Trump says has power to pardon himself; critics disagree

[Get Real]

2 hours ago, attrayant said:

 

Just because somebody has fame and [a small] fortune, that means they don't want more?

Eeeeh??? Are you familiar with the differens of the two words, "need" and "want"
 

[neeray]

1 minute ago, Get Real said:

He will most definately do that.

I for one "hope he does not" make it through his first (and hopefully last) term. At the rate his flubs keep coming, I don't see how this is possible. The Singapore Summit may prove to be his biggest flub yet. I expect Kim will eat him for breakfast and spit him out while still at the table.

[Get Real]

2 hours ago, attrayant said:

Just because somebody has fame and [a small] fortune

Oki doki! Can´t stop laughing, actually. Nevermind, if you like to call a Bloomberg registered net worth around 3 billion dollars, for a small fortune.
Yeah, yeah! It´s up to you, but my guess is that a regular persons finances would treat 30 million dollars as a small furtune. I guess you must be tremendously rich, to state a thing like that. 

[Get Real]

2 minutes ago, neeray said:

I for one "hope he does not" make it through his first (and hopefully last) term. At the rate his flubs keep coming, I don't see how this is possible. The Singapore Summit may prove to be his biggest flub yet. I expect Kim will eat him for breakfast and spit him out while still at the table.

You know that´s my wishes too. Unfortunately it´s still only a wish, but as you say it might be true in the future.

[bkk7]

3 hours ago, Boon Mee said:

Trump could indeed legally pardon himself if he wishes to but it's a moot point. 

No cause or reason to. 

well, duh, not *yet*! because the investigation isn't over!

 

but there are 22 indictments already and more on the way ? 

 

anyway, he absolutely can't pardon himself. the US is a democracy. if he can pardon himself he has absolute power and could bomb American cities, then pardon himself. only a total moron would believe that's a Presidential power.

 

[JimmyJ]

10 minutes ago, Get Real said:

Oki doki! Can´t stop laughing, actually. Nevermind, if you like to call a Bloomberg registered net worth around 3 billion dollars, for a small fortune...
 

"...Bloomberg registered net worth..."

 

Bloomberg registered nothing.

They are taking a swing at it but swinging blind - it's a privately held company.

So they're accepting a valuation guess they made years ago - before it was made clear to the world that Trump is a compulsive liar -  and deducting from that.

 

If Trump actually had billions, being a (malignant) narcissist, it's impossible for me to believe he would have withheld his tax statements.

Actually, I feel he would have been making copies of them and personally posting them on telephone poles all over NYC if he had anywhere near what he claims.

Edited June 5, 2018 by JimmyJ

[bkk7]

1 hour ago, mikebike said:

I'll let you find your own lists... lol!

 

The most promising does an end run around congress and the supreme court and is attempting to get the numbers for a Convention of the States.

 

10% of states have passed the necessary legislation. 25% more have it somewhere in their houses atm. 66% required.

 

Long but promising road.

never gonna happen, thankfully! anybody who wants to know more about this dumb idea should just watch John Oliver's coverage of it.

 

 

[bkk7]

29 minutes ago, JimmyJ said:

There's no evidence to date (I don't think I missed it) that Trump has actually donated his Presidential salary to charity.

  

David Fahrenthold got a Pulitzer Prize for his reporting regarding Trump's past false claims of charitable donations:

 

"Shortly after the Iowa caucuses, David Fahrenthold set out to learn what had become of the $6 million Donald Trump said he’d raised for veterans, including $1 million of his own money. Fahrenthold soon discovered that the candidate had stopped distributing money, despite having given out just a fraction of what he raised..."

https://www.washingtonpost.com/graphics/2017/david-fahrenthold-wins-pulitzer-prize-2017-winner-finalists/?utm_term=.c4add8660da2

even if he did donate to charity, he did so because his conflicts of interest and the money he's making in his businesses off of the presidency outweigh the salary itself!

[bristolboy]

26 minutes ago, Get Real said:

So, I suppose that´s what you would du, because you are a descent person with a sense of morality.
In that case you would be totally unique, due to that there are not a single person and their family that hasn´t been profiting while beeing president for a country.
Almost like I feel the need to ask for your autograph.

Every modern president has put his holdings in a blind trust. Except Donald Trump. And no, not every modern President has benefited while he was President. Afterwards, starting with Reagan sure. But that's a lot different from accepting business from governmens and people whose interests may be inimical to those of the United States. The laws against self-dealing are very strict for those below the rank of President and Vice-President. I guess whoever wrote up those laws just took it for granted that a President would never be so shameless and stoop so low.

