Current Events > Trump's staff tricked him into signing pro-NATO agreement

Topic List	Page List: 1, 2
s0nicfan 08/10/18 2:50:17 PM #51:	King_Hellebuyck posted... s0nicfan posted... King_Hellebuyck posted... s0nicfan posted... Antifar posted... s0nicfan posted... I ask myself "Would I be okay with this happening to any other president or used by the other party?" Once we say something is acceptable behavior, we have to assume it will get used by other people for things we don't support. Not all presidents are created equally. Legal precedent isn't tied to personality. I don't like allowing bad behavior just because it's used against someone I don't like, because eventually someone will use said behavior against someone I DO, and we'll be powerless to stop it. The president not reading anything is not the same as legal precedent 2 cabinet members openly admitting to actively deceiving the president is not the same as the president not reading anything. Ok then explain how there is now a legal precedent Actively attempting to mislead a government official about an important matter is a federal offense. If we don't consider this actionable, then it's legal precedent. https://www.cnn.com/2017/02/14/opinions/did-flynn-break-law-pate-opinion/ Federal law also prohibits someone from making a false statement when discussing a matter within the jurisdiction of the federal government if there is an intent to deceive a government agency about an important matter. Making a false statement is a felony that carries up to five years in prison. Unlike the Logan Act, prosecutions under the false statements statute occur all the time. A false statement can be a lie, or an attempt to cover something up. The critical issue is whether the person intended to mislead a government official about an important matter. Did Flynn make a false statement? Based on whats been reported, it appears that he did. At some point, it appears that Flynn told Vice President Pence that his discussions with the Russian ambassador did not involve the recently imposed sanctions. --- "History Is Much Like An Endless Waltz. The Three Beats Of War, Peace And Revolution Continue On Forever." - Gundam Wing: Endless Waltz <cite>s0nicfan posted [p:906638817] in Trump's st... [t:76890303]...</cite> <quote><cite>King_Hellebuyck posted...</cite> <quote><cite>s0nicfan posted...</cite> <quote><cite>King_Hellebuyck posted...</cite> <quote><cite>s0nicfan posted...</cite> <quote><cite>Antifar posted...</cite> <quote><cite>s0nicfan posted...</cite> <quote>I ask myself "Would I be okay with this happening to any other president or used by the other party?" Once we say something is acceptable behavior, we have to assume it will get used by other people for things we don't support. </quote> Not all presidents are created equally.</quote> Legal precedent isn't tied to personality. I don't like allowing bad behavior just because it's used against someone I don't like, because eventually someone will use said behavior against someone I DO, and we'll be powerless to stop it.</quote> The president not reading anything is not the same as legal precedent</quote> 2 cabinet members openly admitting to actively deceiving the president is not the same as the president not reading anything.</quote> Ok then explain how there is now a legal precedent</quote> Actively attempting to mislead a government official about an important matter is a federal offense. If we don't consider this actionable, then it's legal precedent. https://www.cnn.com/2017/02/14/opinions/did-flynn-break-law-pate-opinion/ <quote>Federal law also prohibits someone from making a false statement when discussing a matter within the jurisdiction of the federal government if there is an intent to deceive a government agency about an important matter. Making a false statement is a felony that carries up to five years in prison. Unlike the Logan Act, prosecutions under the false statements statute occur all the time. A false statement can be a lie, or an attempt to cover something up. The critical issue is whether the person intended to mislead a government official about an important matter. Did Flynn make a false statement? Based on whats been reported, it appears that he did. At some point, it appears that Flynn told Vice President Pence that his discussions with the Russian ambassador did not involve the recently imposed sanctions.</quote></quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Balrog0 08/10/18 2:51:37 PM #52:	I mean, it is possible they didn't give him the info, and that would be bad. But again, it really is just coming down to Trump not paying attention to his own administrative actions. I don't understand what it has to do with precedent --- But to you who are listening I say: Love your enemies, do good to those who hate you, bless those who curse you, pray for those who mistreat you. <cite>Balrog0 posted [p:906638901] in Trump's st... [t:76890303]...</cite> <quote>I mean, it is possible they didn't give him the info, and that would be bad. But again, it really is just coming down to Trump not paying attention to his own administrative actions. I don't understand what it has to do with precedent</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Raptornado 08/10/18 2:51:48 PM #53:	Balrog0 posted... s0nicfan posted... Balrog0 posted... how could he sign a document he didnt have? That's what the article says: As The Times reports, Mr. Trump was presented with only the broad outlines of what the meeting would deliver not details of the document of 79 paragraphs, running 23 pages. I think you're dissembling to make this look worse than it is. The rumor is that Trump is presented with information in bite-sized chunks, typically in the form of one-pagers, because he doesn't read. That isn't the same as him not having the document, it just means he is incredibly uninterested and lazy. This exactly. If it isn't one page of bullet points and pictures, he won't read it, especially if it doesn't mention him constantly. --- Trust me. <cite>Raptornado posted [p:906638919] in Trump's st... [t:76890303]...</cite> <quote><cite>Balrog0 posted...</cite> <quote><cite>s0nicfan posted...</cite> <quote><cite>Balrog0 posted...</cite> <quote>how could he sign a document he didnt have?</quote> That's what the article says: <quote> As The Times reports, Mr. Trump was presented with only the broad outlines of what the meeting would deliver not details of the document of 79 paragraphs, running 23 pages.</quote></quote> I think you're dissembling to make this look worse than it is. The rumor is that Trump is presented with information in bite-sized chunks, typically in the form of one-pagers, because he doesn't read. That isn't the same as him not having the document, it just means he is incredibly uninterested and lazy.</quote> This exactly. If it isn't one page of bullet points and pictures, he won't read it, especially if it doesn't mention him constantly.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
