Miscellaneous Trump (5 Viewers)

[Huntn]

Anxiety surges as Donald Trump may be indicted soon: Why 2024 is 'the final battle' and 'the big one'​

Anxiety surges as Donald Trump may be indicted soon: Why 2024 is 'the final battle' and 'the big one'

Donald Trump's many legal problems – and calls for protests – have generated new fears of political violence and anxiety about the 2024 election.

www.yahoo.com

WASHINGTON – It looks like American politics is entering a new age of anxiety, triggered by an unprecedented legal development: The potential indictment of a former president and current presidential candidate.

Donald Trump's many legal problems – and calls for protests by his followers – have generated new fears of political violence and anxiety about the unknowable impact all this will have on the already-tense 2024 presidential election

I’ll reframe this is a more accurate way, Are Presidents above the law? This new age was spurred into existence when home grown dummies elected a corrupt, mentally ill, anti-democratic, would be dictator as President and don’t bother to hold him responsible for his crimes, don’t want to because in the ensuing mayhem and destruction, they think they will be better off. The man is actually advocating violence (not the first time). And btw, screw democracy too. If this feeling spreads, we are In deep shirt.

This goes beyond one treasonous Peice of work and out to all his minions. This is on you or should we be sympathetic to the idea of they can’t help being selfish suckers to the Nation’s detriment? Donald Trump is the single largest individual threat to our democracy and it‘s all going to boil down to will the majority of the GOP return to his embrace and start slinging his excrement to support him?

 

[Sendai]

No comment on the law passed by Congress which clearly does apply to the President? No comment on the clear convention that has been established in modern times where Presidents do act in accordance with the Emoluments Clause? (Since Andrew Jackson)

This isn’t honest engagement is it?

If challenged by a president the law passed by Congress would have a constitutional challenge.

With The current make up of the it’s a real good bet they would find it unconstitutional. The 6 are likely to view it as not applying to elected officials.

 

[superchuck500]

If it happens the plane is to be given to the Defense Department.

As to after his term.

“Presidential libraries and their holdings belong to the American people and are overseen by the National Archives and Records Administration (NARA). While Presidents initially create and build the libraries, they donate them to the federal government, which then operates and maintains them. The Presidential Records Act of 1978 establishes that records created on or after January 20, 1981, are the property of the United States”

It will be just like Reagan’s plane.

Actually I doubt this will even happen.

Fair enough - but isn't the Reagan plane an exhibit about Air Force One? And it didn't go there until the plane was actually retired from service?

The whole thing is just goofy - and it's because Trump likes the gaudy decor.

 

[superchuck500]

If challenged by a president the law passed by Congress would have a constitutional challenge.

With The current make up of the it’s a real good bet they would find it unconstitutional. The 6 are likely to view it as not applying to elected officials.

Presidents don't challenge laws, they just do what they think they can or can't do and that's how it gets challenged - that's what creates the justiciable case.

But what is the basis for your confidence that 6 justices will find that the foreign emoluments clause doesn't apply to the president? Trump didn't even raise that challenge in the first administration case. 373 F. Supp. 3d 191, 196 n.3 (D.D.C. 2019) ("the parties do not dispute that the [Foreign Emoluments] Clause applies to the President").

In the DOJ OLC opinions on the question, it concludes that "The President surely “holds an Office of Profit or Trust,” and the Peace Prize, including its monetary award, is a “present” or “Emolument . . . of any kind whatever.” U.S.
Const. art I, § 9, cl. 8.

https://www.justice.gov/opinion/file/18441/dl?inline#:~:text=The%20Emoluments%20Clause%20of%20the,Peace%20Prize%20without%20congressional%20consent.

See also:

https://www.justice.gov/file/147686/dl

 

[MT15]

This entire support of a gift to Trump worth $400 million dollars, which will require at least a similar outlay of taxpayer money before he even uses it is just so transparent. Someone who supports this doesn’t really have any boundaries of what they will support, I fear.

As for the convention of anybody but Trump controlling that plane after he leaves office - well that just defies reality. We’ve seen Trump refuse to give paper records to the National Archives and fire the Archivist. Anyone arguing that Trump will willingly turn over a plane worth a billion dollars to the National Archives once he leaves office is just not an honest person.

Sorry to say so this bluntly, but it’s a completely dishonest argument.

 

[MT15]

 

[RobF]

Fair enough - but isn't the Reagan plane an exhibit about Air Force One? And it didn't go there until the plane was actually retired from service?

The whole thing is just goofy - and it's because Trump likes the gaudy decor.

I believe so - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/VC-137C_SAM_27000

29 years of service from 1972 to 2001, as backup from 1990.