[neeray]

"took it for granted that a President would never be so shameless and stoop so low."

And of course they never could have possibly conceived of a President like Donald Trump ever being elected.

So I guess we can not blame them. This President has shaken many to their core.

[sammieuk1]

When I drop one as big as Trump I also pardon myself.

[JimmyJ]

How many billionaires are selling slippers with their name on them?

 

 

Along with drink glasses, coin banks, and other junk, mostly in the $8 - $18 range?

https://www.trumpstore.com/collections/trump-gifts

 

 

 

 

Edited June 5, 2018 by JimmyJ

[attrayant]

[freebyrd]

5 hours ago, Boon Mee said:

Trump could indeed legally pardon himself if he wishes to but it's a moot point. 

No cause or reason to. 

You can't see the wood for the trees as usual - talk about blind faith!

[mikebike]

4 hours ago, bristolboy said:

IN other words, you can clain whatever you like and it's the responsibility of others to provide the proof. Somehow, that doesn't seem quite honorable.

And this attempt to get the numbers for a convention of the states is about reforming the law on political spending? Really?

First off, that makes no sense. If you want to address a specific problem you would go the amendment route. A convention is designed to do massive wide ranging reform. And the only movement I've seen is one sponsored, by the Kochs who spend hundreds of million now on political campaigns.

,

"Taking advantage of almost a decade of political victories in state legislatures across the country, conservative advocacy groups are quietly marshaling support for an event unprecedented in the nation’s history: a convention of the 50 states, summoned to consider amending the Constitution.

The groups are an amalgam of free-market, low-tax and small-government proponents, often funded by corporations and deeply conservative supporters like the billionaire Koch brothers and Donors Trust, whose contributors are mostly anonymous. They want an amendment to require a balanced federal budget, an idea many conservatives have embraced, many economists disdain and Congress has failed to endorse for decades."

https://www.nytimes.com/2016/08/23/us/inside-the-conservative-push-for-states-to-amend-the-constitution.html

The only reference I can find to support for a constitutional convention for campaign finance reform is from the Occupy Wall Street people. Doesn't seem exactly bipartisan to me.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Campaign_finance_reform_in_the_United_States

 

You really should learn to distinguish between wishful thinking and reality.

Blah, Blah, blah. I can claim what ever i like. If you are interested, work on your Google skills. Try starting with WolfPAC.

 

Amendment is not going to work in getting big money out of politics. There is zero political will.

 

Once you know what you are talking about we can continue the discussion.

[mikebike]

3 hours ago, bkk7 said:

never gonna happen, thankfully! anybody who wants to know more about this dumb idea should just watch John Oliver's coverage of it.

 

 

Not what I was talking about.

[ELVIS123456]

A picture says a thousand words - and this sums it up perfectly IMO 

 

[ELVIS123456]

deleted

 

Edited June 5, 2018 by ELVIS123456
duplicate

[dunroaming]

7 hours ago, impulse said:

Not a fan, either.  Never have been a fan of The Donald.  But I am a fan of the 2 benefits he has brought to the American people:

 

1) He has opened the door for an outsider to win the presidency.  His oversized ego and his tough skin are the only reasons he survived where other outsiders couldn't.

 

2) His lack of finesse and experience in politics has laid open just how corrupt the system is, including characters like Cohen and Bannon, et.al. who make fortunes selling access and performing dirty deeds.  A more experienced politician could have kept it all under wraps, like they have for decades.

 

I hope he makes it through the first term, not because I'm a fan.  But to keep the door open for better outsiders to follow him. 

I can see your point but I don't entirely agree.  I believe that he won because of help from Russia and the fact he was up against a poor competitor in Clinton.  A disillusioned public so desperate for change they would have voted in anybody rather than Hillary.

 

I agree that his election has highlighted some of the real lowlifes in Washington and it wasn't surprising that they were the ones he surrounded himself with.  Rarely do we see the swamp so full of Trumps chums or now "ex-chums!"  Maybe the USA will get a new maverick after Trump but on the other hand this moron may send the voters running back to "the establishment".  One thing is for sure, the USA really couldn't survive another Trump.

[Jingthing]

"trump" is claiming the president is a dictator.

Most Americans don't see that as reflecting American values and American democracy.

I think even most rabid "trump" fans don't feel that way either and would be HORRIFIED if a president they didn't love was asserting herself as a DICTATOR, but are totally OK with it (or any outrage really) as long as the dictator in question is the bizarre orange object of their worship. 

 

At this point in time, there are two important questions that have not been definitely answered --

 

-- Can a president be subpoenaed?

(Well, of course he can be, but the legal question is does she have a right to refuse to comply with it?)