VipaGTS 08/10/18 2:52:52 PM #54:	s0nicfan posted... On the one side, I think we need to show strong support for NATO. On the other side, we shouldn't literally be having presidential advisors and cabinet members actively manipulating and deceiving him to push their own desired policy. On the other hand, we really shouldnt have a moron that susceptible to such basic manipulation as President. Thats the biggest issue here. Maybe he should stop being a lazy fuck and read what hes signing. --- "I devour urine just like my Portland Trailblazers, with piss poor defense." <cite>VipaGTS posted [p:906638989] in Trump's st... [t:76890303]...</cite> <quote><cite>s0nicfan posted...</cite> <quote>On the one side, I think we need to show strong support for NATO. On the other side, we shouldn't literally be having presidential advisors and cabinet members actively manipulating and deceiving him to push their own desired policy.</quote> On the other hand, we really shouldnt have a moron that susceptible to such basic manipulation as President. Thats the biggest issue here. Maybe he should stop being a lazy fuck and read what hes signing.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Antifar 08/10/18 2:54:44 PM #55:	Worth noting that the trend in this administration has been for aides (and others) to find, shall we say, clever means of keeping or steering the president's attention: http://nymag.com/daily/intelligencer/2018/05/trump-aides-worry-he-doesnt-get-north-korea-situation.html But aides who have recently left the administration say Mr. Trump has resisted the kind of detailed briefings about enrichment capabilities, plutonium reprocessing, nuclear weapons production and missile programs that Mr. Obama and President George W. Bush regularly sat through. https://talkingpointsmemo.com/livewire/how-trump-aides-get-him-to-read-his-national-security-briefing-materials According to a report published Wednesday by Reuters, Trump is more likely to read national security briefing materials if his name is mentioned in as many paragraphs as possible. Unnamed officials who have briefed the President and others familiar with his learning processes told the publication that Trump still prefers one-page memos and visual aids. One unnamed source told Reuters that since Trump keeps reading if hes mentioned in briefing materials, officials on the National Security Council have learned to insert the Presidents name into as many paragraphs as we can. https://www.vox.com/2017/8/8/16114712/trump-propaganda-document As Alex Thompson of Vice News, citing three current and former White House officials, reports: In the morning at 9:30 and then around 4:30 in the afternoon, Trump is presented with a briefing document full of people praising him. The folders, according to Thompson, are filled with screenshots of positive cable news chyrons (those lower-third headlines and crawls), admiring tweets, transcripts of fawning TV interviews, praise-filled news stories, and sometimes just pictures of Trump on TV looking powerful. https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/everyone-tunes-in-inside-trumps-obsession-with-cable-tv/2017/04/23/3c52bd6c-25e3-11e7-a1b3-faff0034e2de_story.html Foreign diplomats have urged their governments leaders to appear on television when theyre stateside as a means of making their case to Trump, and U.S. lawmakers regard a TV appearance as nearly on par with an Oval Office meeting in terms of showcasing their standing or viewpoints to the president. ... West Wing staffers have begun including local news clippings in his morning briefing, said one, noting that an issue such as rolling back environmental regulations may earn the president poor press nationally but a more positive headline Trump saves coal jobs, for example in a local paper. --- kin to all that throbs <cite>Antifar posted [p:906639087] in Trump's st... [t:76890303]...</cite> <quote>Worth noting that the trend in this administration has been for aides (and others) to find, shall we say, clever means of keeping or steering the president's attention: http://nymag.com/daily/intelligencer/2018/05/trump-aides-worry-he-doesnt-get-north-korea-situation.html <quote>But aides who have recently left the administration say Mr. Trump has resisted the kind of detailed briefings about enrichment capabilities, plutonium reprocessing, nuclear weapons production and missile programs that Mr. Obama and President George W. Bush regularly sat through.</quote> https://talkingpointsmemo.com/livewire/how-trump-aides-get-him-to-read-his-national-security-briefing-materials <quote>According to a report published Wednesday by Reuters, Trump is more likely to read national security briefing materials if his name is mentioned in as many paragraphs as possible. Unnamed officials who have briefed the President and others familiar with his learning processes told the publication that Trump still prefers one-page memos and visual aids. One unnamed source told Reuters that since Trump keeps reading if hes mentioned in briefing materials, officials on the National Security Council have learned to insert the Presidents name into as many paragraphs as we can.</quote> https://www.vox.com/2017/8/8/16114712/trump-propaganda-document <quote>As Alex Thompson of Vice News, citing three current and former White House officials, reports: In the morning at 9:30 and then around 4:30 in the afternoon, Trump is presented with a briefing document full of people praising him. The folders, according to Thompson, are filled with screenshots of positive cable news chyrons (those lower-third headlines and crawls), admiring tweets, transcripts of fawning TV interviews, praise-filled news stories, and sometimes just pictures of Trump on TV looking powerful.