The Former Trump Presidency Thread

[El Guapo]

Remember when the Trump and GOP campaigns were up in arms about foreign dignitaries getting a meeting with Clinton after making a donation to the Clinton Foundation, and that was terrible because this was Clinton somehow using her position to enrich herself in a sideways fashion? Turns out it's way easier to do that if you're President, because then you can just cut out the middleman!

Let no one doubt the power of a press narrative - as a group they went into the election with this image of Clinton as the ethically challenged candidate, and hell if they were going to change their copy during the campaign.

[LawBeefaroni]

The thing is that all this stuff doesn't require direct communications. Like, it is also very credible that Trump didn't ask on the call, but that the President of Argentina was like "shit, I need to make sure that I have a good relationship with Trump - better get that hotel approved."

Exactly! Even if nothing was actually said, it still looks bad. It's the same with foreign dignitaries staying at Trump's hotel in Washington D.C. because they don't want to offend the President. Even if he never actually said to them, "Hey, I can give you a really good rate on a room - really good - amazing" it still looks sketchy as hell.

But it's all in a blind trust. Blind!

[El Guapo]

The thing is that all this stuff doesn't require direct communications. Like, it is also very credible that Trump didn't ask on the call, but that the President of Argentina was like "shit, I need to make sure that I have a good relationship with Trump - better get that hotel approved."

Exactly! Even if nothing was actually said, it still looks bad. It's the same with foreign dignitaries staying at Trump's hotel in Washington D.C. because they don't want to offend the President. Even if he never actually said to them, "Hey, I can give you a really good rate on a room - really good - amazing" it still looks sketchy as hell.

But it's all in a blind trust. Blind!

There will be minutes - hours, even - when Trump doesn't know whether his knowledge of his holdings from the day before is still current.

[Rip]

Remember when the Trump and GOP campaigns were up in arms about foreign dignitaries getting a meeting with Clinton after making a donation to the Clinton Foundation, and that was terrible because this was Clinton somehow using her position to enrich herself in a sideways fashion? Turns out it's way easier to do that if you're President, because then you can just cut out the middleman!

Let no one doubt the power of a press narrative - as a group they went into the election with this image of Clinton as the ethically challenged candidate, and hell if they were going to change their copy during the campaign.

That is precious. The press I have seen were for too busy trying to push the Trump is Hitler narrative to have time for any Clinton narratives beyond she isn't Trump and has to win or the world as we know it is doomed. You know the same narrative you guys are still chasing with reckless abandon.

[LordMortis]

That is precious. The press I have seen were for too busy trying to push the Trump is Hitler narrative to have time for any Clinton narratives beyond she isn't Trump and has to win or the world as we know it is doomed. You know the same narrative you guys are still chasing with reckless abandon.

I missed this press, though I did see the press showing how white nationalist were supporting Trump and he was not backing down on them. It was not their only focus on him, though. They were much more infatuated with "what did say now?" no matter what it was about.

[Rip]

That is precious. The press I have seen were for too busy trying to push the Trump is Hitler narrative to have time for any Clinton narratives beyond she isn't Trump and has to win or the world as we know it is doomed. You know the same narrative you guys are still chasing with reckless abandon.

I missed this press, though I did see the press showing how white nationalist were supporting Trump and he was not backing down on them. It was not their only focus on him, though. They were much more infatuated with "what did say now?" no matter what it was about.

So where is the widespread press narrative that Clinton was a crook selling her office for money? It certainly wasn't on any MSM, unless you guys are actually going to start calling the likes of Breitbart and Drudge the press which would be a huge departure from your own narratives.

[LordMortis]

So where is the widespread press narrative that Clinton was a crook selling her office for money? It certainly wasn't on any MSM, unless you guys are actually going to start calling the likes of Breitbart and Drudge the press which would be a huge departure from your own narratives.

I never saw it in the news. The news largely ignored Clinton beyond reporting on FBI investigations and her physically wavering one day. They were too enthralled hanging on to Trump's every word.

As to Guap's comment, he and I see don't seem to speak the same language, either. So I can doubt his portrayal of media and not be inconsistent with doubting yours. I don't worry about him because his read read as hyperbole and yours read as serious. That could be a mistake in my comprehension.

As to Chaz' original comment. I do remember the GOP being up in arms and about Clinton's relationships with foreign dignitaries and pandering to their electorate over it. Oh, how social media would not let me forget.

[Paingod]

So where is the widespread press narrative that Clinton was a crook selling her office for money?

