## Retiredguy (Jul 24, 2013)

Who must, small d, democratically take office Jan 20 at noon, not sooner, unless legally authorized to do so.

ADDED my above was written before Mod edited his post or at least before I saw his edited post.


----------



## Retiredguy (Jul 24, 2013)

Pretty sure that if (god forbid) t was elected in Nov 2023 and stormed the office saying it was his, using the military to threaten the electorate, anytime before Jan 20 2024 that Sags et al might then take a hypocritical position against a democratically elected Trump.


----------



## MrMatt (Dec 21, 2011)

moderator2 said:


> I've reviewed the posts. I don't think that anything written in #122 violates terms of use or is supporting illegal activity. Biden is the democratically elected leader AND they have the extremely unusual situation of a current lame-duck president (Trump) who is actively planning an undemocratic coup. There really isn't any precedent for what to do in this situation.


Did you read post #127 where sags explicitly confirms he is advocating a coup?

Then restates it in #133

I am not advocating for Trump or Biden to plan a coup. Both of those are illegal, and to advocate for either is a ToS violation.
SAGS is openly advocating for criminal acts, and has confirmed that is the intent of the posting.

The fact that "Trump is doing it too" isn't a defense.
Oh and nobody here is supporting a Trump led coup anyway.

Clearly the moderation is biased.


----------



## MrMatt (Dec 21, 2011)

I've said that here in' Canada we're lucky, all 3 party leaders, well at least the main 2 are better. I said this years ago.
Personally I don't think Trump should be president, I think right now he's doing a lot to undermine his legacy. Which is unfortunate, he's managed a number of good things for the US.
I also don't think Biden should be president, he's clearly suffering mental impairment, I honestly think he's unfit for office. 
I have no opinion on Pence, but if he feels Trump is unfit, he could remove him quickly under the law. But I honestly think that would be close to suicide. The Republicans would be after anyone who votes out Trump, and the Democrats have already said they're coming for members of the Trump administration. (Maybe that was a bad idea?)
Harris is evil, but I guess since she isn't obviously unfit I hope she replaces Biden soon. She can do so as soon as the cabinet is in place.
Since it looks bad, I hope that Biden simply resigns.

Look at that, no criminal advocacy.


----------



## sags (May 15, 2010)

Apparently, there is nothing that Trump could do that would cause Mr. Matt to support an intervention by the leaders of the Congress and President Elect.

Perhaps Mr. Matt should send an email to Thomas Jefferson, tell him the Constitution doesn't cover this kind of situation, and ask for advice.


----------



## MrMatt (Dec 21, 2011)

sags said:


> Apparently, there is nothing that Trump could do that would cause Mr. Matt to support an intervention by the leaders of the Congress and President Elect.
> 
> Perhaps Mr. Matt should send an email to Thomas Jefferson, tell him the Constitution doesn't cover this kind of situation, and ask for advice.


You're close to right, there is very little that Trump could do that would cause me to support Treason and a coup against a democratically elected leader.
You continue advocating for criminal acts. I'm not going to give a checklist of when I think it's okay to to start advocating for the commission of crimes.

I believe that such a latter was already sent to Mr Jefferson, it is the 25th ammendment.

There is a legal process to immediately remove Trump from office. Those with the power to remove him have not decided to do so.
Congress does not have this power.


----------



## sags (May 15, 2010)

The American people own the White House. Biden and Harris can move right in. They could challenge Trump right from the Oval Office.

Trump could remain offically as the President, but have all authority and security clearances removed. 

He can sit upstairs in his housecoat and slippers and tweet.


----------



## saskstu (Oct 21, 2013)

There is a legal succession to the Presidency. Until 20 Jan at noon, it is Pence, Pelosi then Grasslet (president pro for a of the Senate). Anything else would be illegal. After inauguration then Biden can and will occupy the White House.


----------



## sags (May 15, 2010)

The only provision in the US Constitution for the immediate replacement of a President is the death of a President. 

This was used when President Kennedy was assassinated and VP Lyndon Johnson was sworn in on Air Force One on the flight to Washington DC.

Any other provisions, such as the 25th Amendment are long processes, and aren't applicable in a situation that requires immediate attention.



https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/GPO-CONAN-1992/pdf/GPO-CONAN-1992-10-26.pdf


----------



## sags (May 15, 2010)

As it stands right now, according to the Constitution, Trump could rampage for the remaining days of his Presidency and nothing could stop him.

That.......is a huge defect in the Constitution.


----------



## MrMatt (Dec 21, 2011)

sags said:


> The only provision in the US Constitution for the immediate replacement of a President is the death of a President.
> 
> This was used when President Kennedy was assassinated and VP Lyndon Johnson was sworn in on Air Force One on the flight to Washington DC.
> 
> ...





sags said:


> As it stands right now, according to the Constitution, Trump could rampage for the remaining days of his Presidency and nothing could stop him.
> 
> That.......is a huge defect in the Constitution.