</quote> https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/everyone-tunes-in-inside-trumps-obsession-with-cable-tv/2017/04/23/3c52bd6c-25e3-11e7-a1b3-faff0034e2de_story.html <quote>Foreign diplomats have urged their governments leaders to appear on television when theyre stateside as a means of making their case to Trump, and U.S. lawmakers regard a TV appearance as nearly on par with an Oval Office meeting in terms of showcasing their standing or viewpoints to the president. ... West Wing staffers have begun including local news clippings in his morning briefing, said one, noting that an issue such as rolling back environmental regulations may earn the president poor press nationally but a more positive headline Trump saves coal jobs, for example in a local paper. </quote></quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Balrog0 08/10/18 2:55:17 PM #56:	s0nicfan posted... https://www.cnn.com/2017/02/14/opinions/did-flynn-break-law-pate-opinion/ Federal law also prohibits someone from making a false statement when discussing a matter within the jurisdiction of the federal government if there is an intent to deceive a government agency about an important matter. Making a false statement is a felony that carries up to five years in prison. Unlike the Logan Act, prosecutions under the false statements statute occur all the time. A false statement can be a lie, or an attempt to cover something up. The critical issue is whether the person intended to mislead a government official about an important matter. Did Flynn make a false statement? Based on whats been reported, it appears that he did. At some point, it appears that Flynn told Vice President Pence that his discussions with the Russian ambassador did not involve the recently imposed sanctions. I'm not sure how this works when the government official in question is the person who has authorized you to relate to him what you deem to be relevant information. The cabinet members are his agents, and he's their principal. --- But to you who are listening I say: Love your enemies, do good to those who hate you, bless those who curse you, pray for those who mistreat you. <cite>Balrog0 posted [p:906639134] in Trump's st... [t:76890303]...</cite> <quote><cite>s0nicfan posted...</cite> <quote>https://www.cnn.com/2017/02/14/opinions/did-flynn-break-law-pate-opinion/ Federal law also prohibits someone from making a false statement when discussing a matter within the jurisdiction of the federal government if there is an intent to deceive a government agency about an important matter. Making a false statement is a felony that carries up to five years in prison. Unlike the Logan Act, prosecutions under the false statements statute occur all the time. A false statement can be a lie, or an attempt to cover something up. The critical issue is whether the person intended to mislead a government official about an important matter. Did Flynn make a false statement? Based on whats been reported, it appears that he did. At some point, it appears that Flynn told Vice President Pence that his discussions with the Russian ambassador did not involve the recently imposed sanctions.</quote> I'm not sure how this works when the government official in question is the person who has authorized you to relate to him what you deem to be relevant information. The cabinet members are his agents, and he's their principal.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
King_Hellebuyck 08/10/18 2:56:25 PM #57:	s0nicfan posted... King_Hellebuyck posted... s0nicfan posted... King_Hellebuyck posted... s0nicfan posted... Antifar posted... s0nicfan posted... I ask myself "Would I be okay with this happening to any other president or used by the other party?" Once we say something is acceptable behavior, we have to assume it will get used by other people for things we don't support. Not all presidents are created equally. Legal precedent isn't tied to personality. I don't like allowing bad behavior just because it's used against someone I don't like, because eventually someone will use said behavior against someone I DO, and we'll be powerless to stop it. The president not reading anything is not the same as legal precedent 2 cabinet members openly admitting to actively deceiving the president is not the same as the president not reading anything. Ok then explain how there is now a legal precedent Actively attempting to mislead a government official about an important matter is a federal offense. If we don't consider this actionable, then it's legal precedent. No, it isnt. --- All Hail King Connor! Official Connor Hellebuyck fanboy <cite>King_Hellebuyck posted [p:906639204] in Trump's st... [t:76890303]...</cite> <quote><cite>s0nicfan posted...</cite> <quote><cite>King_Hellebuyck posted...</cite> <quote><cite>s0nicfan posted...</cite> <quote><cite>King_Hellebuyck posted...</cite> <quote><cite>s0nicfan posted...</cite> <quote><cite>Antifar posted...</cite> <quote><cite>s0nicfan posted...</cite> <quote>I ask myself "Would I be okay with this happening to any other president or used by the other party?" Once we say something is acceptable behavior, we have to assume it will get used by other people for things we don't support. </quote> Not all presidents are created equally.</quote> Legal precedent isn't tied to personality. I don't like allowing bad behavior just because it's used against someone I don't like, because eventually someone will use said behavior against someone I DO, and we'll be powerless to stop it.</quote> The president not reading anything is not the same as legal precedent</quote> 2 cabinet members openly admitting to actively deceiving the president is not the same as the president not reading anything.</quote> Ok then explain how there is now a legal precedent</quote> Actively attempting to mislead a government official about an important matter is a federal offense. If we don't consider this actionable, then it's legal precedent. </quote> No, it isnt.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
scar the 1 08/10/18 2:58:01 PM #58:	s0nicfan posted... If we don't consider this actionable, then it's legal precedent. What? It's legal precedent when there's a court ruling on it. There needs to be no court ruling, because whether or not to punish Bolton and Mattis for this is completely within Trump's discretion. --- Everything has an end, except for the sausage. It has two. <cite>scar the 1 posted [p:906639310] in Trump's st... [t:76890303]...</cite> <quote><cite>s0nicfan posted...</cite> <quote>If we don't consider this actionable, then it's legal precedent.</quote> What? It's legal precedent when there's a court ruling on it. There needs to be no court ruling, because whether or not to punish Bolton and Mattis for this is completely within Trump's discretion.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