It wasn't news because we call it "Politics" in America. Pretty much everything that happens at a political level - from state to federal - is bought and sold by lobbyists and special interests. I think it's wrong and disgusting, but I still think Trump is wronger and disgustinger.

[Rip]

In other words El Guapo was talking out his anus.

[Kraken]

Earlier this evening I bet my boss $100 that Trump won't make it a year without impeachment hearings at least starting.

Should I collect now?

Only the House can bring impeachment proceedings.

Trump could trade the whole CIA to Putin in a real-estate deal, and Jason Chaffetz would file a diplomatic request to ask if the files mention Whitewater.

I suspect the conventional R's in the House would be just as happy, if not happier, to see Pence in the Oval Office.

For starters, impeachment does not remove the sitting president, so Pence won't necessarily gain from the exercise. Second, I doubt that R's will be tired of being dragged down the shithole after just a year of Drumpf. Give it 2 years and a the prospect of a flipping both houses of congress, then maybe. I'd rather think it's something the D's might pursue when congress does flip in 2 years.

Congress is not going to flip in two years. The post-2010 gerrymandering puts the House almost out of reach by the democrats, and almost all of the competitive races in the senate in 2018 have a democratic incumbent (since the democrats won all the races in the 2006 democratic wave, then held onto most of them in 2012 because the Republicans screwed up the key races).

Yeah, I'm getting annoyed with smug liberals in my facebook stable predicting a D congress in 2018. The math is against it. As you noted, the House is just a lost cause and unworthy of discussion. The D's are defending 23 senate seats to the R's 8 seats, and the R seats are all in safe red states. It would take some epic screwups to prevent the R's from expanding their majority. And yet I keep seeing "just you wait until 2018, boyo."

[Jeff V]

May I remind you that "epic screwups" is the prevailing forecast for the next 2 years?

If such cataclysm fails to materialize, this conversation is moot because nobody will be trying drive out Trump before things get worse. If things go down the crapper like most economists believe it will, the 2018 mid-terms are the first chance for the masses to express their displeasure. If they are getting fucked in every orifice including those they didn't even know they had; it's going to be hard for a lot of themselves to separate themselves from the hell they hath wrought.

[geezer]

In other words El Guapo was talking out his anus.

S T F U

LA Times, Politico, WAPO and NYT coverage.

What are you looking for? Mainstream media coverage asserting that she's guilty, and also BENGHAZI!!! or something?

Not writing that doesn't mean they're biased. It means they're not reporting fake news and bad conclusions.

[El Guapo]

Earlier this evening I bet my boss $100 that Trump won't make it a year without impeachment hearings at least starting.

Should I collect now?

Only the House can bring impeachment proceedings.

Trump could trade the whole CIA to Putin in a real-estate deal, and Jason Chaffetz would file a diplomatic request to ask if the files mention Whitewater.

I suspect the conventional R's in the House would be just as happy, if not happier, to see Pence in the Oval Office.

For starters, impeachment does not remove the sitting president, so Pence won't necessarily gain from the exercise. Second, I doubt that R's will be tired of being dragged down the shithole after just a year of Drumpf. Give it 2 years and a the prospect of a flipping both houses of congress, then maybe. I'd rather think it's something the D's might pursue when congress does flip in 2 years.

Congress is not going to flip in two years. The post-2010 gerrymandering puts the House almost out of reach by the democrats, and almost all of the competitive races in the senate in 2018 have a democratic incumbent (since the democrats won all the races in the 2006 democratic wave, then held onto most of them in 2012 because the Republicans screwed up the key races).

Yeah, I'm getting annoyed with smug liberals in my facebook stable predicting a D congress in 2018. The math is against it. As you noted, the House is just a lost cause and unworthy of discussion. The D's are defending 23 senate seats to the R's 8 seats, and the R seats are all in safe red states. It would take some epic screwups to prevent the R's from expanding their majority. And yet I keep seeing "just you wait until 2018, boyo."

In the Senate the democrats should have at least a decent shot at Nevada, and possibly at Arizona. But that's really it - it's really hard to see a third potential pickup (which is what they'd need for the Senate majority), even assuming that they hold onto to all of their seats.

That said, Trump's an enormous wild card (for better and for worse), so it's *possible* that he screws things up so badly so fast that he puts a lot of races in play (and the democrats will be able to make the "you need to put a check on Trump" argument in 2018). BUT it's not looking good at the moment.

[Jeff V]

BUT it's not looking good at the moment.

So you think Trump is doing a good job already? Odd, so far he's largely been surrounding himself with despicable people and it's hard to imagine good things coming from such cretins.

