The Trump Presidency – 2016

[mckerney]

Originally Posted by Thomkal

I was reading through a lot of his posts and comments on Twitter about the Omnibus. A lot of his base apparently did want him to veto it, and are unhappy he didn't. Plus they didn't include money for his wall, and did include (apparently) some funding for Planned Parenthood, Sanctuary Cities, and others things Dems wanted.

That's what they call The Art of the Deal.

[Thomkal]

Dems really got a lot of what they wanted, Trump didn't get very much:

GOP Congress rebuffs Trump and goes on a spending spree - POLITICO

[mckerney]

NEW: When Trump threatened to veto the spending bill this morning, aides warned him that he might catch blame for shutting down the government on a weekend he planned to spend at Mar-a-Lago.

“F— that,” the president replied. https://t.co/AOnFQwRx11

— Rebecca Ballhaus (@rebeccaballhaus) March 23, 2018

So he wanted to veto the bill but ultimately decided he couldn't let the job of governing get in the way of his weekend golfing plans.

[JPhillips]

We've never had a weaker President. He's all plumage and no beak.

[Thomkal]

Yep his base is not happy with him:

Coulter, Drudge blast Trump for signing spending bill | TheHill

[BBT]

The good news is that we probably aren't going to war with him in office once he finds out that golfing while troops are dying isn't a good look.

[JPhillips]

I don't know what's funnier, Trump hiring DiGenova or DiGenova possibly turning down the job.

[NobodyHere]

Trump bans most transgender Americans from serving in the military

[Thomkal]

:::sigh::: does he really think he'll win back his base with this? Yet another court battle he's going to lose.

[BishopMVP]

Originally Posted by SackAttack

Twelfth Amendment answers your question, Bishop.

Nobody ineligible to be President is eligible to serve as Vice-President.

As Obama has already served two full terms, he is ineligible to be further elected as President as matters currently stand. As a result, he is also ineligible to serve as Vice-President.

Now, I think there IS a loophole in the Constitution that could get Obama back into the White House. As you point out, the 22nd only talks about the election of a President. Obama cannot be elected President again, which means he can't be elected Vice-President, either.

But the Presidential succession extends further than that. He could be elected to the House of Representatives and, if Democrats controlled the chamber, become Speaker of the House. If that happened, and the Presidency and Vice-Presidency were vacated at the same time for any reason, he would probably be eligible to ascend directly to the Presidency to complete the current term of office (but could not stand for re-election). Likewise if any future Democratic President appointed him to the Cabinet (albeit he'd be much further down the line of succession in such a case).

But the 22nd says he couldn't then (nor can he now) be elected President again, and the 12th says nobody who's ineligible to be elected President may be elected VP. So absent a fringe case like the immediately preceding, that's your answer.

Thanks. Figured it was way too obvious a loophole not to mention whether they could be elected as VP, should've guessed it was covered in an earlier amendment.

[Thomkal]

Meanwhile in Wisconsin, they are so afraid of Democrats winning the two special elections they are required to hold by state law, they are defying a judge's orders, and are going to have a special session...just so they can change the election laws so they don't have to have the elections:

Wisconsin GOP will tinker with election laws rather than follow court order | TheHill

[BBT]

"It's clear that little thought was given to the impact of the special elections ruling," they went on. "In essence, there will be two elections occurring simultaneously for the two offices. It will undoubtedly lead to voter confusion and electoral chaos. Also, holding the special elections after the conclusion of the regular session is a waste of taxpayer dollars and local government resources."

How will voters and electoral officials deal with two separate races in separate districts occurring at the same time...that never happens

[cartman]

Trump's base has something they can be happy about. There is language in the Omnibus bill banning ACORN from getting any federal funding.

[lungs]

Originally Posted by Thomkal

Meanwhile in Wisconsin, they are so afraid of Democrats winning the two special elections they are required to hold by state law, they are defying a judge's orders, and are going to have a special session...just so they can change the election laws so they don't have to have the elections:

Wisconsin GOP will tinker with election laws rather than follow court order | TheHill

It’s kind of moot now as the legislature is wrapping up its business. But those greasy Republicans have been orchestrating it this whole time, from the timing of the seats opening up to not scheduling elections. I hope they get destroyed this fall.

[JPhillips]

This isn't just about votes in the legislature. State office holders do a lot of constituency service, from ceremonial duties to help navigating the state bureaucracy. Keeping these seats open causes real harm to the people in those districts.