TheCyborgNinja 08/10/18 2:58:05 PM #59:	BignutzisBack posted... I'm sure making it public won't backfire at all lol He's probably having somebody proofread his juvenile tweets as we speak. --- "message parlor" ? do you mean the post office ? - SlayerX888 <cite>TheCyborgNinja posted [p:906639313] in Trump's st... [t:76890303]...</cite> <quote><cite>BignutzisBack posted...</cite> <quote>I'm sure making it public won't backfire at all lol</quote> He's probably having somebody proofread his juvenile tweets as we speak.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
s0nicfan 08/10/18 3:01:11 PM #61:	scar the 1 posted... s0nicfan posted... If we don't consider this actionable, then it's legal precedent. What? It's legal precedent when there's a court ruling on it. There needs to be no court ruling, because whether or not to punish Bolton and Mattis for this is completely within Trump's discretion. Fine, then it's selective enforcement. I used the wrong phrase, but my point still stands. We shouldn't put up with crimes we wouldn't want seen used against future presidents just because we don't like this one. That's a really, really bad path to go down. --- "History Is Much Like An Endless Waltz. The Three Beats Of War, Peace And Revolution Continue On Forever." - Gundam Wing: Endless Waltz <cite>s0nicfan posted [p:906639496] in Trump's st... [t:76890303]...</cite> <quote><cite>scar the 1 posted...</cite> <quote><cite>s0nicfan posted...</cite> <quote>If we don't consider this actionable, then it's legal precedent.</quote> What? It's legal precedent when there's a court ruling on it. There needs to be no court ruling, because whether or not to punish Bolton and Mattis for this is completely within Trump's discretion.</quote> Fine, then it's selective enforcement. I used the wrong phrase, but my point still stands. We shouldn't put up with crimes we wouldn't want seen used against future presidents just because we don't like this one. That's a really, really bad path to go down.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
DifferentialEquation 08/10/18 3:02:27 PM #62:	Trump wasn't tricked. He pretended to be tricked to solidify his narrative of him being the outsider and the establishment politicians working against him (all while supporting NATO which is what he actually wants to do). Trump is playing 30D chess while everyone else is still playing tic tac toe. --- There's no business to be taxed. <cite>DifferentialEquation posted [p:906639562] in Trump's st... [t:76890303]...</cite> <quote>Trump wasn't tricked. He pretended to be tricked to solidify his narrative of him being the outsider and the establishment politicians working against him (all while supporting NATO which is what he actually wants to do). Trump is playing 30D chess while everyone else is still playing tic tac toe.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
scar the 1 08/10/18 3:04:34 PM #63:	s0nicfan posted... scar the 1 posted... s0nicfan posted... If we don't consider this actionable, then it's legal precedent. What? It's legal precedent when there's a court ruling on it. There needs to be no court ruling, because whether or not to punish Bolton and Mattis for this is completely within Trump's discretion. Fine, then it's selective enforcement. I used the wrong phrase, but my point still stands. We shouldn't put up with crimes we wouldn't want seen used against future presidents just because we don't like this one. That's a really, really bad path to go down. Every administration, starting from the founding of the US, has been doing selective/discretionary enforcement. That's the whole point of the executive branch of the government. And again, Trump has the power to fire these guys. --- Everything has an end, except for the sausage. It has two. <cite>scar the 1 posted [p:906639685] in Trump's st... [t:76890303]...</cite> <quote><cite>s0nicfan posted...</cite> <quote><cite>scar the 1 posted...</cite> <quote><cite>s0nicfan posted...</cite> <quote>If we don't consider this actionable, then it's legal precedent.</quote> What? It's legal precedent when there's a court ruling on it. There needs to be no court ruling, because whether or not to punish Bolton and Mattis for this is completely within Trump's discretion.</quote> Fine, then it's selective enforcement. I used the wrong phrase, but my point still stands. We shouldn't put up with crimes we wouldn't want seen used against future presidents just because we don't like this one. That's a really, really bad path to go down.</quote> Every administration, starting from the founding of the US, has been doing selective/discretionary enforcement. That's the whole point of the executive branch of the government. And again, Trump has the power to fire these guys.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
s0nicfan 08/10/18 3:05:11 PM #64:	scar the 1 posted... s0nicfan posted... scar the 1 posted... s0nicfan posted... If we don't consider this actionable, then it's legal precedent. What? It's legal precedent when there's a court ruling on it. There needs to be no court ruling, because whether or not to punish Bolton and Mattis for this is completely within Trump's discretion. Fine, then it's selective enforcement. I used the wrong phrase, but my point still stands. We shouldn't put up with crimes we wouldn't want seen used against future presidents just because we don't like this one. That's a really, really bad path to go down. Every administration, starting from the founding of the US, has been doing selective/discretionary enforcement. That's the whole point of the executive branch of the government. And again, Trump has the power to fire these guys. If I steal from my company, their ability to fire me has nothing to do with whether I broke the law or not. --- "History Is Much Like An Endless Waltz. The Three Beats Of War, Peace And Revolution Continue On Forever." - Gundam Wing: Endless Waltz <cite>s0nicfan posted [p:906639724] in Trump's st... [t:76890303]...</cite> <quote><cite>scar the 1 posted...</cite> <quote><cite>s0nicfan posted...</cite> <quote><cite>scar the 1 posted...</cite> <quote><cite>s0nicfan posted...</cite> <quote>If we don't consider this actionable, then it's legal precedent.</quote> What? It's legal precedent when there's a court ruling on it. There needs to be no court ruling, because whether or not to punish Bolton and Mattis for this is completely within Trump's discretion.</quote> Fine, then it's selective enforcement. I used the wrong phrase, but my point still stands. We shouldn't put up with crimes we wouldn't want seen used against future presidents just because we don't like this one. That's a really, really bad path to go down.</quote> Every administration, starting from the founding of the US, has been doing selective/discretionary enforcement. That's the whole point of the executive branch of the government. And again, Trump has the power to fire these guys.</quote> If I steal from my company, their ability to fire me has nothing to do with whether I broke the law or not.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
