The Trump Card...

[Grizzly]

I can be sold on engagement. Meeting .. diplomacy .. talk .. bully .. slam dunk .. whatever ..... but honored? Really? Should any POTUS be saying that regarding that scumbag?

How do any of us know what Trump intended to say, or meant, or thought he should have said, or said last year, or might say tomorrow ..? As POTUS aren't the words he speaks more significant?

Being a Trumpster appears to require more faith than any religion out there.

Sent from my VS987 using EO Forums mobile app

 

[Turtle]

I can be sold on engagement. Meeting .. diplomacy .. talk .. bully .. slam dunk .. whatever ..... but honored? Really? Should any POTUS be saying that regarding that scumbag?

Depends on what he meant. If he was honored to meet him, the same way one might be honored to meet Clint Eastwood, that's a problem. If he meant he would be honored to slam dunk the guy, that's very different.

All I know is, you can get a better gauge of someone face to face than you can third handed.

How do any of us know what Trump intended to say, or meant, or thought he should have said, or said last year, or might say tomorrow ..?

That's precisely it. Unless you know what he meant, it's meaningless to attach your own meaning to it, and then hammer him for that meaning.

As POTUS aren't the words he speaks more significant?

Traditionally, sure. Trump is not your run-of-the-mill POTUS. You'd think people would be aware of that by now.

Being a Trumpster appears to require more faith than any religion out there.

All it requires is patience, to see what happens. Freaking out over all the possibilities, or worse, passing judgment based on interpretations and assumptions, is meaningless at best, dangerous at worse.

 

[skyraider]

POTUS: Trump ,unlike Obama, has not given Iran billions of our dollars, some how we forget these things, and the Fast and the Furious and so on......Trump is being blasted for many things these days, but we forget , Obama got away with many things and the people never said a thing, except at the voting booths. Now gang, Hillary and Bill are still walking tall and loaded with big bucks,,ugh, did I mention that DOJ guy , yep boy Eric Holder,,,he be walking tall and loving it too. I just love American justice,,,,the working guy gets the shaft and the government guy gets accolades of praise for doing a bad job... Now for our Congress and Senate clowns,,,,oh well, life goes on for some.

 

[ATeam]

Fox News: Frustrated Conservatives Ready to Start Winning Under Trump

With the passage of time, Trump's behavior patterns in office are becoming more clear, as is the response from various sources.

Trump is clearly NOT the capable deal maker he presented himself to be on the campaign trail. The fact that he is a successful business man is proving irrelevant now that he is attempting to operate in another domain. The man is out of his element. He is floundering and, as this news story shows, Republicans are beginning to figure this out.

Trump has consistently reversed himself or caved on numerous issues. This is not because it is part of some brilliant, master strategy that only Trump knows. It's not because Congress cannot get its act together to support Trump like his supporters think Congress should. It's because Trump is a super-narcissist whose perception of reality is flawed. He has no strategy except to do whatever serves him in the moment.

Trump's willingness to hand the Democrats a number of victories in the budget bill he is about to sign is only the most recent example. Trump's saber rattling with North Korea has had little effect. North Korea continues to test missiles and issue insane threats. South Korea flat-out refused to pay the money Trump said they should pay for the THAAD missile defense system. Trump's threat to end NAFTA was quickly reversed after he heard from Canada and Mexico.

World leaders are coming to understand that Trump's words are meaningless. Republicans are beginning to understand this too.

Pence will come to look better and better as these trends continue; leading, I believe, to the completion of the impeachment scenario I predicted. The Republicans who have the power to do so will impeach Trump to get the president Pence they prefer and with him, stronger hopes of getting things done.

 

[Turtle]

Since, clearly, 102 days into office is more than enough time for Trump to have completed all the items on his agenda, the notion that he is failing bigly and is obviously out of his element and impeachment is inevitable, seems like a pretty big takeaway from an article about the failings of an incompetent Republican congressional leadership.

Probably wouldn't hurt to read the full, original story at The Washington Examiner.

 

[ATeam]

Since, clearly, 102 days into office is more than enough time for Trump to have completed all the items on his agenda, the notion that he is failing bigly and is obviously out of his element and impeachment is inevitable, seems like a pretty big takeaway from an article about the failings of an incompetent Republican congressional leadership.

Probably wouldn't hurt to read the full, original story at The Washington Examiner.

Except, my prediction/views are not based on that single article. The elements of Trump's upcoming impeachment that need to align all existed the day he was elected. The article shows some of the movement now underway that will bring the elements of impeachment into alignment.

