America - The Official Thread

[Rallywagon]

Except those business were setup to protect him from personal liability. These allegations would make him liabel personally. What is the statute of limitations for Tax fraud? The most recent allegation that they lowered the evaluation of his late fathers estate, for lowering tax purposes, is that illegal in the USA? Such practices are, to my knowledge, viewed as tax evasion here in my country.

It probably would here too, if you make less than a certain amount. As far as I know a civil tax fraud case has no statute of limitations, but, the IRS generally wont go after anyone after 6 years without good evidence and cause. If the Times dug that up, then they may be able to get an investigation started. But, for some reason I find all of that highly unlikely. Not the Times evidence, but that anything will be investigated by authorities.

 

[PocketZeven]

It probably would here too, if you make less than a certain amount. As far as I know a civil tax fraud case has no statute of limitations, but, the IRS generally wont go after anyone after 6 years without good evidence and cause. If the Times dug that up, then they may be able to get an investigation started. But, for some reason I find all of that highly unlikely. Not the Times evidence, but that anything will be investigated by authorities.

New York is apparantly taking action. This investigation is most likely going to overlap with Muller's special Investigation.
Hopefully this will lead to the release of his Tax returns.

https://www.cnbc.com/2018/10/02/new...legations-involving-trump-in-nyt-article.html

I always found it interesting that Trump, although being a New Yorker, never seemed to have a good reputation there. He also didnt win the 2016 election in New York. Under normal cicrumstances a state would be proud to have a fellow New-Yorker to become POTUS.

 

[Biggles]

But will these claims of fraud have concequences?

The genius of Donald Trump is the way he identified & harnessed feelings of discontent among a section of the general US population - discontent around lack of economic opportunity, against immigration, against Mexicans, against muslims, against politicians, against Washington, against political correctness, against uppity blacks, against uppity women - and used those feelings to grab a chunk of the GOP primary base sufficient to win the Republican nomination. He then used the enthusiastic support of that base to win the GE against lackluster Democratic opposition.

Once in power, Trump managed to co-opt the rest of the Republican party & push a narrative of "us against them", where if you're not with him, you're representative of a swampy, deep state, fake news, liberal elite. Surprisingly, he has pulled this off pretty successfully, so that there seems to be nothing - no lie, no outrageously one-sided policy position, no foreign policy gaffe, & no evidence of Trump's history of self-serving, corruption & collusion - that can shake the faith of the true believers. It's up to the mass of the American electorate to finally see through the lies & BS & vote against Trumpism in the upcoming elections. Otherwise, there will be no consequences.

 

[Dotini]

The genius of Donald Trump is the way he identified & harnessed feelings of discontent among a section of the general US population - discontent around lack of economic opportunity, against immigration, against Mexicans, against muslims, against politicians, against Washington, against political correctness, against uppity blacks, against uppity women - and used those feelings to grab a chunk of the GOP primary base sufficient to win the Republican nomination. He then used the enthusiastic support of that base to win the GE against lackluster Democratic opposition.

Once in power, Trump managed to co-opt the rest of the Republican party & push a narrative of "us against them", where if you're not with him, you're representative of a swampy, deep state, fake news, liberal elite. Surprisingly, he has pulled this off pretty successfully, so that there seems to be nothing - no lie, no outrageously one-sided policy position, no foreign policy gaffe, & no evidence of Trump's history of self-serving, corruption & collusion - that can shake the faith of the true believers. It's up to the mass of the American electorate to finally see through the lies & BS & vote against Trumpism in the upcoming elections. Otherwise, there will be no consequences.

Nice post! IMO it needs but one correction: Rather than voting against Trumpism (populism), the voters will need to vote against Trump himself. In a straight USA contest between populism/nationalism and globalism/socialism/communism, the latter will have little chance.

 

[Danoff]

In a straight USA contest between populism/nationalism and globalism/socialism/communism, the latter will have little chance.

I didn't follow that.

 

[Imari]

In Trump world women should only report rape if they remember everything and have substantial evidence.

That may be what Trump thinks, but that's obviously not true. If you're raped, you should report it regardless of how much information you have about it. That goes for women and men.

So they should not shower after the rape (because of DNA), go straight to the police and give a detailed account of how, when and where.

Ideally, yes. The more evidence you have, the easier you make it for the police and prosecution. Again, this applies to any crime and is just basic common sense. I'm not sure why you're trying to hold it up like this is unreasonable.

Of course, in the real world it doesn't quite work like that, but I think the major obstacle is that sexual assault claims tend to be poo-poohed, discouraging people from reporting and ensuring that if they ever do the evidence is out of date. If it came with as little social stigma as reporting a burglary, there would be far less of an issue as cases could be pursued in a timely manner and the maximum amount of perpetrators brought to justice.

If you wait to long and fail to remember these "important" details you are just out of luck.

Kinda, yeah. If you turn it into a he said/she said situation, it gets really, really hard to justify actual consequences for the accused because there's nothing to distinguish a victim from a psychotic out to ruin their life.

It sucks that there's a bunch of victims out there that won't get justice because of that, but the world isn't fair sometimes and it doesn't get any fairer by pushing trial by media and guilty until proven innocent. If we want real justice, perhaps let's start by removing the barriers to reporting crime and making sure that those responsible for investigating are engaged and well supported instead of turning to vigilantism.

I didn't follow that.

My impression from over here on the arse end of the world was that the stereotypical US citizen was still quite nationalistic (in both positive and negative ways) and that anti-communist/socialist sentiment was still really quite strong after the decades and decades of scare tactics about the Red Menace.

 

[PocketZeven]

The genius of Donald Trump is the way he identified & harnessed feelings of discontent among a section of the general US population - discontent around lack of economic opportunity, against immigration, against Mexicans, against muslims, against politicians, against Washington, against political correctness, against uppity blacks, against uppity women - and used those feelings to grab a chunk of the GOP primary base sufficient to win the Republican nomination. He then used the enthusiastic support of that base to win the GE against lackluster Democratic opposition.

Once in power, Trump managed to co-opt the rest of the Republican party & push a narrative of "us against them", where if you're not with him, you're representative of a swampy, deep state, fake news, liberal elite. Surprisingly, he has pulled this off pretty successfully, so that there seems to be nothing - no lie, no outrageously one-sided policy position, no foreign policy gaffe, & no evidence of Trump's history of self-serving, corruption & collusion - that can shake the faith of the true believers. It's up to the mass of the American electorate to finally see through the lies & BS & vote against Trumpism in the upcoming elections. Otherwise, there will be no consequences.

I am aware and agree with your post, but my whole point is, that at the moment the best way to actually to get rid of "trumpism" is to actually make Trump responsible for all his shady business and lies. Till now he has been out of reach of the law, but either this or the muller investigation could finally get him out of the graces of his following. No president of a free country should spread this kind of hate and division. A president should always do his best to try and bring people together. Even worse is his example of cheating and lying (without consequence) for future generations. If a young child wants to be president, the message sent by Trump is that its ok to cheat on your wife, blatantly lie, scam people, fraud, spread conspiracies etc. without any consequences, because you can be elected president anyway.

 

[BobK]

So I would like the take of the americans in this thread on the latest revelations on Trump's claim of being a selfmade Billionaire? Do these revelations change your opinion of him?

No, these revelations (or allegations more precisely) don't really change my opinion of him. I still believe he's the second worst candidate I've ever seen running for any Federal office.

 

[DK]

So which member of the American Nazi Party, the Dixiecrats, the Know-Nothings or the Stalin-Did-Nothing-Wrong Party pipped him to top spot?

 

[BobK]

If a young child wants to be president, the message sent by Trump and Bill Clinton is that its ok to cheat on your wife, blatantly lie, scam people, fraud, spread conspiracies etc. without any consequences, because you can be elected president anyway.

Made a minor change but the truth of it remains.

 

[Dotini]

I didn't follow that.

It's only my opinion. But in other words, in a US national election without outside interference, populists (of the right and left) will out-vote those of globalist, socialist and communist suasions, nationalism here being a stronger force than globalism (at least for the moment).

 

[Tornado]

Accepting that as business as usual, well, I suppose that's easier to stomache when you read about it in a post than when you're struggling to feed your kids.

"The USW is working on a counterproposal that would preserve benefits, fix pension issues, and include "real" pay raises for workers, who are paid between $20.45 an hour and $27.52 an hour under the last contract negotiated in 2015."

It certainly doesn't sound like a McJob to me. That certainly doesn't sound like "the reality that 90+% of americans live in," making over $20 an hour with union representation to fight for a pension and a benefits package. The pearl clutching seems a bit overblown.


The whole thing does sound like a pretty straightforward bit of union/company negotiations when a new contract comes up, even with the background info. Things rarely get to the level of a strike, but it's hardly unheard of. And since US Steel is one of the centerpieces of a flyover country industrial base Trump has started a trade war over, typical corporate conservatism when it comes to employee costs seems rather prudent if not entirely defensible. The current market situation probably isn't sustainable for a company that flirted with bankruptcy because of it just a few years ago. In fact, I'm kind of shocked you're taking union statements at face value when the same union in the article you linked also repeats Trump rhetoric almost verbatim.