King_Hellebuyck 08/10/18 3:07:05 PM #65:	s0nicfan posted... scar the 1 posted... s0nicfan posted... If we don't consider this actionable, then it's legal precedent. What? It's legal precedent when there's a court ruling on it. There needs to be no court ruling, because whether or not to punish Bolton and Mattis for this is completely within Trump's discretion. Fine, then it's selective enforcement. I used the wrong phrase, but my point still stands. We shouldn't put up with crimes we wouldn't want seen used against future presidents just because we don't like this one. That's a really, really bad path to go down. Your point is nonexistent if theres no legal precedent here. --- All Hail King Connor! Official Connor Hellebuyck fanboy <cite>King_Hellebuyck posted [p:906639832] in Trump's st... [t:76890303]...</cite> <quote><cite>s0nicfan posted...</cite> <quote><cite>scar the 1 posted...</cite> <quote><cite>s0nicfan posted...</cite> <quote>If we don't consider this actionable, then it's legal precedent.</quote> What? It's legal precedent when there's a court ruling on it. There needs to be no court ruling, because whether or not to punish Bolton and Mattis for this is completely within Trump's discretion.</quote> Fine, then it's selective enforcement. I used the wrong phrase, but my point still stands. We shouldn't put up with crimes we wouldn't want seen used against future presidents just because we don't like this one. That's a really, really bad path to go down.</quote> Your point is nonexistent if theres no legal precedent here.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
spudger 08/10/18 3:13:49 PM #66:	BLAKUboy posted... Tappor posted... Imagine what else they could get him to sign... A resignation letter, perhaps. --- -Only dead fish swim with the current http://error1355.com/ce/spudger.html <cite>spudger posted [p:906640215] in Trump's st... [t:76890303]...</cite> <quote><cite>BLAKUboy posted...</cite> <quote><cite>Tappor posted...</cite> <quote>Imagine what else they could get him to sign...</quote> A resignation letter, perhaps.</quote></quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Balrog0 08/10/18 3:14:15 PM #67:	s0nicfan posted... If I steal from my company, their ability to fire me has nothing to do with whether I broke the law or not. you need a trick, scheme, or device being used to conceal a material fact I think your bar for a trick, scheme, or device is probably lower than what, for instance, a jury would agree to if you think giving an incomplete summary counts as a trick, scheme, or device setting aside whether this meets the narrow legal definition here, why are you so upset about it in this instance? you never complain about the misleading information his aides give him regularly, as outlined by Antifar It's actually less misleading to omit part of a deal than to selectively quote local newspapers articles that paint a picture that is exactly the opposite of what everyone else is saying, for instance. And it should be just as illegal, right? --- But to you who are listening I say: Love your enemies, do good to those who hate you, bless those who curse you, pray for those who mistreat you. <cite>Balrog0 posted [p:906640237] in Trump's st... [t:76890303]...</cite> <quote><cite>s0nicfan posted...</cite> <quote> If I steal from my company, their ability to fire me has nothing to do with whether I broke the law or not.</quote> you need a trick, scheme, or device being used to conceal a material fact I think your bar for a trick, scheme, or device is probably lower than what, for instance, a jury would agree to if you think giving an incomplete summary counts as a trick, scheme, or device setting aside whether this meets the narrow legal definition here, why are you so upset about it in this instance? you never complain about the misleading information his aides give him regularly, as outlined by Antifar It's actually less misleading to omit part of a deal than to selectively quote local newspapers articles that paint a picture that is exactly the opposite of what everyone else is saying, for instance. And it should be just as illegal, right?</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
scar the 1 08/10/18 3:15:37 PM #68:	s0nicfan posted... scar the 1 posted... s0nicfan posted... scar the 1 posted... s0nicfan posted... If we don't consider this actionable, then it's legal precedent. What? It's legal precedent when there's a court ruling on it. There needs to be no court ruling, because whether or not to punish Bolton and Mattis for this is completely within Trump's discretion. Fine, then it's selective enforcement. I used the wrong phrase, but my point still stands. We shouldn't put up with crimes we wouldn't want seen used against future presidents just because we don't like this one. That's a really, really bad path to go down. Every administration, starting from the founding of the US, has been doing selective/discretionary enforcement. That's the whole point of the executive branch of the government. And again, Trump has the power to fire these guys. If I steal from my company, their ability to fire me has nothing to do with whether I broke the law or not. Keep in mind that Trump is also the boss of the executive branch of government, the part of government in charge of the discretionary enforcement of the law. --- Everything has an end, except for the sausage. It has two. <cite>scar the 1 posted [p:906640315] in Trump's st... [t:76890303]...</cite> <quote><cite>s0nicfan posted...</cite> <quote><cite>scar the 1 posted...</cite> <quote><cite>s0nicfan posted...