I don't see how a Qatari-owned 747-8 worth hundreds of millions of dollars being gifted under a particular president and then transferred to that same president's national library when they leave office is "just the same" as a plane that wasn't a gift from a foreign regime and served under Nixon, Ford, Carter, Reagan, HW Bush, Clinton, and W Bush being on display at Reagan's Presidential Library after it was retired, somehow.

 

[TampaJoe]

If challenged by a president the law passed by Congress would have a constitutional challenge.

With The current make up of the it’s a real good bet they would find it unconstitutional. The 6 are likely to view it as not applying to elected officials.

Here’s the thing with this whole gift giving deal. You lose the ability to birch about “crooked” Hillary or “crooked” Joe or the swamp and corruption. This reeks of self interest. Clearly Quatar is stroking his ego. Why? I dunno and I don’t care. Is it illegal? I dunno. It is unethical. Plain and simple.

My wife worked for FedEx for 30 years. She couldn’t accept anything over $25 dollars. It was strictly prohibited. I will bet there are similar rules in place for rank and file government employees. It is high time we as citizens hold our “public servants” to some sensible ethical standards.

This whole airplane business is ridiculous on its face. He doesn’t need a plane. We got plenty of them.

 

[Optimus Prime]

Again, fork everyone who voted for this
==========================

Today, I am resigning from the National Science Board and the Library of Congress Scholars Council.

Even as the White House threatens the foundational tenets of constitutional democracy and continues to slash funding for essential social services, it is tempting to hope that the public institutions charged with promoting and protecting knowledge will, nevertheless, soldier on with their mission. I did.

Since January 2025, scientists and librarians, program officers and policy analysts at the National Science Foundation, the Library of Congress, and other federal offices and agencies have focused on their work, despite an increasingly hostile political environment. We’ve also seen civil servants fired and accused of not making the mark, vendors’s contracts ignored, and grants and fellowships cancelled.

Perseverance has its limits. The erosion of these institutions’ integrity—and the growing realization that it is impossible to fulfill their missions in good faith—has made the cost of continuing untenable. This is why I must step away from my work with two federal institutions I care deeply about.

In both these roles, over the past few years, I've been asked to serve on diverse bodies that offer guidance about how the Executive and Legislative branches can be stewards of knowledge and create structure to enable discovery, innovation, and ingenuity. In the instance of the National Science Board, this ideal has dissolved so gradually, yet so completely, that I barely noticed its absence until confronted with its hollow simulacrum.

I have encountered increasing barriers to the exercise of honest counsel. These repeated obstacles of procedural circumvention, particularly insidious to those of us who have long advocated for more democratic and inclusive knowledge systems, represent not just personal frustration, but institutional regression.

Freedom of expression is not merely an abstract principle, or even a constitutional right, but a practical necessity for meaningful advisory work. In Ray Bradbury's Fahrenheit 451, published as short stories in the late 1940s and as a novel in 1953, warned not only of the destruction of books, but of a society in which people had lost the desire to read them.

The parallel today is not only the administration’s effort to destroy and suppress knowledge, but also the institution’s willingness to accept the cultivated irrelevance of it—a challenge that undermines any serious effort to conduct research, inform policy, or guide public institutions............

Why I’m Resigning from the NSF and Library of Congress

I cannot participate in systems that require dishonesty as the price of belonging.

time.com

 

[Optimus Prime]

Here’s the thing with this whole gift giving deal. You lose the ability to birch about “crooked” Hillary or “crooked” Joe or the swamp and corruption. This reeks of self interest. Clearly Quatar is stroking his ego. Why? I dunno and I don’t care. Is it illegal? I dunno. It is unethical. Plain and simple.

My wife worked for FedEx for 30 years. She couldn’t accept anything over $25 dollars. It was strictly prohibited. I will bet there are similar rules in place for rank and file government employees. It is high time we as citizens hold our “public servants” to some sensible ethical standards.

This whole airplane business is ridiculous on its face. He doesn’t need a plane. We got plenty of them.

Both sides!

 

[superchuck500]

Here’s the thing with this whole gift giving deal. You lose the ability to birch about “crooked” Hillary or “crooked” Joe or the swamp and corruption. This reeks of self interest. Clearly Quatar is stroking his ego. Why? I dunno and I don’t care. Is it illegal? I dunno. It is unethical. Plain and simple.

My wife worked for FedEx for 30 years. She couldn’t accept anything over $25 dollars. It was strictly prohibited. I will bet there are similar rules in place for rank and file government employees. It is high time we as citizens hold our “public servants” to some sensible ethical standards.

This whole airplane business is ridiculous on its face. He doesn’t need a plane. We got plenty of them.

I read that it had all sorts of gold and gaudy decoration in it - you know he loves that stuff.

https://www.fastcompany.com/91329575/none-of-the-objects-on-the-oval-office-mantle-were-made-in-the-u-s

 

[DJ1BigTymer]

Why? I dunno and I don’t care. Is it illegal? I dunno. It is unethical. Plain and simple.