-- Can a president pardon himself?

Let's do the first and have the supreme court decide.

Assuming they will probably decide yes, let "trump" pardon himself (there will be charges, don't delude yourselves "trump" fans) and then see what the supreme court says about that.

 

Democracy or dictatorship -- only the supreme court can decide, once and for all. 

Edited June 5, 2018 by Jingthing

[Enoon]

8 hours ago, Get Real said:

As much as a actually hate this man, I do believe he did nothing wrong. I mean he didn´t need to win the presidency for publicity or money. He had both. He also denied salury from his position as president. However, one thing still stands. He is totally unaware how to deal with the position he´s in.

 

He is a megalomaniac narcissist.

 

There is no end to his "needs" (the foremost being power and control).

 

He cares not how much damage he does, or who he destroys in his efforts to satisfy them.

 

He may even destroy himself......but he will console himself that it is the fault of others.

 

That's what they do.

 

 

 

[Jingthing]

29 minutes ago, ELVIS123456 said:

A picture says a thousand words - and this sums it up perfectly IMO 

 

Cute but that would never happen.  Pence thinks "God" has told him he will be president, and he may well be someday, but there is no <deleted>' way if that happened that he would ever give it up!

[attrayant]

29 minutes ago, ELVIS123456 said:

A picture says a thousand words - and this sums it up perfectly IMO 

 

 I'm cutting your meme off half way (sorry if that caused a little coitus interruptus for you) because all presidential appointments are subject to simple majority votes in both houses of congress.  The same congress that, according to your fantasy, just impeached him with a two-thirds majority.

[Jingthing]

2 minutes ago, attrayant said:

 I'm cutting your meme off half way (sorry if that caused a little coitus interruptus for you) because all presidential appointments are subject to simple majority votes in both houses of congress.  The same congress that, according to your fantasy, just impeached him with a two-thirds majority.

Interesting I hadn't thought of that so I looked into the history of President Ford. He indeed nominated Nelson Rockefeller and had to undergo hearings in congress. 

[cheapcanuck]

America must be the land of morons for electing this pussy grabbing moron.

[bristolboy]

2 hours ago, mikebike said:

Blah, Blah, blah. I can claim what ever i like. If you are interested, work on your Google skills. Try starting with WolfPAC.

 

Amendment is not going to work in getting big money out of politics. There is zero political will.

 

Once you know what you are talking about we can continue the discussion.

Yes, I see that every state this resolution has passed in is one where Democrats dominate.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wolf_PAC

Not evidence of bipartisan support. And why would Republicans support it? As the latest tax bill shows, they are overwhelmingly the party of the wealthy, by the wealthy, and for the wealthy..

[Jingthing]

31 minutes ago, cheapcanuck said:

America must be the land of morons for electing this pussy grabbing moron.

That insult is overly broad but totally understandable that many people feel that way. Hopefully, over time, we can repair the damage. No guarantees!

[mikebike]

1 hour ago, bristolboy said:

Yes, I see that every state this resolution has passed in is one where Democrats dominate.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wolf_PAC

Not evidence of bipartisan support. And why would Republicans support it? As the latest tax bill shows, they are overwhelmingly the party of the wealthy, by the wealthy, and for the wealthy..

I found WP on a libertarian website...

[Jingthing]

 

So terribly abnormal. Gots to take care of those fellow criminal "Trumpian lickspittles" don't he?

 

 

"Trump, as usual, takes self-dealing to a whole new level. The pardon for Dinesh D’Souza, like the previous pardon of Sheriff Joe Arpaio in Arizona, seems to be purely a function of them being Trumpian lickspittles. A pardon for Rod Blagojevich, the impeached and imprisoned former governor of Illinois, would be a way of setting a precedent for, well, himself, in the event of his own downfall."

 

 

http://www.paywallnews.com/life/Opinion-%7C-Pardon-Me!.SynRGnMDkVg7.html

 

Sent from my Lenovo A7020a48 using Thailand Forum - Thaivisa mobile app

 

 

 

 

[Andaman Al]

4 hours ago, attrayant said:

A picture says a thousand words - and this sums it up perfectly IMO 

 

I would be very happy with this option, so that we could watch Trump have to be Pence's bitch for 18 months. To be second in command would be Trump's biggest nightmare. Then when they are both voted out, the State of NY kicks in all the State offenses and sends Trump and his 3 little piggies to jail for 20 plus. Maybe Ivanka's children will be taken in to care while she does a 5 year stretch  and just "lost" in the system like the thousands of border kids.. Oh my oh my off to bed early, sweet dreams tonight.