[Thomkal]

Originally Posted by BBT

How will voters and electoral officials deal with two separate races in separate districts occurring at the same time...that never happens

yeah the reasons they use to justify their actions in situations like this have become pretty laughable. I mean its an election, not something where people are going to riot or cause chaos. (normally)

[Thomkal]

Originally Posted by cartman

Trump's base has something they can be happy about. There is language in the Omnibus bill banning ACORN from getting any federal funding.

I had to go look it up because I was pretty sure ACORN no longer existed. Thank God the Republicans were there to stop a non-existant group from getting federal funds.

There is also an anti-porn "rider" in it. To make sure it was enforced they added it four times. Of course legal experts say its completely meaningless but...

Here Is The Single Dumbest Thing In The Government Spending Bill | HuffPost

[Thomkal]

Originally Posted by lungs

It’s kind of moot now as the legislature is wrapping up its business. But those greasy Republicans have been orchestrating it this whole time, from the timing of the seats opening up to not scheduling elections. I hope they get destroyed this fall.

I thought I had read they were going to have a special session just so they could change the law?

[lungs]

Originally Posted by Thomkal

I thought I had read they were going to have a special session just so they could change the law?

It's going to be this week or very soon, before any election would take place.

Originally Posted by JPhillips

This isn't just about votes in the legislature. State office holders do a lot of constituency service, from ceremonial duties to help navigating the state bureaucracy. Keeping these seats open causes real harm to the people in those districts.

True, I didn't consider that aspect.

[RainMaker]

The porn thing is weird since you'd think they'd drop the "family values" act after making Trump their party leader. Guy was banging porn stars.

[Thomkal]

Originally Posted by RainMaker

The porn thing is weird since you'd think they'd drop the "family values" act after making Trump their party leader. Guy was banging porn stars.

yes and make sure to watch 60 Minutes on Sunday to get all the details!

[NobodyHere]

Originally Posted by Thomkal

yes and make sure to watch 60 Minutes on Sunday to get all the details!

I'm hope I'm wrong but I think nothing major will come out of that interview. It will be about Stormy Daniels promoting Stormy Daniels.

[cuervo72]

Originally Posted by lungs

It’s kind of moot now as the legislature is wrapping up its business. But those greasy Republicans have been orchestrating it this whole time, from the timing of the seats opening up to not scheduling elections. I hope they get destroyed this fall.

Not sure which is worse -- that or Pennsylvania, where the GOP is trying to impeach judges who ruled against their gerrymander.

[SackAttack]

Originally Posted by Thomkal

I thought I had read they were going to have a special session just so they could change the law?

They kinda have to. It's that or contempt of court.

But it's this fucked double jeopardy bullshit because the affected districts won't have representation in a vote designed to deny them representation for at least another 7 months.

Bonus fun? If Walker had called the elections when those Senators first resigned to join his Administration, the special elections could have been on Tuesday's ballot. Yeah, wankery because the legislature will be out of session the rest of the year, but the court bullshit never needed to happen.

There never needed to be a separate election to cost the state additional money.

And there never needed to be this appearance of 'oh shit we're afraid we're gonna lose hold onto power by any means necessary,' whether that's actually what's going on or not.

But nobody ever went broke betting on the WI GOP to do the dumbest fucking thing imaginable at the worst possible moment.

[SackAttack]

Originally Posted by lungs

It's going to be this week or very soon, before any election would take place.

There's an election on Tuesday (or possibly a week from Tuesday) to select a Supreme Court justice, among other things. It's too late for the special election to be on that ballot because Walker and the WI-GOP spent four months going THE VACANCIES HAPPENED LAST DECEMBER THEY DON'T COUNT TRA LA LA.

But, y'know. Details, right?

[SackAttack]

Originally Posted by cartman

Trump's base has something they can be happy about. There is language in the Omnibus bill banning ACORN from getting any federal funding.

Originally Posted by Thomkal

I had to go look it up because I was pretty sure ACORN no longer existed. Thank God the Republicans were there to stop a non-existant group from getting federal funds.

There is also an anti-porn "rider" in it. To make sure it was enforced they added it four times. Of course legal experts say its completely meaningless but...

Here Is The Single Dumbest Thing In The Government Spending Bill | HuffPost

It's been in every spending bill since Republicans took back control of Congress during the Obama Administration. Just like they had to vote to repeal ACA 69 billion times so every new crop of freshmen Republicans could vote against ACA to fulfill a campaign pledge, every spending bill since 2011 has had the anti-ACORN provision in it.