When Trump supporters defend the reversals and setbacks, they frequently appeal to the future (102 days is not enough time) or place the blame somewhere else ("the failings of an incompetent Republican congressional leadership"). That works for them and it keeps Trump elevated in their esteem. It also blinds them to the fact that the elements for impeachment are in place and they are moving toward alignment.

The Republicans find it very easy to be the party of no. They said no to Obama's Supreme Court nomination. They have shut down the government. They said no on Obamacare numerous times when Obama was in office. They turned on House Speaker Boehner. They have "Cantored" longstanding republicans out of office with right-wing primary activism. When more elements align, it will come easily to these same Republicans to say no to Donald Trump.

The Republican-majority Congress may have inept leadership but that leadership has the power to impeach Trump, and they will likely do so as the elements align.

 

[Turtle]

Please do not twist the meanings of my words. "The failings of an incompetent Republican congressional leadership" is a comment solely about the content of the article and in no way addresses Trump's "reversals and setbacks."

You cited an article about the failings of Republicans in Congress, ostensibly to give us some some compelling insight, as a pretext to wax poetic about Trump's setbacks and failures, and as one more item of an aligning list of things which will lead to his impeachment. That seems to be more wishful, rather than critical, thinking.

 

[ATeam]

I read [The Art of the Deal] it many years ago, then revisited it early last year when he looked like he was in this for real. I wouldn't encourage anyone to put too much stock in the book, either, but knowing what is in the book certainly gives one more context with which to speculate about his words and actions. For example, within the context of the traditional, pedestrian politician, a speculative conclusion of "His empty promises, flip flops and the ease with which he caves all build up," makes perfect logical sense. In the context of The Art of the Deal, very different conclusions can be reached.

Trump did not write The Art of the Deal. He hired a ghost writer named Tony Schwartz to write it. Regarding context, what Tony Schwartz has to say about Trump is significant. About Trump, Schwartz says, "Lying is second nature to him." Schwartz characterizes Trump as a a pathological liar and sociopath.

If we wish to use the book to provide more context with which to speculate about Trump's words and actions and reach "very different conclusions," it is only fair to also consider the context set by the man who actually wrote the book.

 

[ATeam]

... You cited an article about the failings of Republicans in Congress, ostensibly to give us some some compelling insight, as a pretext to wax poetic about Trump's setbacks and failures, and as one more item of an aligning list of things which will lead to his impeachment. That seems to be more wishful, rather than critical, thinking.

If you predict that a bridge is likely to fall because of its deteriorating condition, it is neither wishful thinking nor critical thinking to bring it to the attention of others that yet another crack in the bridge has developed.

 

[Turtle]

what Tony Schwartz has to say about Trump is significant.

Especially if what he has to say is negative.

Schwartz characterizes Trump as a a pathological liar and sociopath.

Dr. Schwartz, is it?

For every independent confirmation of your thoughts and biases on Trump you can find, it's easy to find one that contradicts it.

If you predict that a bridge is likely to fall because of its deteriorating condition, it is neither wishful thinking nor critical thinking to bring it to the attention of others that yet another crack in the bridge has developed.

Yeah, but you used an article about bridge graffiti to bolster your position that the bridge will fail.

 

[ATeam]

In today's news, Trump is about to sign a bill that counteracts several of his stated initiatives. In so doing, he is avoiding a threatened government shutdown. Then he says (Tweets) “Our country needs a good ‘shutdown’ in September to fix mess!”

He acts to avoid a shutdown and then calls for a shutdown. He calls for several funding changes in the campaign and in office and then signs a bill that not only does not provide what he is calling for but actually provides the opposite in some cases (an increase in funding for Planed Parenthood, for example).

Does anyone else think this is simply nuts? If Trump wanted to, he could rally a collection of Republicans and Democrats with sufficient votes to steamroll the Freedom Caucus and the extreme left in the Democratic Party. That's a coalition that could actually get something done like tax reform, infrastructure, health care reform, and maybe even a balanced budget.

But there is no sign Trump wants to do that. He seems pleased to amplify the longstanding partisan divide that keeps Washington stuck, and with it the country.

 

[ATeam]

For every independent confirmation of your thoughts and biases on Trump you can find, it's easy to find one that contradicts it.

I freely admit to confirmation bias. I have made a prediction based on my view of the political landscape at the time. When something develops that suggests the prediction will come true, of course I will notice it. Of course I will highlight it. That said, just because I have a bias, it does not mean that I cannot still be objective and cannot view a fact as a fact and give opposing views a fair hearing.