My wife worked for FedEx for 30 years. She couldn’t accept anything over $25 dollars. It was strictly prohibited. I will bet there are similar rules in place for rank and file government employees. It is high time we as citizens hold our “public servants” to some sensible ethical standards.

This whole airplane business is ridiculous on its face. He doesn’t need a plane. We got plenty of them.

His eyes, open!

 

[Huntn]

This entire support of a gift to Trump worth $400 million dollars, which will require at least a similar outlay of taxpayer money before he even uses it is just so transparent. Someone who supports this doesn’t really have any boundaries of what they will support, I fear.

As for the convention of anybody but Trump controlling that plane after he leaves office - well that just defies reality. We’ve seen Trump refuse to give paper records to the National Archives and fire the Archivist. Anyone arguing that Trump will willingly turn over a plane worth a billion dollars to the National Archives once he leaves office is just not an honest person.

Sorry to say so this bluntly, but it’s a completely dishonest argument.

Based on the Emoluments clause, and Trump using his position as POTUS to further his brand, wheel and deal for personal profit, he could be easily impeached and convicted by Congress if it was not composed of co-conspirators.

 

[TampaJoe]

His eyes, open!

My eyes have been open. I don’t close them on party lines. Do you?

 

[efil4]

Here’s the thing with this whole gift giving deal. You lose the ability to birch about “crooked” Hillary or “crooked” Joe or the swamp and corruption. This reeks of self interest. Clearly Quatar is stroking his ego. Why? I dunno and I don’t care. Is it illegal? I dunno. It is unethical. Plain and simple.

My wife worked for FedEx for 30 years. She couldn’t accept anything over $25 dollars. It was strictly prohibited. I will bet there are similar rules in place for rank and file government employees. It is high time we as citizens hold our “public servants” to some sensible ethical standards.

This whole airplane business is ridiculous on its face. He doesn’t need a plane. We got plenty of them.

you do care. otherwise it wouldnt be an issue.

it is a clear issue - one that reeks of tit-for-tat at some point. You see it, others see it as well.

This whole argument of POTUS accepting a gift from a country that, at the very least, is suspect on human rights and terror org support, is just lunacy. There is no timeline where this would be acceptable. None.

Refreshing to see common ground.

 

[fooferdoggie]

And here Trump goes after protesters because they support Hamas but now he is taking a plane from a country that supports them a ton.

 

[UncleTrvlingJim]

Here’s the thing with this whole gift giving deal. You lose the ability to birch about “crooked” Hillary or “crooked” Joe or the swamp and corruption. This reeks of self interest. Clearly Quatar is stroking his ego. Why? I dunno and I don’t care. Is it illegal? I dunno. It is unethical. Plain and simple.

My wife worked for FedEx for 30 years. She couldn’t accept anything over $25 dollars. It was strictly prohibited. I will bet there are similar rules in place for rank and file government employees. It is high time we as citizens hold our “public servants” to some sensible ethical standards.

This whole airplane business is ridiculous on its face. He doesn’t need a plane. We got plenty of them.

That ship sailed a long time ago. In his first administration his son-in-law who was in the administration received a billion dollars from Qatar. His businesses continued to do work with foreign governments. He is currently selling access to him and other senior officials. Openly.

No one who voted for Trump cares about corruption...

 

[efil4]

That ship sailed a long time ago. In his first administration his son-in-law who was in the administration received a billion dollars from Qatar. His businesses continued to do work with foreign governments. He is currently selling access to him and other senior officials. Openly.

No one who voted for Trump cares about corruption...

Trump just announced Saudi Arabia is investing $600B in US. ( remains to be seen )

One of his most fervent supporters, Charlie Kirk, posted this just 6 years ago.

Wonder what changed? Nothing. He simply doesnt care about corruption

 

[TampaJoe]

you do care. otherwise it wouldnt be an issue.

it is a clear issue - one that reeks of tit-for-tat at some point. You see it, others see it as well.

This whole argument of POTUS accepting a gift from a country that, at the very least, is suspect on human rights and terror org support, is just lunacy. There is no timeline where this would be acceptable. None.

Refreshing to see common ground.

Let me rephrase, I don’t care about the why. That is not the point. It just should not happen. I don’t really care to hear about justification for something that should never be acceptable.

I am a CPA. If I certify financial statements, that is supposed to be an unbiased, independent opinion. I am to avoid actual conflicts of interest or the APPEARANCE of a conflict of interest. IMO, that is the standard that should be applied to elected officials, judges and executive level appointees and secretaries. It should be not be tolerated from anyone. Period. Full stop.