How much of those great big profits these US Steel executives are presumably swimming in like Scrooge McDuck are going to be there when Trump's protectionism inevitably follows him right out the door? Because the union won't be negotiating for a contract on the premise that the good times will taper off. It sounds they're arguing on the premise that things are great now and will be for the foreseeable duture, with the new contract coming up almost immediately after Trump's tarrifs went into effect (that the union even acknowledges), and that the employee contract should represent that for what looks like the next three to four years. Trump doesn't have three to four years of presidency left, I suspect.

 

[PocketZeven]

Made a minor change but the truth of it remains.

I dont think Trump and Clinton are in the same league. Trumps lying have been far more blatant and his message of division and hate doesnt compare with Clinton's policies. He might have been a flawed man, but he was a good president.

 

[Danoff]

It's only my opinion. But in other words, in a US national election without outside interference, populists (of the right and left) will out-vote those of globalist, socialist and communist suasions, nationalism here being a stronger force than globalism (at least for the moment).

I'm sorry I'm just not getting it.

I kinda see the populist vs. socialist/communist point? A little? Those aren't necessarily at odds with each other though. One could almost argue that they're orthogonal. But populist vs. globalist I don't get at all. That's not really a dichotomy. Populism and nationalism are also... not really at odds or tightly linked.

Nationalism vs. Globalism I get. The link between socialism and communism I get. Globalism isn't linked with socialism and communism. Populism isn't really linked with nationalism, and is not at odds with socialism or globalism. And I can kinda see populism vs. communism.

 

[Dotini]

I'm sorry I'm just not getting it.

I kinda see the populist vs. socialist/communist point? A little? Those aren't necessarily at odds with each other though. One could almost argue that they're orthogonal. But populist vs. globalist I don't get at all. That's not really a dichotomy. Populism and nationalism are also... not really at odds or tightly linked.

Nationalism vs. Globalism I get. The link between socialism and communism I get. Globalism isn't linked with socialism and communism. Populism isn't really linked with nationalism, and is not at odds with socialism or globalism. And I can kinda see populism vs. communism.

Okay. We are all entitled to our opinions and our confusions. Perhaps I'll address it a bit more later. But first I need to go and attend a fencing lesson.

 

[PocketZeven]

It's only my opinion. But in other words, in a US national election without outside interference, populists (of the right and left) will out-vote those of globalist, socialist and communist suasions, nationalism here being a stronger force than globalism (at least for the moment).

The irony of it all is that the US got in the great depression, when a republican was in office, when there was little regulation and the rich got greedy. People seem to forget that the ones responsible got bailed out and did not see any prison time. Only the people who have probably voted for Trump lost their jobs, houses and savings. Then a Democrat was elected and arranged more regulation on financial institutes and the enviroment, a recovering economy and more equality (towards social democracy). And somehow a populist is elected and is now dismantling these regulations the former President did to fix the problems that were already being fixed and even blaming what started during a Republicans presidency. Only so that the Cycle of greed can start again.

It is impressive how the Trumpian republicans have spun the narrative.

 

[Biggles]

I am aware and agree with your post, but my whole point is, that at the moment the best way to actually to get rid of "trumpism" is to actually make Trump responsible for all his shady business and lies.

I don't think that's actually going to happen ... unless some really obvious & egregious (& by that I mean MORE obvious & egregious) instances of wrong-doing come to light. My point is that it's up to the US electorate to come to their senses & get rid of the guy.

It's only my opinion. But in other words, in a US national election without outside interference, populists (of the right and left) will out-vote those of globalist, socialist and communist suasions, nationalism here being a stronger force than globalism (at least for the moment).

You're positing a an extreme & absurdly simplistic contrast of views in the US, whereas, in reality there are a whole range of different issues in the US & a whole range of views on each of those issues. Who exactly is a "globalist/communist"? How exactly do those of a libertarian persuasion fit into your formula?

What Trump has done, is divide the country into "us & them" - the most divisive President in decades. Given that the American people are pretty evenly split between those who lean Democrat & those who lean Republican, with a smaller, but decisive number as "independents", creating an extreme division doesn't seem like a realistic long-term strategy. But Trump doesn't care about the long-term", he only cares about his own immediate interests.

John Kasich put it this way i an interview on CNN:

https://www.cnn.com/videos/politics...lists/reaction-to-brett-kavanaugh-allegation/

 

[Eunos_Cosmo]

Who are some people who could start to bring the country back together (maybe as president)? Ideally it would be someone tolerable to both sides, even if not exactly loved by either. It will probably need to be somebody notable enough to be taken seriously, but definitely not a celebrity.

John Kasich is one I often see capable of this.
Al Franken ? