The Former Trump Presidency Thread

LawBeefaroni · Post by **LawBeefaroni** » Mon Oct 29, 2018 3:27 pm

El Guapo wrote: Mon Oct 29, 2018 3:14 pm These theories about why Trump said it are also not contradictory. Calling Gillum a thief, even in the absence of evidence, helps brand him as a criminal and associate the public's mind with the criminal case involving him. Trump clearly also thinks of black people as criminals or potential criminals as well, and that's another reason for Trump to call Gillum a thief. Whether Trump's motivation is 80% the former and 20% the latter, or vice versa, doesn't really matter much.

I think leading with the fact that DeSantis is a "Harvard/Yale educated man" is also part if it. Through the Trump filter that reads as "white male."

GreenGoo · Post by **GreenGoo** » Mon Oct 29, 2018 3:34 pm

LawBeefaroni wrote: Mon Oct 29, 2018 3:27 pm I think leading with the fact that DeSantis is a "Harvard/Yale educated man" is also part if it. Through the Trump filter that reads as "white male."

He's got SCOTUS material written all over his degree.

LawBeefaroni · Post by **LawBeefaroni** » Mon Oct 29, 2018 3:37 pm

GreenGoo wrote: Mon Oct 29, 2018 3:34 pm
LawBeefaroni wrote: Mon Oct 29, 2018 3:27 pm I think leading with the fact that DeSantis is a "Harvard/Yale educated man" is also part if it. Through the Trump filter that reads as "white male."
He's got SCOTUS material written all over his degree.

Squi and Flounder have nothing but good things to say about him.

GreenGoo · Post by **GreenGoo** » Mon Oct 29, 2018 3:43 pm

LawBeefaroni wrote: Mon Oct 29, 2018 3:37 pm Squi and Flounder have nothing but good things to say about him.

He didn't have nothing to do with that one time he suggested getting girls drunk so's we could grope'em.

edit: Recognize your reference to Dorfman, but who's squi? If it's supposed to be squid, then who's squid?

YellowKing · Post by **YellowKing** » Mon Oct 29, 2018 3:55 pm

He's also implying with the "educated man" comment that Gillum is uneducated - yet another bit of racist verbage.

Kraken · Post by **Kraken** » Mon Oct 29, 2018 4:00 pm

Since when do Trumpsters value educated people? Elitism!

$iljanus · Post by **$iljanus** » Mon Oct 29, 2018 4:51 pm

Kraken wrote:Since when do Trumpsters value educated people? Elitism!

Well if you graduated from an esteemed institution of learning like, say, Trump University then that would be different.

GreenGoo · Post by **GreenGoo** » Mon Oct 29, 2018 4:55 pm

$iljanus wrote: Mon Oct 29, 2018 4:51 pm
Kraken wrote:Since when do Trumpsters value educated people? Elitism!
Well if you graduated from an esteemed institution of learning like, say, Trump University then that would be different.

Those are rare and worth even more now that they've been discontinued.

Don't take it out of its wrapper!

Isgrimnur · Post by **Isgrimnur** » Mon Oct 29, 2018 4:58 pm

GreenGoo wrote: Mon Oct 29, 2018 4:55 pm
$iljanus wrote: Mon Oct 29, 2018 4:51 pm
Kraken wrote:Since when do Trumpsters value educated people? Elitism!
Well if you graduated from an esteemed institution of learning like, say, Trump University then that would be different.
Those are rare and worth even more now that they've been discontinued.

Don't take it out of its wrapper!

Yeah! Raw dog that house flip!

GreenGoo · Post by **GreenGoo** » Mon Oct 29, 2018 4:59 pm

Isgrimnur wrote: Mon Oct 29, 2018 4:58 pm Yeah! Raw dog that house flip!

*don't* is the operative word.

...if I'm understanding you correctly.

Isgrimnur · Post by **Isgrimnur** » Mon Oct 29, 2018 5:02 pm

GreenGoo wrote: Mon Oct 29, 2018 4:59 pm
Isgrimnur wrote: Mon Oct 29, 2018 4:58 pm Yeah! Raw dog that house flip!
*don't* is the operative word.

...if I'm understanding you correctly.