</cite> <quote><cite>scar the 1 posted...</cite> <quote><cite>s0nicfan posted...</cite> <quote>If we don't consider this actionable, then it's legal precedent.</quote> What? It's legal precedent when there's a court ruling on it. There needs to be no court ruling, because whether or not to punish Bolton and Mattis for this is completely within Trump's discretion.</quote> Fine, then it's selective enforcement. I used the wrong phrase, but my point still stands. We shouldn't put up with crimes we wouldn't want seen used against future presidents just because we don't like this one. That's a really, really bad path to go down.</quote> Every administration, starting from the founding of the US, has been doing selective/discretionary enforcement. That's the whole point of the executive branch of the government. And again, Trump has the power to fire these guys.</quote> If I steal from my company, their ability to fire me has nothing to do with whether I broke the law or not.</quote> Keep in mind that Trump is also the boss of the executive branch of government, the part of government in charge of the discretionary enforcement of the law.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
s0nicfan 08/10/18 3:20:05 PM #69:	Balrog0 posted... s0nicfan posted... If I steal from my company, their ability to fire me has nothing to do with whether I broke the law or not. you need a trick, scheme, or device being used to conceal a material fact I think your bar for a trick, scheme, or device is probably lower than what, for instance, a jury would agree to if you think giving an incomplete summary counts as a trick, scheme, or device setting aside whether this meets the narrow legal definition here, why are you so upset about it in this instance? you never complain about the misleading information his aides give him regularly, as outlined by Antifar It's actually less misleading to omit part of a deal than to selectively quote local newspapers articles that paint a picture that is exactly the opposite of what everyone else is saying, for instance. And it should be just as illegal, right? My bar would be higher if there wasn't tacit admission to the act. It may come down to exactly what was said by who, but if all they did was have an overly short summary than you're right... that's below any bar that would be set. If they openly admit that the intent was to deceive, than I'd argue that's a much clearer case. My issue is primarily that: the admission. I fully accept that details are cut regularly because nobody has time to read everything. It's when you're openly admitting that details were cut to force a decision or act that you think wouldn't happen otherwise where we have an issue. And I really like Mattis, so it's not like I'm making this a sticking point over the individuals. As for Antifar, I honestly don't read most of his topics. I can appreciate that his gimmick is "post whole news stories without comment" but I rarely, if ever, see anything even approximating reasonable discussion in them when I do bother to stick around, so I just don't see it as productive. So if he's brought up the issue before, I haven't seen it. Unless you mean his post above, at which point I'll refer you to my prior paragraph about admission. --- "History Is Much Like An Endless Waltz. The Three Beats Of War, Peace And Revolution Continue On Forever." - Gundam Wing: Endless Waltz <cite>s0nicfan posted [p:906640574] in Trump's st... [t:76890303]...</cite> <quote><cite>Balrog0 posted...</cite> <quote><cite>s0nicfan posted...</cite> <quote> If I steal from my company, their ability to fire me has nothing to do with whether I broke the law or not.</quote> you need a trick, scheme, or device being used to conceal a material fact I think your bar for a trick, scheme, or device is probably lower than what, for instance, a jury would agree to if you think giving an incomplete summary counts as a trick, scheme, or device setting aside whether this meets the narrow legal definition here, why are you so upset about it in this instance? you never complain about the misleading information his aides give him regularly, as outlined by Antifar It's actually less misleading to omit part of a deal than to selectively quote local newspapers articles that paint a picture that is exactly the opposite of what everyone else is saying, for instance. And it should be just as illegal, right?</quote> My bar would be higher if there wasn't tacit admission to the act. It may come down to exactly what was said by who, but if all they did was have an overly short summary than you're right... that's below any bar that would be set. If they openly admit that the intent was to deceive, than I'd argue that's a much clearer case. My issue is primarily that: the admission. I fully accept that details are cut regularly because nobody has time to read everything. It's when you're openly admitting that details were cut to force a decision or act that you think wouldn't happen otherwise where we have an issue. And I really like Mattis, so it's not like I'm making this a sticking point over the individuals. As for Antifar, I honestly don't read most of his topics. I can appreciate that his gimmick is "post whole news stories without comment" but I rarely, if ever, see anything even approximating reasonable discussion in them when I do bother to stick around, so I just don't see it as productive. So if he's brought up the issue before, I haven't seen it. Unless you mean his post above, at which point I'll refer you to my prior paragraph about admission.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