Indeed, opposing views are helpful in maintaining objectivity. The good news is, now that Trump is in office, we do not have to rely on supposition, speculation and spin. Trump is now developing a trail of facts that illustrate not how he will be as president but how he has been.

Now, you can accuse me of viewing those facts through a confirmation bias lens, and I can say the same of you. There is no way to resolve that. There is a way to render my impeachment prediction valid or invalid. That's simply to let time pass and watch what develops.

You might note that I have admitted Trump's base is holding firm. That's not a fact that supports my impeachment scenario but it remains true. Yes, I have a confirmation bias, but I can also remain objective. That's because I know the bias exists. I account for it when reviewing the big picture and drawing my conclusions.

 

[Turtle]

One thing to keep in mind is, a government shutdown in September carries far greater negative political consequences for those up for reelection in 2018 than does a shutdown in May, before the recess. It may be a case of picking your battles.

I do agree that with Republicans in control of everything, they'd better git r dun.

 

[Worn Out Manager]

So, I guess he did accomplish ONE thing

Sent from my hand-held Etch-A- Sketch

 

[ATeam]

This article talks about the possibility that the New York state legislature may pas a law that would require the state tax authority to post on its website the last five years of returns filed by the president and vice president, the state’s two U.S. senators, as well as the governor, lieutenant governor, state comptroller and state attorney general. The state tax authority would continue to post returns filed by those individuals until they leave office.

Will it happen? I don't know.

A number of states are working on laws that will require presidential candidates to publicly release their tax returns as a condition of getting on the state ballot.

Eventually, one way or another, Trump's tax returns are going to come out.

 

[Turtle]

This article talks about the possibility that the New York state legislature may pas a law that would require the state tax authority to post on its website the last five years of returns filed by the president and vice president, the state’s two U.S. senators, as well as the governor, lieutenant governor, state comptroller and state attorney general. The state tax authority would continue to post returns filed by those individuals until they leave office.

Will it happen? I don't know.

Me neither. But, the Republicans control the NY State Senate, so it's unlikely to even come up for a vote. And, if the Supreme Court takes the view that the law is politically motivated and punitive, they'll strike it down on privacy violations of the 14th Amendment.

The New Jersey bill, for example, would compel candidates to turn over to the state everything they would turn over to the Internal Revenue Service, leaving it to a state official to decide what to redact, like Social Security numbers and other personal information. Candidates shouldn’t have to relinquish this much control over their privacy.

A number of states are working on laws that will require presidential candidates to publicly release their tax returns as a condition of getting on the state ballot.

A number of states have been working on those laws for decades, always when the president is of the opposite political party. Since there is no Constitutional requirement of the releasing of tax returns to be president, and the Supreme Court has historically taken a dim view of lawmakers (federal, state and local) trying to resolve a ordinary political skirmishes by making it a matter of statutory law, making the release of tax returns as a ballot requirement is highly unlikely to survive the Court. As the Court has stated in multiple rulings, the political process is a flexible tool for addressing such issues case by case; a statute is a monolithic, one-size-fits-all solution, and it requires strict scrutiny.

Eventually, one way or another, Trump's tax returns are going to come out.

Many liberals feel that if they want something really really bad, they should have it, they deserve it, solely for the reason that they want it really really bad. Trump's tax returns may very well come out, but they will not come out in a legal manner.

 

[muttly]

So, I guess he did accomplish ONE thing

Sent from my hand-held Etch-A- Sketch

The quote rings true even if it wasn't the real Sean Spicer.

 

[Turtle]

Sean Spicier's Twitter feed is hilarious.
Sean Spicier (@sean_spicier) on Twitter

So Obama told Flynn, "if you like your security clearance, you may keep your security clearance"

 

[Turtle]

Just thought I'd point this out, in order to, you know, get my own confirmational bias neener neener in, of the importance of how perception of the economy trumps the hard economic indicator numbers in a presidential election.
This is the best news Donald Trump has had in a while - CNNPolitics.com

"President Obama repeatedly struggled with the fact that while most economic indicators suggested the economy was improving -- particularly in his second term -- large numbers of people still felt squeezed. Insisting that things were going better while lots of people just didn't feel that way was a total political loser."

"James Carville's famous 1992 campaign mantra -- "It's the economy, stupid" -- is as true today as it was 25 years ago. If Trump gets the economy right -- and get credit for doing so -- he will be in good shape as he moves into a 2020 reelection bid."

 

[davekc]

Too many people likely have access to Trumps returns at the IRS. Just playing the odds, has to be a handful at the IRS that are Colburn fans and hate his guts. Leak should have happened already if there was a good smoking gun. Just my take. Everything else gets leaked.