I'm equating the diploma to a condom.

Unagi · Post by **Unagi** » Mon Oct 29, 2018 5:38 pm

So wait, the diploma's wrapper had nothing to do with the condom comment then? Now I really don't get it at all.

Isgrimnur · Post by **Isgrimnur** » Mon Oct 29, 2018 5:43 pm

Leaving the diploma in the wrapper implies that it's not going to be actually used for its intended purpose, implying that one would be performing the real estate transaction without actually applying the knowledge represented by the still-sealed diploma.

If one were to leave a condom in the wrapper, that would be the 'raw dogging' action, of which the president is apparently a fan.

Unagi · Post by **Unagi** » Mon Oct 29, 2018 5:44 pm

Or you just miss-fired on a 'wrapper' joke.

Isgrimnur · Post by **Isgrimnur** » Mon Oct 29, 2018 5:47 pm

Unagi · Post by **Unagi** » Mon Oct 29, 2018 6:03 pm

Your attempt to repackage it was respectable. But a stretch.

Carpet_pissr · Post by **Carpet_pissr** » Mon Oct 29, 2018 6:04 pm

Can we just put a pin in this conversation please?!

Unagi · Post by **Unagi** » Mon Oct 29, 2018 6:05 pm

GreenGoo wrote: Mon Oct 29, 2018 4:55 pm
$iljanus wrote: Mon Oct 29, 2018 4:51 pm
Kraken wrote:Since when do Trumpsters value educated people? Elitism!
Well if you graduated from an esteemed institution of learning like, say, Trump University then that would be different.
Those are rare and worth even more now that they've been discontinued.

Don't take it out of its wrapper!

Didn't you know?

Trump University diplomas don't come in a wrapper!

Unagi · Post by **Unagi** » Mon Oct 29, 2018 6:06 pm

Carpet_pissr wrote: Mon Oct 29, 2018 6:04 pm Can we just put a pin in this conversation please?!

I'm just ribbing Issy.

hentzau · Post by **hentzau** » Mon Oct 29, 2018 6:29 pm

Unagi wrote: Mon Oct 29, 2018 6:06 pm
Carpet_pissr wrote: Mon Oct 29, 2018 6:04 pm Can we just put a pin in this conversation please?!
I'm just ribbing Issy.

Clever...

Max Peck · Post by **Max Peck** » Mon Oct 29, 2018 9:01 pm

GreenGoo wrote: Mon Oct 29, 2018 3:43 pm
LawBeefaroni wrote: Mon Oct 29, 2018 3:37 pm Squi and Flounder have nothing but good things to say about him.
He didn't have nothing to do with that one time he suggested getting girls drunk so's we could grope'em.

edit: Recognize your reference to Dorfman, but who's squi? If it's supposed to be squid, then who's squid?

Chris "Squi" Garrett is one of Brett Kavanaugh's high school carousing buddies.

Zarathud · Post by **Zarathud** » Mon Oct 29, 2018 9:32 pm

Unagi wrote:
Carpet_pissr wrote: Mon Oct 29, 2018 6:04 pm Can we just put a pin in this conversation please?!
I'm just ribbing Issy.

Only for your selfish pleasure.

GreenGoo · Post by **GreenGoo** » Mon Oct 29, 2018 9:45 pm

Max Peck wrote: Mon Oct 29, 2018 9:01 pm Chris "Squi" Garrett is one of Brett Kavanaugh's high school carousing buddies.

thanks.

Holman · Post by **Holman** » Tue Oct 30, 2018 9:52 am

This morning Trump is floating the idea that he can sign an executive order to end birthright citizenship.

It really is Racism Week. I guess Trump figures it worked in 2016.

Or maybe he was shaken by the news that he hadn't yet locked down the Pittsburgh Shooter Actual Nazi vote.

Defiant · Post by **Defiant** » Tue Oct 30, 2018 9:55 am

President Donald Trump offered a dramatic, if legally dubious, promise in a new interview to unilaterally end birthright citizenship, ratcheting up his hardline immigration rhetoric with a week to go before critical midterm elections.