CableZL 08/10/18 3:20:11 PM #70:	s0nicfan posted... Fine, then it's selective enforcement. I used the wrong phrase, but my point still stands. We shouldn't put up with crimes we wouldn't want seen used against future presidents just because we don't like this one. That's a really, really bad path to go down. One could argue that electing a man who needs to be treated like a toddler and doesn't read what he's signing is a really, really bad path to go down, but I digress. --- https://imgur.com/ByKGlJb https://imgur.com/nZdaA8D https://imgur.com/VBLBILg <cite>CableZL posted [p:906640585] in Trump's st... [t:76890303]...</cite> <quote><cite>s0nicfan posted...</cite> <quote>Fine, then it's selective enforcement. I used the wrong phrase, but my point still stands. We shouldn't put up with crimes we wouldn't want seen used against future presidents just because we don't like this one. That's a really, really bad path to go down.</quote> One could argue that electing a man who needs to be treated like a toddler and doesn't read what he's signing is a really, really bad path to go down, but I digress.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Ray_Dorset 08/10/18 3:21:17 PM #71:	CableZL posted... s0nicfan posted... Fine, then it's selective enforcement. I used the wrong phrase, but my point still stands. We shouldn't put up with crimes we wouldn't want seen used against future presidents just because we don't like this one. That's a really, really bad path to go down. One could argue that electing a man who needs to be treated like a toddler and doesn't read what he's signing is a really, really bad path to go down, but I digress. You're just going to confuse the poor kid by using logic. --- Owner of https://imgtc.com/ <cite>Ray_Dorset posted [p:906640661] in Trump's st... [t:76890303]...</cite> <quote><cite>CableZL posted...</cite> <quote><cite>s0nicfan posted...</cite> <quote>Fine, then it's selective enforcement. I used the wrong phrase, but my point still stands. We shouldn't put up with crimes we wouldn't want seen used against future presidents just because we don't like this one. That's a really, really bad path to go down.</quote> One could argue that electing a man who needs to be treated like a toddler and doesn't read what he's signing is a really, really bad path to go down, but I digress.</quote> You're just going to confuse the poor kid by using logic.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Balrog0 08/10/18 3:22:44 PM #72:	s0nicfan posted... My issue is primarily that: the admission. I fully accept that details are cut regularly because nobody has time to read everything. It's when you're openly admitting that details were cut to force a decision or act that you think wouldn't happen otherwise where we have an issue. And I really like Mattis, so it's not like I'm making this a sticking point over the individuals. well, I don't think they have admitted it tbf it is all 'Described by European diplomats and American officials' per the NYT --- But to you who are listening I say: Love your enemies, do good to those who hate you, bless those who curse you, pray for those who mistreat you. <cite>Balrog0 posted [p:906640746] in Trump's st... [t:76890303]...</cite> <quote><cite>s0nicfan posted...</cite> <quote>My issue is primarily that: the admission. I fully accept that details are cut regularly because nobody has time to read everything. It's when you're openly admitting that details were cut to force a decision or act that you think wouldn't happen otherwise where we have an issue. And I really like Mattis, so it's not like I'm making this a sticking point over the individuals. </quote> well, I don't think they have admitted it tbf it is all 'Described by European diplomats and American officials' per the NYT</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
s0nicfan 08/10/18 3:23:33 PM #73:	Balrog0 posted... s0nicfan posted... My issue is primarily that: the admission. I fully accept that details are cut regularly because nobody has time to read everything. It's when you're openly admitting that details were cut to force a decision or act that you think wouldn't happen otherwise where we have an issue. And I really like Mattis, so it's not like I'm making this a sticking point over the individuals. well, I don't think they have admitted it tbf shrugs that's a fair point. I may have been giving too much credit to the author in the OP in terms of how things were phrased. --- "History Is Much Like An Endless Waltz. The Three Beats Of War, Peace And Revolution Continue On Forever." - Gundam Wing: Endless Waltz <cite>s0nicfan posted [p:906640802] in Trump's st... [t:76890303]...</cite> <quote><cite>Balrog0 posted...</cite> <quote><cite>s0nicfan posted...</cite> <quote>My issue is primarily that: the admission. I fully accept that details are cut regularly because nobody has time to read everything. It's when you're openly admitting that details were cut to force a decision or act that you think wouldn't happen otherwise where we have an issue. And I really like Mattis, so it's not like I'm making this a sticking point over the individuals. </quote> well, I don't think they have admitted it tbf</quote> shrugs that's a fair point. I may have been giving too much credit to the author in the OP in terms of how things were phrased.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
#74	Post #74 was unavailable or deleted.
VipaGTS 08/10/18 4:18:09 PM #75:	Sonicfan will do anything to defend Trump. I like how youre so upset at everyone else and not the fact that the man whose signature is necessary for it didnt even bother to read it or cant understand it. --- "I devour urine just like my Portland Trailblazers, with piss poor defense." <cite>VipaGTS posted [p:906644237] in Trump's st... [t:76890303]...</cite> <quote>Sonicfan will do anything to defend Trump. I like how youre so upset at everyone else and not the fact that the man whose signature is necessary for it didnt even bother to read it or cant understand it.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
s0nicfan 08/10/18 4:19:47 PM #76:	VipaGTS posted... Sonicfan will do anything to defend Trump. I like how youre so upset at everyone else and not the fact that the man whose signature is necessary for it didnt even bother to read it or cant understand it. @Balrog0 sorry to tag you, but I wanted to do a sanity check and you've always been reasonable. Is there anything about Vipa's post you would agree with, or is he just trolling? --- "History Is Much Like An Endless Waltz. The Three Beats Of War, Peace And Revolution Continue On Forever." - Gundam Wing: Endless Waltz <cite>s0nicfan posted [p:906644332] in Trump's st... [t:76890303]...</cite> <quote><cite>VipaGTS posted...</cite> <quote>Sonicfan will do anything to defend Trump. I like how youre so upset at everyone else and not the fact that the man whose signature is necessary for it didnt even bother to read it or cant understand it.</quote> @Balrog0 sorry to tag you, but I wanted to do a sanity check and you've always been reasonable. Is there anything about Vipa's post you would agree with, or is he just trolling?