[Skinypupy]

"Billionaire philanthropist" Betsey DuVos nominated as Sec of Education.

In a potentially controversial choice, Trump intends to nominate billionaire philanthropist Betsy DeVos for education secretary, people familiar with the selection said, turning to a conservative activist who has forcefully pushed for private school voucher programs. Her nomination is expected to face strong opposition from public school advocates, who oppose her efforts to funnel taxpayer dollars from public to private and religious schools.

I'm trying to find out what qualifications she brings for the position other than being very, very rich, but am coming up quite empty.

Also, the article mentions Devos and Haley's nominations as "cabinet level positions". Is the UN Ambassador considered cabinet level?

EDIT: This WaPo article has a bit more info about her. BTW, didn't Donald say he was going to close ED?

[Jeff V]

BTW, didn't Donald say he was going to close ED?

Yes, but not until he's destroyed the educational system completely. After all, he loves the "uneducated." Less education means more of his brain dead minions.

[Smoove_B]

Ties to an organization that supports Common Core? Something tells me she's not going to make it.

DeVos, 58, has not said much about the Common Core, the set of math and reading guidelines adopted by most states. But she has ties to several pro-Common Core organizations, including as a member of the board of the Foundation for Excellence in Education...

[Kraken]

May I remind you that "epic screwups" is the prevailing forecast for the next 2 years?

Among liberals, sure.

If things go down the crapper like most economists believe it will,

That's not the consensus that I'm reading, nor is it what the markets are predicting. To the contrary, if Trump (miraculously) gets his Keynesian stimulus plan through Congress in 2017 the economy may be starting to overheat by 2018. That would be a nice problem for a president to have.

'Course, we don't know if that will prevail, or if Trump will start trade wars, or if he'll choke off the immigrant labor supply, or any of a half dozen other variables.

Anyway, I said repeatedly that Democrats should not feel smug about 2016, and I'm saying the same for '18. The math is just against them.

In the Senate the democrats should have at least a decent shot at Nevada, and possibly at Arizona. But that's really it - it's really hard to see a third potential pickup (which is what they'd need for the Senate majority), even assuming that they hold onto to all of their seats.

That said, Trump's an enormous wild card (for better and for worse), so it's *possible* that he screws things up so badly so fast that he puts a lot of races in play (and the democrats will be able to make the "you need to put a check on Trump" argument in 2018). BUT it's not looking good at the moment.

Many of the seats the D's are defending are in red states and states that flipped to Trump. But I'll concur with you and JeffV that there are a LOT of unknowns between now and then.

[Zarathud]

The president can’t have a conflict of interest.

Already added to the sig.

Unbelievable.

[The Meal]

Wait -- the Amway DeVos family? *That* should go over well...

[malchior]

Wait -- the Amway DeVos family? *That* should go over well...

Well she married in - fun fact her brother Erik founded Blackwater...yes that Blackwater. #DrainTheSwamp

[El Guapo]

The president can’t have a conflict of interest.

Already added to the sig.

Unbelievable.

For what it's worth I read that governmental conflict of interest laws apparently *don't* apply to the President - those are governed just by political norms (which Trump is shredding).

So Trump may have just been accurately stating the law (what his lawyers told him) as opposed to making a NIxonian statement.

[gilraen]

Ties to an organization that supports Common Core? Something tells me she's not going to make it.

DeVos, 58, has not said much about the Common Core, the set of math and reading guidelines adopted by most states. But she has ties to several pro-Common Core organizations, including as a member of the board of the Foundation for Excellence in Education...

She has now stated explicitly "I am not a supporter [of Common Core] - period."

[RunningMn9]

I'm sure she has excellent qualifications that give her a thoroughly educated opinion on Common Core.

[LordMortis]

Ties to an organization that supports Common Core? Something tells me she's not going to make it.

DeVos, 58, has not said much about the Common Core, the set of math and reading guidelines adopted by most states. But she has ties to several pro-Common Core organizations, including as a member of the board of the Foundation for Excellence in Education...

Oh noooo, she has been trying to dismantle public education in favor of privatized for profit vouchers in Michigan "school of choice" for years. We are now home to nearly 400 subsidized charter schools from the public education budget. And you can bet they aren't massively Montessori style success stories (though some are. If they truly pushed for excellence and had requirements for paying their staff, I might change my tune). And she has had some success and it's been terrible for education, in general, as well as specifically for public education. She fits the bill perfectly and scarily.