[mckerney]

Originally Posted by SackAttack

There's an election on Tuesday (or possibly a week from Tuesday) to select a Supreme Court justice, among other things. It's too late for the special election to be on that ballot because Walker and the WI-GOP spent four months going THE VACANCIES HAPPENED LAST DECEMBER THEY DON'T COUNT TRA LA LA.

But, y'know. Details, right?

I think most of the time was spent being spooked they lost a state senate seat in St. Croix, Pierce, and Polk Counties by 11 points.

[SackAttack]

Originally Posted by mckerney

I think most of the time was spent being spooked they lost a state senate seat in St. Croix, Pierce, and Polk Counties by 11 points.

Almost certainly. But there was still a period of a couple weeks where Walker could have called the special elections before that happened. Had he done so, there wouldn't have been a court case, they'd be on the upcoming ballot, and they wouldn't look like they were pissing their pants at the prospect of losing historically double-digit-Republican seats.

Instead, he went 'nah I don't gotta the law only requires that if they're vacated after the new year,' Democrats won the seat you mentioned, and the pants-wetting began.

And now they're talking about changing the law to make sure they can harm a group of their own godforsaken constituents against a court order.

Cowards or assholes. No middle ground.

[albionmoonlight]

Originally Posted by SackAttack

Cowards or assholes. No middle ground.

[Thomkal]

Originally Posted by SackAttack

Almost certainly. But there was still a period of a couple weeks where Walker could have called the special elections before that happened. Had he done so, there wouldn't have been a court case, they'd be on the upcoming ballot, and they wouldn't look like they were pissing their pants at the prospect of losing historically double-digit-Republican seats.

Instead, he went 'nah I don't gotta the law only requires that if they're vacated after the new year,' Democrats won the seat you mentioned, and the pants-wetting began.

And now they're talking about changing the law to make sure they can harm a group of their own godforsaken constituents against a court order.

Cowards or assholes. No middle ground.

Thanks for chiming in on this Sack. So is there any movement by Dems to impeach Walker? Most people in Wis fed up about him and R's actions?

[JPhillips]

From WaPo:

“59 percent of registered Republican voters said they consider themselves more a supporter of Trump than the Republican Party.”

[lungs]

Originally Posted by Thomkal

Thanks for chiming in on this Sack. So is there any movement by Dems to impeach Walker? Most people in Wis fed up about him and R's actions?

He is up for re-election this year. Lots of Dems vying for the nomination. Hopefully we are smart enough not to nominate Paul Soglin, Mayor of Madison. Not that I dislike Soglin, but he will not play well statewide.

[Thomkal]

Originally Posted by lungs

He is up for re-election this year. Lots of Dems vying for the nomination. Hopefully we are smart enough not to nominate Paul Soglin, Mayor of Madison. Not that I dislike Soglin, but he will not play well statewide.

Hopefully the Dems don't blow this. Walker's practically gift-wrapped the governorship for them.

[lungs]

Originally Posted by Thomkal

Hopefully the Dems don't blow this. Walker's practically gift-wrapped the governorship for them.

Dems have been energized against Walker for eight years and he's still survived a recall and regular election. Problem is that he's never faced an opponent that can either a) Win the western swing counties or b) energize turnout in Milwaukee and Madison.

Not quite sure who that right person is in this crowded primary in 2018.

[Thomkal]

Well Trump can tweet about his damn Wall again (the amount budgeted in the Omnibus is a down payment). And how we shouldn't believe the fake news about the law firms that don't want to represent him, but any tweets about the marches throughout the country yesterday? Nada.

Trump claims many lawyers want to represent him: 'Don’t believe the Fake News narrative' | TheHill

[mckerney]

CPR is enough to save gunshot victims, right?

Santorum: Instead of calling for gun laws, kids should take CPR classes

"How about kids instead of looking to someone else to solve their problem, do something about maybe taking CPR classes or trying to deal with situations that when there is a violent shooter that you can actually respond to that," Santorum said on CNN's "State of the Union."

[kingfc22]

Yea. Shame on them for marching on Washington where Congress is supposedly representing the wants of the people.

[kingfc22]

Originally Posted by Thomkal

Well Trump can tweet about his damn Wall again (the amount budgeted in the Omnibus is a down payment). And how we shouldn't believe the fake news about the law firms that don't want to represent him, but any tweets about the marches throughout the country yesterday? Nada.