Trump's vow to end the right to citizenship for the children of non-citizens and unauthorized immigrants born on US soil came in an interview with Axios released Tuesday. Such a step would be regarded as an affront to the US Constitution, which was amended 150 years ago to include the words: "All persons born or naturalized in the United States and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States."

Trump did not say when he would sign the order, and some of his past promises to use executive action have gone unfulfilled. But whether the President follows through on his threat or not, the issue joins a string of actions intended to thrust the matter of immigration into the front of voters' minds as they head to polls next week.

https://www.cnn.com/2018/10/30/politics ... index.html

I figure Trump finally believes Obama was born in the US, and this is the first step in his attempt to retroactively take away his citizenship.

El Guapo · Post by **El Guapo** » Tue Oct 30, 2018 10:02 am

Defiant wrote: Tue Oct 30, 2018 9:55 am
President Donald Trump offered a dramatic, if legally dubious, promise in a new interview to unilaterally end birthright citizenship, ratcheting up his hardline immigration rhetoric with a week to go before critical midterm elections.

Trump's vow to end the right to citizenship for the children of non-citizens and unauthorized immigrants born on US soil came in an interview with Axios released Tuesday. Such a step would be regarded as an affront to the US Constitution, which was amended 150 years ago to include the words: "All persons born or naturalized in the United States and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States."

Trump did not say when he would sign the order, and some of his past promises to use executive action have gone unfulfilled. But whether the President follows through on his threat or not, the issue joins a string of actions intended to thrust the matter of immigration into the front of voters' minds as they head to polls next week.
https://www.cnn.com/2018/10/30/politics ... index.html

I figure Trump finally believes Obama was born in the US, and this is the first step in his attempt to retroactively take away his citizenship.

No doubt Trump will issue an embarrassed apology once someone points out that the EO would be flagrantly unconstitutional.

Of course, some hardline Trumpians try to use the "subject to the jurisdiction of the U.S." clause (which was meant to exclude people like diplomats and their kids, who are present in the U.S. but not subject to U.S. jurisdiction due to diplomatic immunity) to say that birthright citizenship is not required by the 14th amendment. But that's ridiculous, because illegal immigrants are clearly "subject to the jurisdiction of the U.S." insofar as it is legal for the U.S. to detain and deport them. I do find it ironic that the arguments that birthright citizenship is not required would seem to imply (if accepted) that enforcing immigration laws against non-citizens is unconstitutional.

Isgrimnur · Post by **Isgrimnur** » Tue Oct 30, 2018 10:03 am

Unagi wrote: Mon Oct 29, 2018 6:06 pm
Carpet_pissr wrote: Mon Oct 29, 2018 6:04 pm Can we just put a pin in this conversation please?!
I'm just ribbing Issy.

Smoove_B · Post by **Smoove_B** » Tue Oct 30, 2018 10:04 am

Only in this timeline could the President issue a statement about his intention to revoke citizenship for a certain classification of people 7 days before a midterm election.

LawBeefaroni · Post by **LawBeefaroni** » Tue Oct 30, 2018 10:08 am

Shows how much he values the Constitution. It's going to come as a huge shock to his faithful when he shreds the 2nd but it will be too late.

It's Ok to naturalize his foreign in-laws so they can babysit his kid but woe to someone actually born in the fucking county and a citizen by the most basic law of the land if they're brown.

LordMortis · Post by **LordMortis** » Tue Oct 30, 2018 10:10 am

Smoove_B wrote: Tue Oct 30, 2018 10:04 am Only in this timeline could the President issue a statement about his intention to revoke citizenship for a certain classification of people 7 days before a midterm election.

"But now they're saying I can do it just with an executive order." This is the man who believes only he can MAGA and is being empowered to do so... It's all about what "they're saying" in whispers. Dance monkey dance and proclaim it's OK because you win.

pr0ner · Post by **pr0ner** » Tue Oct 30, 2018 10:15 am

It's always "they're saying". Who is this mystical "they"? 4chan? Stormfront? The voices in his head? Fox News (minus Shep Smith and Chris Wallace)?

coopasonic · Post by **coopasonic** » Tue Oct 30, 2018 10:25 am

pr0ner wrote: Tue Oct 30, 2018 10:15 am It's always "they're saying". Who is this mystical "they"? 4chan? Stormfront? The voices in his head? Fox News (minus Shep Smith and Chris Wallace)?

When it comes to immigration, most likely Stephen Miller.

pr0ner · Post by **pr0ner** » Tue Oct 30, 2018 10:27 am

coopasonic wrote: Tue Oct 30, 2018 10:25 am
pr0ner wrote: Tue Oct 30, 2018 10:15 am It's always "they're saying". Who is this mystical "they"? 4chan? Stormfront? The voices in his head? Fox News (minus Shep Smith and Chris Wallace)?
When it comes to immigration, most likely Stephen Miller.

Forgot about him.

Sepiche · Post by **Sepiche** » Tue Oct 30, 2018 10:34 am

Changes to birthright citizenship will never happen. He's just trying to get the shooting and his immoral reaction to it out of the headlines.

GreenGoo · Post by **GreenGoo** » Tue Oct 30, 2018 10:38 am

Sepiche wrote: Tue Oct 30, 2018 10:34 am Changes to birthright citizenship will never happen. He's just trying to get the shooting and his immoral reaction to it out of the headlines.

Because this is *way* better publicity, amirite?

Sepiche · Post by **Sepiche** » Tue Oct 30, 2018 10:49 am

GreenGoo wrote: Tue Oct 30, 2018 10:38 am
Sepiche wrote: Tue Oct 30, 2018 10:34 am Changes to birthright citizenship will never happen. He's just trying to get the shooting and his immoral reaction to it out of the headlines.
Because this is *way* better publicity, amirite?

In his mind: yes. He doesn't get/believe that the majority of the country thinks clamping down on immigration is wrong. He's thought it's a winning issue for some time.

Skinypupy · Post by **Skinypupy** » Tue Oct 30, 2018 10:55 am

Sepiche wrote: Tue Oct 30, 2018 10:49 am
GreenGoo wrote: Tue Oct 30, 2018 10:38 am
Sepiche wrote: Tue Oct 30, 2018 10:34 am Changes to birthright citizenship will never happen. He's just trying to get the shooting and his immoral reaction to it out of the headlines.
Because this is *way* better publicity, amirite?
In his mind: yes. He doesn't get/believe that the majority of the country thinks clamping down on immigration is wrong. He's thought it's a winning issue for some time.

Among the faithful 25-30% (who will not waver, regardless of the message), he's absolutely correct in that assumption. I'm seeing lots of cheers about this proclamation from the MAGA crowd on social media this morning.

GreenGoo · Post by **GreenGoo** » Tue Oct 30, 2018 10:58 am

Sepiche wrote: Tue Oct 30, 2018 10:49 am In his mind: yes. He doesn't get/believe that the majority of the country thinks clamping down on immigration is wrong. He's thought it's a winning issue for some time.

So you think that he thinks he's getting bad press about his handling of the shooting, but you think that he thinks he'll get good press if he's "tough on immigration"? via undermining the constitution?

GreenGoo · Post by **GreenGoo** » Tue Oct 30, 2018 10:59 am

Skinypupy wrote: Tue Oct 30, 2018 10:55 am Among the faithful 25-30% (who will not waver, regardless of the message), he's absolutely correct in that assumption. I'm seeing lots of cheers about this proclamation from the MAGA crowd on social media this morning.

Were there a lot of complaints about his handling of the shooting from that same MAGA crowd prior?

My point is that he wasn't getting bad press from the usual suspects, and he'll continue to not get bad press from them no matter what he does.

There is literally no change in PR whether he's devaluing jewish lives or keeping brown people out of the country.

Skinypupy · Post by **Skinypupy** » Tue Oct 30, 2018 11:01 am

GreenGoo wrote: Tue Oct 30, 2018 10:59 am
Skinypupy wrote: Tue Oct 30, 2018 10:55 am Among the faithful 25-30% (who will not waver, regardless of the message), he's absolutely correct in that assumption. I'm seeing lots of cheers about this proclamation from the MAGA crowd on social media this morning.
Were there a lot of complaints about his handling of the shooting from that same MAGA crowd prior?

Not that I noticed. They all seemed to mostly ignore that particular bit of awful.