</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Alpha218 08/10/18 4:21:23 PM #77:	Tappor posted... This sets a very bad precedent. Imagine what else they could get him to sign... Youre acting like this is the first this has happened Trump is infamous for not liking to read things, Im sure he has done the same for bills and EOs put in front of him if theyre longer than a page --- I'm Commander Shepard, and this is my favorite user on the Citadel. Now Playing: Rainbow 6: Siege, Octopath Traveler, Enter the Gungeon, WarioWare Gold <cite>Alpha218 posted [p:906644427] in Trump's st... [t:76890303]...</cite> <quote><cite>Tappor posted...</cite> <quote>This sets a very bad precedent. Imagine what else they could get him to sign...</quote> Youre acting like this is the first this has happened Trump is infamous for not liking to read things, Im sure he has done the same for bills and EOs put in front of him if theyre longer than a page</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Sphyx 08/10/18 7:19:46 PM #78:	fucking imbecile... --- You're so vain, You probably think this sig is about you. <cite>Sphyx posted [p:906654927] in Trump's st... [t:76890303]...</cite> <quote>fucking imbecile...</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
legendarylemur 08/10/18 7:33:38 PM #79:	thronedfire2 posted... Trump will call this treason So... It's treason then bzzzt --- "Iwata was awesome" - Mr. Nintendo https://imgur.com/JGJqvwW <cite>legendarylemur posted [p:906655663] in Trump's st... [t:76890303]...</cite> <quote><cite>thronedfire2 posted...</cite> <quote>Trump will call this treason</quote> So... It's treason then bzzzt</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
thronedfire2 08/10/18 7:35:38 PM #80:	Alpha218 posted... Tappor posted... This sets a very bad precedent. Imagine what else they could get him to sign... Youre acting like this is the first this has happened Trump is infamous for not liking to read things, Im sure he has done the same for bills and EOs put in front of him if theyre longer than a page It would explain why he contradicts himself so much --- I could see you, but I couldn't hear you You were holding your hat in the breeze Turning away from me In this moment you were stolen... <cite>thronedfire2 posted [p:906655777] in Trump's st... [t:76890303]...</cite> <quote><cite>Alpha218 posted...</cite> <quote><cite>Tappor posted...</cite> <quote>This sets a very bad precedent. Imagine what else they could get him to sign...</quote> Youre acting like this is the first this has happened Trump is infamous for not liking to read things, Im sure he has done the same for bills and EOs put in front of him if theyre longer than a page</quote> It would explain why he contradicts himself so much</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
iPhone_7 08/10/18 7:37:56 PM #81:	legendarylemur posted... thronedfire2 posted... Trump will call this treason So... It's treason then bzzzt autis screeching --- Sig User Logic https://imgur.com/lA5fm7w <cite>iPhone_7 posted [p:906655914] in Trump's st... [t:76890303]...</cite> <quote><cite>legendarylemur posted...</cite> <quote><cite>thronedfire2 posted...</cite> <quote>Trump will call this treason</quote> So... It's treason then bzzzt</quote> autis screeching</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Roxborough4Ever 08/10/18 7:41:59 PM #82:	wasn't a problem when Obama had his foreign handlers telling him what to do and sign. --- You feast on red herring because it is your birthright. <cite>Roxborough4Ever posted [p:906656136] in Trump's st... [t:76890303]...</cite> <quote>wasn't a problem when Obama had his foreign handlers telling him what to do and sign.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Antifar 08/10/18 7:42:27 PM #83:	Roxborough4Ever posted... wasn't a problem when Obama had his foreign handlers telling him what to do and sign. Can you give examples? --- kin to all that throbs <cite>Antifar posted [p:906656152] in Trump's st... [t:76890303]...</cite> <quote><cite>Roxborough4Ever posted...</cite> <quote>wasn't a problem when Obama had his foreign handlers telling him what to do and sign.</quote> Can you give examples?</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
#84	Post #84 was unavailable or deleted.
darkstar4221 08/11/18 1:36:42 AM #85:	0AbsoluteZero0 posted... s0nicfan posted... On the one side, I think we need to show strong support for NATO. On the other side, we shouldn't literally be having presidential advisors and cabinet members actively manipulating and deceiving him to push their own desired policy. When you elect a thin-skinned manchild with the geopolitical understanding of your average first grader, sometimes these things are necessary His understanding of government is literally that of a 1st grader. He was taking a civic lesson on the constitution (with the help from his campaign aide) during the presidential run, see link. My guess is almost every bill he signs he has to get advice from his staff first. How did this clown get elected his beyond me. He wasn't vetted for his lack of knowledge on government. https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/ex-campaign-aide-claims-he-was-once-ordered-to-explain-the-constitution-to-trump-report <cite>darkstar4221 posted [p:906672248] in Trump's st... [t:76890303]...</cite> <quote><cite>0AbsoluteZero0 posted...</cite> <quote><cite>s0nicfan posted...</cite> <quote>On the one side, I think we need to show strong support for NATO. On the other side, we shouldn't literally be having presidential advisors and cabinet members actively manipulating and deceiving him to push their own desired policy.</quote> When you elect a thin-skinned manchild with the geopolitical understanding of your average first grader, sometimes these things are necessary</quote> His understanding of government is literally that of a 1st grader. He was taking a civic lesson on the constitution (with the help from his campaign aide) during the presidential run, see link. My guess is almost every bill he signs he has to get advice from his staff first. How did this clown get elected his beyond me. He wasn't vetted for his lack of knowledge on government. https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/ex-campaign-aide-claims-he-was-once-ordered-to-explain-the-constitution-to-trump-report</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Topic List	Page List: 1, 2

Current Events > Trump's staff tricked him into signing pro-NATO agreement (+) Yeah! (+)

Current Events > Trump's staff tricked him into signing pro-NATO agreement