Trump claims many lawyers want to represent him: 'Don’t believe the Fake News narrative' | TheHill

And now the latest 2 attorneys who were joining his team are not.

Trump really needs to mix up his tweets. Claim false = true.

[NobodyHere]

Originally Posted by mckerney

CPR is enough to save gunshot victims, right?

Santorum: Instead of calling for gun laws, kids should take CPR classes

First Aid is never a bad thing to learn and would probably be a more effective solution at savings lives than marching.

[digamma]

Not if the marches turn into votes that pass meaningful legislation that actually does reduce gun deaths.

As a side note, I was going to type all of the things Santorum got wrong in his interview there, but instead I just googled "santorum."

[NobodyHere]

Originally Posted by digamma

Not if the marches turn into votes that pass meaningful legislation that actually does reduce gun deaths.

And the odds of that happening is about the same as the Cleveland Browns winning the Super Bowl next season.

[molson]

Originally Posted by NobodyHere

First Aid is never a bad thing to learn and would probably be a effective solution at savings lives than marching.

I'm pretty sure they don't have to choose one or the other. Walking out of school for a day does not prevent one from also learning CPR.

[Thomkal]

Originally Posted by kingfc22

And now the latest 2 attorneys who were joining his team are not.

Trump really needs to mix up his tweets. Claim false = true.

Ya know, the one thing I would have thought Trump had a handle on was the timing of his tweets:

Trump’s legal team in flux as he reverses decision to hire controversial pair - POLITICO

[Honolulu_Blue]

Originally Posted by NobodyHere

First Aid is never a bad thing to learn and would probably be a effective solution at savings lives than marching.

Good point. I mean, it's not like protests, marching, organizing people to vote and the like have ever accomplished anything in the U.S.

They should just learn CPR so they can try to save the lives of the friends and fellow students as they lie dying from gunshot wounds. Just think of all of the lives those six and seven year-olds could have saved at Sandy Hook had they just learned CPR in kindergarten.

[AENeuman]

Originally Posted by NobodyHere

And the odds of that happening is about the same as.....

Said somebody, everytime before every meaningful change, since at least Plato.

”Now, in my opinion, the procession of the native inhabitants was fine; but the one the Thracians conducted was no less fitting a show. After we had prayed and looked on, we went off toward town.”

[NobodyHere]

Originally Posted by Honolulu_Blue

Good point. I mean, it's not like protests, marching, organizing people to vote and the like have ever accomplished anything in the U.S.

They should just learn CPR so they can try to save the lives of the friends and fellow students as they lie dying from gunshot wounds. Just think of all of the lives those six and seven year-olds could have saved at Sandy Hook had they just learned CPR in kindergarten.

So no one should learn first aid because it wouldn't have worked in your narrow scenario? Learning first aid has benefits far beyond gun shootings.

[NobodyHere]

Originally Posted by AENeuman

Said somebody, everytime before every meaningful change, since at least Plato.

So what do you think the odds are of effective gun legislation happening because of these marches?

[molson]

Originally Posted by NobodyHere

So no one should learn first aid because it wouldn't have worked in your narrow scenario? Learning first aid has benefits far beyond gun shootings.

What's preventing them from learning CPR? I don't understand.

[JPhillips]

Originally Posted by NobodyHere

So what do you think the odds are of effective gun legislation happening because of these marches?

Gun control issues are going to be front and center in a number of campaigns this year. That's in part due to the organized efforts of those calling for gun control. Federal laws are tough because one party is committed to no legislation and the President is a wildcard, but I'd expect local and state level bills in many locations.

[whomario]

They are higher than without them. But hey, why even strive for something that is hard to achieve ? Next people will say they are only doing it to shirk moving the lawn or doing their homework. Bloody entitled little brats ...

Originally Posted by NobodyHere

So no one should learn first aid because it wouldn't have worked in your narrow scenario? Learning first aid has benefits far beyond gun shootings.

No one actually said that.

You have taken/presented the position that knowing CPR somehow makes these protests redundant, no one said that doing these protests (or even improved gun regulation) makes CPR redundant.

And what you call "a solution" is actually just another treatment for the symptoms with which one can pat oneself on the back and feel good about doing something.

I mean, it isn't the same level as arming teachers but the line of argument is not without similarities.