That's simply not true.
The president can be deemed unfit by the VP & cabinet and replaced immediately. I posted that hours ago in this thread.

I've reported your false news about the election and I'm putting you on ignore.

You are ignorant/misinformed and unwilling to learn.
You are spreading false information.
You're advocating the commission of crimes.


----------



## james4beach (Nov 15, 2012)

It's true that Trump could go on a rampage for the next X weeks. He could absolutely tear apart the US government. He's already destroyed part of the Pentagon (by firing top staff) and countless other departments, and he could continue firing people all over government. But that is how the US system works. And remember, the American people chose him. Many Americans hate the federal government, and don't value or respect government institutions or national institutions.

As sad as it is, this is what the voters wanted. And yes, it absolutely helps America's enemies (they can only cheer the destruction of the USA) but again, this is what the American people wanted. Many Americans are cheering as Trump tears apart the US government.

This is likely why Russia supported Trump as a candidate. From day one, it was clear he would weaken the USA. And during the 2016 election, Russia interfered in the elections and preferred candidate Trump over Clinton. I'll bet that China and North Korea are also pretty happy that Trump won.

At the same time, Biden can't take power until the appointed date. What gets more complicated is if Trump actively disrupts the upcoming vote of the electoral results on January 6 to seize power and install himself as dictator. But that hasn't happened yet.


----------



## sags (May 15, 2010)

Trump abuses the laws and Constitution and Mr. Matt defends his right to do it..........sad.

He is a typical Trumpster echoing the same words heard daily on Fox News that Kamala Harris is evil and Joe Biden is mentally incompetent.

A lot of people got the Trump virus.


----------



## sags (May 15, 2010)

Under the leadership of Trump, the Republicans lost the Presidency, the House of Representatives, the Senate and the reputation and careers of many.

The Trump Presidency will be remembered as a sad chapter in American history and a lesson to the people to be careful what they wish for and who they put into power.


----------



## sags (May 15, 2010)

Vice President Al Gore presided over announcing the electoral votes in an election he lost by 500 votes in Florida and declared George W. Bush as President.

Vice President Joe Biden presided over announcing the electoral votes in an election that Hillary Clinton lost and declared Donald Trump as President.

President Trump demands that Vice President Mike Pence refuse to announce the electoral votes that determine Joe President is President and declare Trump as winner instead.

The final desperate days of Donald Trump. 

Hopefully, when VP Pence told Trump he wasn't going to do what Trump wanted, he also told Trump that if he resigned immediately Pence would issue a pardon, but if Trump continues to cause mayhem and trouble until the bitter end......he wouldn't be getting a pardon. 

Maybe that would encourage Trump to leave peacefully now and let VP Pence take over until Biden is officially sworn in on Jan 20.


----------



## Beaver101 (Nov 14, 2011)

sags said:


> Vice President Al Gore presided over announcing the electoral votes in an election he lost by 500 votes in Florida and declared George W. Bush as President.
> 
> Vice President Joe Biden presided over announcing the electoral votes in an election that Hillary Clinton lost and declared Donald Trump as President.
> 
> ...


 ... and it was rumoured(?) that VP Pence wants to run for president in 2024 .... with a legacy of the Dump, who wants a repeat?


----------



## Tostig (Nov 18, 2020)

Beaver101 said:


> ... and it was rumoured(?) that VP Pence wants to run for president in 2024 .... with a legacy of the Dump, who wants a repeat?


It would be interesting if Trump runs as an independent against Pence as the Republican nominee.


----------



## MrMatt (Dec 21, 2011)

Beaver101 said:


> ... and it was rumoured(?) that VP Pence wants to run for president in 2024 .... with a legacy of the Dump, who wants a repeat?


Wait till 4 years of Harris and ask again.


----------



## Beaver101 (Nov 14, 2011)

MrMatt said:


> Wait till 4 years of Harris and ask again.


 ... sorry I don't have a crystal-ball as to when Biden is gonna to die and neither Harris has said anything to this effect.


----------



## MrMatt (Dec 21, 2011)

Beaver101 said:


> ... sorry I don't have a crystal-ball as to when Biden is gonna to die and neither Harris has said anything to this effect.


Did you miss the Freudian slip where Biden referred to it as the Harris administration?
You know they Democrats really wanted Harris, but when she failed so miserably during the primaries they went to using Biden as a Trojan horse.
Want to bet that Biden doesn't make it the full term?


----------



## Beaver101 (Nov 14, 2011)

MrMatt said:


> Did you miss the Freudian slip where Biden referred to it as the Harris administration?
> You know they Democrats really wanted Harris, but when she failed so miserably during the primaries they went to using Biden as a Trojan horse.


 ... and so? Why are you so scared? 


> Want to bet that Biden doesn't make it the full term?


 ... I don't gamble on politics unlike some people.


----------



## MrMatt (Dec 21, 2011)

Beaver101 said:


> ... and so? Why are you so scared?
> ... I don't gamble on politics unlike some people.


Because the Left wing extremists have some very bad ideas.

If they actually manage to implement their plans, it will have disastrous consequences for the US and the world at large (including Canada)


----------



## Money172375 (Jun 29, 2018)

MrMatt said:


> Because the Left wing extremists have some very bad ideas.
> 
> If they actually manage to implement their plans, it will have disastrous consequences for the US and the world at large (including Canada)


You‘re right Matt. Things are going so well with the current crop of extremists. Can I ask that you stop with the doom and gloom under Biden. Save all your comments til 2024 when his administration will be judged.


----------



## Beaver101 (Nov 14, 2011)

MrMatt said:


> Because the Left wing extremists have some very bad ideas.
> 
> If they actually manage to implement their plans, it will have disastrous consequences for the US and the world at large (including Canada)


 ... well then, we (in fact, the entire world) will see how bad Biden and Harris performs. No need to get yourself in a knot when nothing has happened yet other than the crazies storming the capitol at this moment (date & time).


----------



## MrMatt (Dec 21, 2011)

Money172375 said:


> You‘re right Matt. Things are going so well with the current crop of extremists. Can I ask that you stop with the doom and gloom under Biden. Save all your comments til 2024 when his administration will be judged.


Uhhh no.
When politicians put forth a bad plan, I think it is completely reasonable to discuss the negative impacts that it is going to have. It's particularly appropriate on a financial forum when the plan has very significant economic impacts


----------



## MrMatt (Dec 21, 2011)

Well it seems even Trump admits the election is over.


----------



## Tostig (Nov 18, 2020)

1) Just goes to show you that Twitter and Facebook should have suspended his accounts since November 3rd.
2) Does anybody really believe him? He said the same kind of thing at that kiddie desk news conference and then he back tracked like he does so many times before.


----------



## andrewf (Mar 1, 2010)

MrMatt said:


> Did you miss the Freudian slip where Biden referred to it as the Harris administration?
> You know they Democrats really wanted Harris, but when she failed so miserably during the primaries they went to using Biden as a Trojan horse.
> Want to bet that Biden doesn't make it the full term?


Nevermind that Trump supporters stormed the legislature. Gotta distract with baseless conspiracy theories about the vice president elect.


----------



## MrMatt (Dec 21, 2011)

andrewf said:


> Nevermind that Trump supporters stormed the legislature. Gotta distract with baseless conspiracy theories about the vice president elect.


A quote from the President elect is "baseless"?


----------



## andrewf (Mar 1, 2010)

MrMatt said:


> A quote from the President elect is "baseless"?


He often uses the phrase 'Biden Harris administration'. So, a normal person would interpret that comment as a simple verbal flub (akin to 'Tim Apple') and not an accidental tipping of his hand as to their evil plot to let Kamala be the shadow president. You are welcome to live in whatever fantasy land you like, but I think you are as likely to be disappointed in your prognostications as those who claimed Obama was going to intern people in FEMA camps.


----------



## MrMatt (Dec 21, 2011)

andrewf said:


> He often uses the phrase 'Biden Harris administration'. So, a normal person would interpret that comment as a simple verbal flub (akin to 'Tim Apple') and not an accidental tipping of his hand as to their evil plot to let Kamala be the shadow president. You are welcome to live in whatever fantasy land you like, but I think you are as likely to be disappointed in your prognostications as those who claimed Obama was going to intern people in FEMA camps.


And when he refers to it as the "Harris Administration", without the Biden....

Huh, what does Obama conspiracy theories have to do with anything?

As much as I think that Harris is bad, unfortunately I don't believe they're incompetent. I'm more scared they're going to accomplish their goals than fail to do anything.
They control most of the government, and might take extraordinary action to take over the rest of it.


----------



## sags (May 15, 2010)

Biden will stabilize America. Harris will guide it's future.......the right people are in place.


----------



## sags (May 15, 2010)

The stock markets are up because Trump is finally gone and stability will return.

Garth Turner's blog post is right on. Trump's brand is completely destroyed, his followers will drift away to obscurity, and the world will return to normal.

Investors like that scenario.





__





Book and Weblog – Authored by Garth Turner — Greater Fool – Authored by Garth Turner – The Troubled Future of Real Estate







www.greaterfool.ca


----------



## Beaver101 (Nov 14, 2011)

sags said:


> The stock markets are up because Trump is finally gone and stability will return.
> 
> Garth Turner's blog post is right on. *Trump's brand is completely destroyed,* his followers will drift away to obscurity, and the world will return to normal.
> 
> ...


 ... more than that. He may have just killed the Republican Party as well. What a job so well done. 

Top CEOs may cut off funding to Republicans who have supported Trump's election challenge: 'Money is the key way'


----------



## andrewf (Mar 1, 2010)

MrMatt said:


> And when he refers to it as the "Harris Administration", without the Biden....
> 
> Huh, what does Obama conspiracy theories have to do with anything?
> 
> ...


If you say 'Biden Harris administration' a lot, a verbal flub where you miss the first word is not tipping their hand to an evil plot. I thought you believed Joe was senile. Now all of a sudden his verbal pronouncements are completely free of error?

You are promulgating a conspiracy theory based on a verbal flub. It reminds me of similarly unhinged conspiracy theories about Obama interning people in FEMA camps.


----------



## MrMatt (Dec 21, 2011)

andrewf said:


> If you say 'Biden Harris administration' a lot, a verbal flub where you miss the first word is not tipping their hand to an evil plot. I thought you believed Joe was senile. Now all of a sudden his verbal pronouncements are completely free of error?
> 
> You are promulgating a conspiracy theory based on a verbal flub. It reminds me of similarly unhinged conspiracy theories about Obama interning people in FEMA camps.


Taking a quote from someone isn't a conspiracy theory.
The reality is Biden is a very old man who is not capable of the office.


Plus why would you suggest some wacky theory from the 90's?
why not something more mainstream like flat earth?


----------



## andrewf (Mar 1, 2010)

The conspiracy is taking a single verbal flub and extrapolating it to a vast conspiracy by Biden, DNC, etc. to install Harris as president. I don't believe that if the DNC had that power, they would have chosen Harris. I think the DNC was quite happy with Biden being the nominee.

The Obama FEMA camps conspiracy theories are, unsurprisingly, from during Obama's tenure 2008-2016, not the 1990's.


----------



## MrMatt (Dec 21, 2011)

andrewf said:


> The conspiracy is taking a single verbal flub and extrapolating it to a vast conspiracy by Biden, DNC, etc. to install Harris as president. I don't believe that if the DNC had that power, they would have chosen Harris. I think the DNC was quite happy with Biden being the nominee.
> 
> The Obama FEMA camps conspiracy theories are, unsurprisingly, from during Obama's tenure 2008-2016, not the 1990's.


Goes back way further




__





FEMA camps conspiracy theory - Wikipedia







en.wikipedia.org





It's not a very complicated conspiracy, they're pretty open about it.
The reality is Biden is suffering mental decline, the VP selection this round was very important as in both cases it would have been quite likely they will take over from a failing President.

Several people actually suggested that a series of VP debates would be more important because of this.


----------



## sags (May 15, 2010)

Biden has looked good in his press conferences. He is appointing very experienced, capable people to high level posts.

Kamala Harris will be a fine Vice President. She represents the new wave of political leaders well.

I don't have any concerns about the incoming President. It is the outgoing one that is a problem.

I also don't see much in the GOP ranks for a future nominee. Possibly Mitt Romney again or Ben Sasse, but the pickings are thin.


----------



## Money172375 (Jun 29, 2018)

I will say both Biden and Pelosi struggle for words some time. I saw an interview with Colin Powell this week.....age 83......very coherent and clear.


----------



## MrMatt (Dec 21, 2011)

Money172375 said:


> I will say both Biden and Pelosi struggle for words some time. I saw an interview with Colin Powell this week.....age 83......very coherent and clear.


The military, and the US Army specifically seem to have one of the best HR systems.
That being said being high performing into your 80's or beyond is also a bit of luck.

Go watch a Thomas Sowell interview, or read his latest book. He's 90 and exceptionally sharp.


----------



## Money172375 (Jun 29, 2018)

MrMatt said:


> The military, and the US Army specifically seem to have one of the best HR systems.
> That being said being high performing into your 80's or beyond is also a bit of luck.
> 
> Go watch a Thomas Sowell interview, or read his latest book. He's 90 and exceptionally sharp.


Don’t know if I agree with that, seems like there were quite a few former military taking part in the riot.


----------



## MrMatt (Dec 21, 2011)

Money172375 said:


> Don’t know if I agree with that, seems like there were quite a few former military taking part in the riot.


Perhaps, nobody has those status but I didn't hear of any senior people.
Also you have to remember that people from all walks of life have been rioting all summer.


----------



## james4beach (Nov 15, 2012)

MrMatt said:


> Perhaps, nobody has those status but I didn't hear of any senior people.
> Also you have to remember that people from all walks of life have been rioting all summer.


Rioting isn't the issue.

Only right wing extremists are attempting to overthrow the government and kill government officials. Black Lives protesters in the summer didn't try to overthrow the government or murder the Vice President.

It's exclusively right wing terrorists who are doing this. So far, they have


murdered a member of Parliament in the UK
murdered a German parliament member (shot him in the head)
sent pipe bombs to many US government figures
attempted to assassinate the Canadian Prime Minister this summer
attempted to overthrow the US Government and murder the Vice President of the USA


----------



## MrMatt (Dec 21, 2011)

james4beach said:


> Rioting isn't the issue.
> 
> Only right wing extremists are attempting to overthrow the government and kill government officials. Black Lives protesters in the summer didn't try to overthrow the government or murder the Vice President.
> 
> ...


You are apply a political bias to this. 
It really has nothing to do with political affiliation, or even religion.

Those who choose violence are the problem.

No BLM didn't try to murder the Vice president, but they did try to take over Federal Government buildings, they also took over at least one police station and killed many.
They did riot all summer
Here is another example of left wing violence.




__





Five people shot, including Republican congressman, at baseball practice


On June 14, 2017, a gunman walked onto a baseball field at Eugene Simpson Park in Alexandria, Virginia, opening fire on politicians and wounding House GOP Whip




www.history.com





It's ALL wrong.

I actually think you're the one that's become radicalized. 
You're consuming some American style propaganda about the VIOLENT RIGHT WING, and you've become emotionally attached to it.
You see right wing terrorists everywhere, even when someone calmly disagrees with you, you think they're a violent radical. You've made these claims against me.
To be clear, I denounce political violence MORE than you do. 
I denounced BLM riots, I denounce the riot in Washingon, I denounced Zehaf-Bibeau, I denounced CHAZ/CHOP and the insanity within.

I want the violence to stop, and for that to happen, we need to engage in deradicalization strategies.

Now I expect you'll ignore this post, or you'll bring up some example where we disagree, because of how we see the facts lining up.
But rather than rehash the same old arguments of where we disagree, can't you see that if you take the politics out of it, most of us want the same thing?


----------



## MrMatt (Dec 21, 2011)

james4beach said:


> Rioting isn't the issue.


Just to be clear, Rioting is the issue.
I denounce political violence, it is categorically unacceptable.


----------



## sags (May 15, 2010)

No, the issue is a violent coup attempt by Trump and his minions to overthrow the US government.

Treason and sedition enter into the equation........which aren't a normal consideration in the aftermath of riots.

Federal prosecutors are compiling evidence against everyone, and have pledged they will lay charges if they gather sufficient evidence.

They include Trump and his family in their investigations.


----------



## james4beach (Nov 15, 2012)

MrMatt said:


> I actually think you're the one that's become radicalized.


This is usually your response every time I point out that you talk like a right wing extremist. I can't even count how many times you have tried to cover for and defend right wing extremists.

It's some kind of a mission for you. You barely post on financial topics, but man oh man, are you vocal when it's time to defend the honour of right wing terrorists.



MrMatt said:


> You see right wing terrorists everywhere


No, I see them when someone bothers to come online and spend their whole day making excuses for violent extremists. And when that person works especially hard to protect the image of extremists, any time they are challenged or called out.

This is your pattern. You either directly protect the right wing radicals, downplay the severity of the terrorism, or you immediately try to deflect attention away, or confuse the situation with what-about-isms and non sequiturs. @Ukrainiandude is doing some of that too.

You did it immediately following this DC attack. Immediately, you popped up to downplay the severity.

What motivates you to do that?


----------



## MrMatt (Dec 21, 2011)

james4beach said:


> This is usually your response every time I point out that you talk like a right wing extremist.
> 
> I strongly believe you are a right wing extremist, quite possibly a terrorist. I can't even count how many times you have tried to cover for and defend right wing extremists.
> 
> ...


No I didn't. You haven't been able to ever provide the evidence.
Your failure to provide the evidence is why I say "I never did that... you must be thinking of someone else".
Because you are ascribing statements and positions that I don't have.

I've consistently denounced violence, of all types.
I denounced it all summer and I denounced it in Washington.

Now you're accusing me of a terrorist, because I categorically and consistently reject political violence?
Rejecting violence must mean I'm one of the most incompetent ones in history. 

Just to be clear, I do differentiate between the legal and appropriate actions and the illegal and wrong actions.
I think it is okay for a person to protest non violently.
I also think it's wrong for a person to be violent and participate in a riot.

That is true even if it is the same person, and true irrespective of their political orientation.

For example I think the BLM protests were fine (albeit stupid), until they started rioting and attacked government buildings.
For a second example, I think that the MAGA protests were fine (but again stupid), until they started rioting and attacking government buildings.

Once they got violent, I think they crossed the line, IN BOTH CASES.
So join me, and denounce all political violence, committed by both the right wing and left wing extremists.

I'm sorry if you think consistently espousing liberal values means "talking like a right wing extremist".


----------



## james4beach (Nov 15, 2012)

MrMatt said:


> For example I think the BLM protests were fine (albeit stupid), until they started rioting and attacked government buildings.
> For a second example, I think that the MAGA protests were fine (but again stupid), until they started rioting and attacking government buildings.
> 
> Once they got violent, I think they crossed the line, IN BOTH CASES.
> So join me, and denounce all political violence, committed by both the right wing and left wing extremists.


Yes, I denounce political violence. But here you go again trying to make false equivalencies as a way to cover for the right wing extremists and deflect attention away from them.

We have a serious problem with, specifically, right wing extremists.

The *only* ones sending bombs around, murdering everyone inside churches, mosques, synagogues, murdering politicians (UK, Germany, attempts in US and Canada), trying to overthrow government, committing insurrection are right wing terrorists.

Even the DHS and FBI know this, for god sake. They've published reports about how the US has a massive problem with right wing extremism. The leftie extremists don't even make it onto the list, there are so few of them.


----------



## MrMatt (Dec 21, 2011)

james4beach said:


> Yes, I denounce political violence. But here you go again trying to make false equivalencies as a way to cover for the right wing extremists and deflect attention away from them.
> 
> We have a serious problem with, specifically, right wing extremists.
> 
> The *only* ones sending bombs around, murdering everyone inside churches, mosques, synagogues, murdering politicians (UK, Germany, attempts in US and Canada), trying to overthrow government and invading government building are right wing terrorists.


Those activities are all wrong, irrespective of political or religious ideology.

Yes we have a serious problem with right wing extremists.
But we also have a serious problem with left wing extremists and religious extremists. You're trying to deflect away from them by focusing on right wing extremists.
And yes, saying "only" means you're pretending the second class doesn't exist, and it absolutely does. (Steve Scalise was shot by a left wing extremist) Aaron Driver was a religious extremist. 
I reject all of it, left right and other, don't you?


Now you'll go and make some counting and numbers and say "the problem is bigger here or there". But that's just to distract from the fact that extremists on both side present a danger. We should be watching all sides for problem and work to deradicalize ALL OF THEM.
We can argue that all day, but at the end of the day it's irrelevant. It should all stop.
I just want the violence to stop, and law enforcement to do their job and stop it. They should have stopped it this summer, and they should have stopped it before it got into the Capital buildings.


That means no riots, by anyone.
No treason, by anyone. Pence can remove Trump today, Congress & Senate can do it by next week. But lets have the process do the job.


----------



## james4beach (Nov 15, 2012)

MrMatt said:


> Yes we have a serious problem with right wing extremists.
> But we also have a serious problem with left wing extremists


Thanks for demonstrating in real time so everyone can see how you defend the extremists. This is exactly what I'm talking about.

This ^ is the *false equivalency *you keep pushing. It's a method of covering for the far right and trying to soften the severity of everything they do.

No, we DON'T have a 'problem with left wing extremists'. They barely exist. No US government / intelligence agency, or European one for that matter, has ever said there are significant levels of left wing extremism. Practically all of the active domestic extremists are far-right, today.


----------



## MrMatt (Dec 21, 2011)

james4beach said:


> Thanks for demonstrating in real time so everyone can see how you defend the extremists. This is exactly what I'm talking about.
> 
> This ^ is the *false equivalency *you keep pushing. It's a method of covering for the far right and trying to soften the severity of everything they do.
> 
> No, we DON'T have a 'problem with left wing extremists'. They barely exist. No US government / intelligence agency, or European one for that matter, has ever said there are significant levels of left wing extremism. Practically all of the active domestic extremists are far-right, today.


I didn't defend anyone. I didn't even draw an equivalency. I simply stated the problem exists from multiple sides/
When people are attempting to assassinate political leaders, WE HAVE A SERIOUS PROBLEM.

I'm just saying keep an open mind.
The biggest threat is the one you don't see coming. You're only looking in one direction.

The unfounded accusations of being an extremist or even a terrorist is a completely inappropriate personal attack, and in my opinion has no place in this or any discussion.
This discussion is pointless. I'm ending it.


----------



## james4beach (Nov 15, 2012)

MrMatt said:


> I didn't defend anyone. I didn't even draw an equivalency. I simply stated the problem exists from multiple sides/
> When people are attempting to assassinate political leaders, WE HAVE A SERIOUS PROBLEM.


I'm glad we are in agreement that we have a serious problem, when people are attempting to assassinate political leaders.


----------



## sags (May 15, 2010)

The US needs to restrict their concept of "free speech". It is far too broad a protection and doesn't serve them well.

They are one of the few countries in the world who don't have laws against "hate speech".

If they want to make significant change to dampen the rhetoric.........they can start there.


----------



## MrMatt (Dec 21, 2011)

sags said:


> The US needs to restrict their concept of "free speech". It is far too broad a protection and doesn't serve them well.
> 
> They are one of the few countries in the world who don't have laws against "hate speech".
> 
> If they want to make significant change to dampen the rhetoric.........they can start there.


"Hate speech" is just speech that someone disagrees with.

In some countries it's hate speech to say homosexuality is okay, are you okay with that?

I think that there should be very few, carefully considered limits to what can be said.
I think true statements should be, in general almost always explicitly permitted.
I do think direct calls for violence should not be permitted.

But hate speech, not sure about that.
I hate Nazis, I think they're evil and have no place on this earth, and I think anyone should be allowed to post whatever "hate speech" about nazis they want. As long as they don't directly call for violence against them.

We already have laws for libel & slander, they should be enforced.

Hate speech is just an excuse to shut down legitimate debate on an issue.

That being said, I don't think you should engage in speech intended to hurt people. But there is a difference between making a statement of fact or opinion, and "hate".

Some people think "deadnaming" is hate speech.
I think this is a problem.
I should be able to talk freely about how E Pages performance in Whip It was phenomenal, and raised a number of important social issues, and refer to E Page as a the gender they were at that time and in the context of that movie, without being accused of hate speech.
Referring to Elliot Page as Male in the context of gender roles in Whip It only confuses the issue and makes it difficult to discuss.
Nobody benefits.

Juno makes even less sense with Elliot Page as the lead, again great movie that raises a lot of important issues.

Also yes, if you haven't you absolutely should see Whip It, it's excellent.


----------



## sags (May 15, 2010)

Society decides the limits of free speech by choosing the government that represents their moral values.


----------



## MrMatt (Dec 21, 2011)

sags said:


> Society decides the limits of free speech by choosing the government that represents their moral values.


Yes, and that's why liberal countries like the USA & Canada codified freedom of speech in their constitutions.
it's also part of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights.









Universal Declaration of Human Rights | United Nations


A milestone document in the history of human rights, the Universal Declaration of Human Rights set out, for the first time, fundamental human rights to be universally protected. It has been translated into over 500 languages.




www.un.org





Governments should protect our human rights, not infringe upon them.

Also we should hold the government accountable for immoral acts, and ensure that we have mechanisms to do so.
There are many cases where the laws of the land were immoral and wrong, and freedom of speech is the most powerful tool to address them.
Only those who feel they benefit from the status quo would want to restrict speech, in order to prevent progress.


----------



## andrewf (Mar 1, 2010)

I think most transgender people are pretty understanding when people use the wrong name or pronoun. The strict enforcement of 'deadnaming' is mostly from 'allies' or activists who see it as a cudgel, or are trying to protect from those who deadname out of malice to deny the individual's identity. 

I was a little put off by the news coverage around Eliot Page reveal his transgenderism. The news media did not mention his previous name but talked about Eliot as if you have any idea who that is. And then wink, include a picture. It's a silly game, and not offensive to say that Eliot was previously named Ellen.


----------



## MrMatt (Dec 21, 2011)

andrewf said:


> I think most transgender people are pretty understanding when people use the wrong name or pronoun. The strict enforcement of 'deadnaming' is mostly from 'allies' or activists who see it as a cudgel, or are trying to protect from those who deadname out of malice to deny the individual's identity.
> 
> I was a little put off by the news coverage around Eliot Page reveal his transgenderism. The news media did not mention his previous name but talked about Eliot as if you have any idea who that is. And then wink, include a picture. It's a silly game, and not offensive to say that Eliot was previously named Ellen.


I agree.
Personally I honestly don't grasp the whole problem.

If gender is a social construct that doesn't matter, then being transgender is a non issue, and actually nonsensical.
So why do they seem to care so much?

Nobody is denying anyone identity or existence that's simply not a thing.
Really ones gender is mostly irrelevant to my interactions with them, I simply don't care, and don't understand why anyone cares about anyone elses gender.


----------



## james4beach (Nov 15, 2012)

andrewf said:


> I was a little put off by the news coverage around Eliot Page reveal his transgenderism. The news media did not mention his previous name but talked about Eliot as if you have any idea who that is. And then wink, include a picture. It's a silly game, and not offensive to say that Eliot was previously named Ellen.


By the way, it's (tiny) inconsequential issues like this ^ one you describe, which the right wing media blows up into a "rallying cause" for angry men. Most of us shrug and say, who cares - Ellen or Elliot will call him or herself whatever they want.

These things are constantly amplified through Fox News and other right wing media outlets, plus their Facebook news items, and made into actual issues which men start caring about, even getting steamed about. Things like this, or a small number of hispanic refugees, or the fact there are restrictions on what kinds of guns they can buy.

And then [the Republicans and right wing media machinery] amplify those emotions and anger for 5-10 years, telling white men that everyone is out to get them, the "libs" are going to destroy your life and take away your freedoms, and that's how we land where we are today.

Then before you know it, you have them creating and mailing pipe bombs, organizing armed militant groups, posting on CMF that Pelosi is going to "exterminate" conservatives, and all this nonsense. It all traces back to a long history of angry right wingers constantly fuelling anger and outrage about stupid, inconsequential things, for their political purposes.


----------



## MrMatt (Dec 21, 2011)

james4beach said:


> By the way, it's (tiny) inconsequential issues like this ^ one you describe, which the right wing media blows up into a "rallying cause" for angry men. Most of us shrug and say, who cares - Ellen or Elliot will call him or herself whatever they want.


Then why criminalize it?


----------



## andrewf (Mar 1, 2010)

james4beach said:


> By the way, it's (tiny) inconsequential issues like this ^ one you describe, which the right wing media blows up into a "rallying cause" for angry men. Most of us shrug and say, who cares - Ellen or Elliot will call him or herself whatever they want.
> 
> These things are constantly amplified through Fox News and other right wing media outlets, plus their Facebook news items, and made into actual issues which men start caring about, even getting steamed about. Things like this, or a small number of hispanic refugees, or the fact there are restrictions on what kinds of guns they can buy.
> 
> ...


To be clear, Page is blameless in this. I blame PC culture run amok in news media, when they publish a story like that.


----------



## MrMatt (Dec 21, 2011)

andrewf said:


> To be clear, Page is blameless in this. I blame PC culture run amok in news media, when they publish a story like that.


PC culture run amok is a huge problem.
I think part of the problem is that many lifelong advocates have won their battles, now they're bored, and don't know what to do with themselves.


----------



## andrewf (Mar 1, 2010)

I think it is virtue signaling. PC as fashion statement. The quiet middle keep their mouths shut for fear of being shouted down, despite generally being sympathetic.


----------



## james4beach (Nov 15, 2012)

andrewf said:


> I think it is virtue signaling. PC as fashion statement. The quiet middle keep their mouths shut for fear of being shouted down, despite generally being sympathetic.


Some aspects of political correctness are out of hand, but let's not lose sight of the big picture. Being irritated about "PC culture" is no excuse for forming radical violent militias or taking up arms to terrorize society.

What generally happens is that these extremist groups have agendas such as white nationalism, or are anti-western liberal government. Those agendas are the starting point. *To recruit new members*, they exploit these common 'white male' annoyances such as irritation about political correctness, feminism, or too many non-white immigrants. Those are techniques to draw more people into their movements.

This is why I am extremely suspicious of people who are very quick to pivot any discussion to complaints about political correctness / feminism / immigrants. It's part of the right wing extremist propaganda toolbox.

Let's stay grounded in reality here. The major problem our society faces, as a threat to public safety and government stability, is right wing extremism. And no... this didn't happen because of PC culture.


----------



## MrMatt (Dec 21, 2011)

james4beach said:


> This is why I am extremely suspicious of people who are very quick to pivot any discussion to complaints about political correctness / feminism / immigrants. It's part of the right wing extremist propaganda toolbox.


That's the problem, you don't want to hear legitimate concerns, or engage with people. You immediately dismiss them as "right wing extremist".

Well, if you want to disenfranchise people and push them away, that's EXACTLY how you do it.

There are legitimate issues with all those issues, and by suggesting raising any concern makes you a right wing extremists is how you CREATE right wing extremists.
If you call someone names long enough, they might actually start believing you.


----------



## james4beach (Nov 15, 2012)

MrMatt said:


> That's the problem, you don't want to hear legitimate concerns, or engage with people. You immediately dismiss them as "right wing extremist".


I think it's my duty to call you out as lying, when you make up such weird fiction as saying the far left kills more people than the far right in the US.

Why don't you list for us: which major attacks or massacres has the "far left" committed in the US in the last 10 years? What are the casualties?

Are you one of these guys who watches a far right terrorist attack, and then shakes your head and says, "tsk tsk it's those far left guys destroying my country again".

Because that's exactly what many Republican and MAGA people are saying right now. In denial, detached from reality.


----------



## sags (May 15, 2010)

I would suggest that moderators close this thread. We already know the answer to how Trump would handle defeat.


----------



## MrMatt (Dec 21, 2011)

How many people were killed in the George Floyd Riots, how many were killed in the Capital riot?

Again, in both cases there were agitators, and a lot of people who have been lied to.
We have to figure out how to engage with them so they can be deradicalized.

I'm sure MAGA is filling followers heads with garbage, just like I know BLM is perpetuating their lies.
The answer isn't to say they're bad people, it's to engage and work with them to deradicalize them.


----------



## moderator2 (Sep 20, 2017)

sags said:


> I would suggest that moderators close this thread. We already know the answer to how Trump would handle defeat.


Good point. Thread is closed.


----------