And I'll put it to you like this. DeVos has been instrumental in placing Snyder in power and keeping him there along with an insane legislature.

http://www.michigan.gov/snyder/0,4668,7 ... --,00.html

http://www.detroitnews.com/story/news/e ... /94193032/

http://www.freep.com/story/opinion/colu ... /89774760/

Finally, I don't doubt doubt she purchased the position. That is jaded speculation on my part, though.

[Chaz]

Well, I'm super excited. I've got a four-month old, so any decisions they make now about defunding public schools should be coming back to bite kids on the ass right about the time my son is headed into the public school system. Excellent!

[Rip]

In other words El Guapo was talking out his anus.

S T F U

LA Times, Politico, WAPO and NYT coverage.

What are you looking for? Mainstream media coverage asserting that she's guilty, and also BENGHAZI!!! or something?

Not writing that doesn't mean they're biased. It means they're not reporting fake news and bad conclusions.

First a number of those are opinion pieces. Opinion pieces does not a news source narrative make. Second, that is four articles. I can show you four in one day on each of them that suggested Trump was a maniac and Hillary must win or doom was coming.

I'm not speaking to whether they were biased. Although they obviously are and in more than one case admittedly so. The point is not a single major media outlet had a narrative that Hillary was crooked. Politicians sure, people sure, but the major media outlets, not a chance. They were every single one in the tank for Hillary. To think otherwise is just not being honest with yourself.

[Rip]

Wait -- the Amway DeVos family? *That* should go over well...

Yep, look forward to your next school event funding to involve selling Amway.

[LordMortis]

I don't tend to read Politico but...

Helping the little guy.

http://www.politico.com/story/2016/11/h ... ump-231636

House Republicans are currently in the process of making lists of regulations that fall within their time frame and could potentially be repealed early next year. One of the major ones they’re eyeing is Obama’s overtime rule that requires companies to pay time-and-a-half to employees who make under roughly $47,000.

The rule is set to go into effect Dec. 1 and will be a top priority for Republicans to reverse, multiple sources said.

“We have heard over the past year that it would have truly dramatically bad effects, not just on employers but on employees across the country,” said Rep. Bradley Byrne (R-Ala.), a former labor lawyer. He said the University of Alabama expects the rule will cost the institution $14 million a year, which will likely be passed on to students via higher tuition.

And “I can give you the names of a ton of private-sector businesses who will either have to eat that cost or pass that cost on to their customers,” Byrne said.

Really? Because that's where they paychecks come from. Either from an employer is eating the costs or passing those costs on to their customers. That's how money works. Where else do you think the money is going to come from?

[tgb]

The point is not a single major media outlet had a narrative that Hillary was crooked.

Considering that neither the DOJ or the FBI considered her "crooked", for the media to pursue that narrative would have been libelous.

[malchior]

WaPo wonders when the outrage machine will turn on him

And it’s not just that; at the same time, the Drumpf administration and congressional Republicans are getting ready to move on their highest priorities, cutting taxes for the wealthy, scrapping oversight on Wall Street, and lightening regulations on big corporations.

Imagine you’re one of those folks who went to Drumpf rallies and thrilled to his promises to take America back from the establishment, who felt your heart stir as he promised to torture prisoners, who got your “Drumpf That Bitch” T-shirt, who was overjoyed to finally have a candidate who tells it like it is. What are you thinking as you watch this?

If you have any sense, you’re coming to the realization that it was all a scam. You got played. While you were chanting “Lock her up!” he was laughing at you for being so gullible. While you were dreaming about how you’d have an advocate in the Oval Office, he was dreaming about how he could use it to make himself richer. He hasn’t even taken office yet and everything he told you is already being revealed as a lie.

My guess? Never. They won't turn on him.

[Pyperkub]

The point is not a single major media outlet had a narrative that Hillary was crooked.

Considering that neither the DOJ or the FBI considered her "crooked", for the media to pursue that narrative would have been libelous.

Officially. Lots of agents apparently bought into it.

[geezer]

In other words El Guapo was talking out his anus.

S T F U

LA Times, Politico, WAPO and NYT coverage.

What are you looking for? Mainstream media coverage asserting that she's guilty, and also BENGHAZI!!! or something?

Not writing that doesn't mean they're biased. It means they're not reporting fake news and bad conclusions.

First a number of those are opinion pieces. Opinion pieces does not a news source narrative make. Second, that is four articles. I can show you four in one day on each of them that suggested Trump was a maniac and Hillary must win or doom was coming.

I'm not speaking to whether they were biased. Although they obviously are and in more than one case admittedly so. The point is not a single major media outlet had a narrative that Hillary was crooked. Politicians sure, people sure, but the major media outlets, not a chance. They were every single one in the tank for Hillary. To think otherwise is just not being honest with yourself.

But where is a "narrative" going to come from? Not the reporting ideally, and it shouldn't (but nevertheless, you certainly can't deny they were eagerly publishing every OMG! EMAILZ! piece of garbage that Chaffetz and his ilk were pushing), but rather the editorial and opinion pages, who nevertheless unceasingly pressed the "Clinton is flawed" angle.

That said, *preferring* Clinton to Trump doesn't speak to being in the tank for HRC, but rather to the fact that one candidate was clearly and obviously more competent, ideology aside. The media based it's "preference" on the fact that Trump was admittedly and proudly uninformed, and on the fact that he believes he knows more that the intel services on things like ISIS and Russia (Among other silliness). I mean, honestly, is it "bias" to say that HRC is a better candidate than Trump? Really?? Is it more likely that publications like the Dallas Morning News are liberal shills, or that they realized that Trump was, and is, laughably unprepared to be President?

[Zarathud]

Opinion pieces does not a news source narrative make.

Saved for later. Really, Rip, you should know better.

The point is not a single major media outlet had a narrative that Hillary was crooked. Politicians sure, people sure, but the major media outlets, not a chance. They were every single one in the tank for Hillary. To think otherwise is just not being honest with yourself.

The media reported on every accusation against Hillary, even when Trump was provably wrong.

CNN had to hire people to take Trump's position. You call that bias, but I call that Trump just being crazy-ass ridiculous.

[tgb]

The point is not a single major media outlet had a narrative that Hillary was crooked.

Considering that neither the DOJ or the FBI considered her "crooked", for the media to pursue that narrative would have been libelous.

Officially. Lots of agents apparently bought into it.

Officially is all that really matters, isn't it?

[Kraken]

WaPo wonders when the outrage machine will turn on him

And it’s not just that; at the same time, the Drumpf administration and congressional Republicans are getting ready to move on their highest priorities, cutting taxes for the wealthy, scrapping oversight on Wall Street, and lightening regulations on big corporations.

Imagine you’re one of those folks who went to Drumpf rallies and thrilled to his promises to take America back from the establishment, who felt your heart stir as he promised to torture prisoners, who got your “Drumpf That Bitch” T-shirt, who was overjoyed to finally have a candidate who tells it like it is. What are you thinking as you watch this?

If you have any sense, you’re coming to the realization that it was all a scam. You got played. While you were chanting “Lock her up!” he was laughing at you for being so gullible. While you were dreaming about how you’d have an advocate in the Oval Office, he was dreaming about how he could use it to make himself richer. He hasn’t even taken office yet and everything he told you is already being revealed as a lie.

My guess? Never. They won't turn on him.

The harder people buy into a lie, the more invested they are in defending it. Human nature makes it very hard to admit, even to oneself, that one was conned.

[Smoove_B]

I will pick the greatest auditor - the best. Amazing, really:

President-elect Donald Trump will soon be able to appoint a new director of the agency auditing his taxes, a potential political minefield after his writeoffs and his refusal to release his returns were repeatedly questioned in the campaign.

The president is barred from directing how the IRS treats specific taxpayers, but lawyers say there’s nothing to stop Trump from appointing an IRS chief who will go easy on him while scrutinizing his political enemies.

...

Meanwhile, Trump will be the first president in recent memory to enter office under audit and the first since Gerald Ford not to have released his returns. The ongoing audit of Trump’s returns will likely take on new importance and sensitivity, tax lawyers said. No one wants to mess up an audit of the president-elect’s returns, which by most accounts are extremely complex given his far-flung commercial ventures.

“Legally, the fact that he’s been elected president has no bearing on the rules,” Rizek said. “But as a practical matter, the agents, the commissioners of the different divisions, the field officers, work for the commissioner, and it’s going to be pretty likely that that audit is going to get higher level review before they make adjustments.”

[geezer]

The point is not a single major media outlet had a narrative that Hillary was crooked.

Considering that neither the DOJ or the FBI considered her "crooked", for the media to pursue that narrative would have been libelous.

Officially. Lots of agents apparently bought into it.

Officially is all that really matters, isn't it?

Well, no, because, see, "real Americans" in flyover country know better. They know more than Comey about secret clearances, they know more than the Justice Department about what's subject to subpoena, and they know more than the IRS about nonprofit tax returns.

[LordMortis]

[Max Peck]

To be fair, that covers his supporters and opponents.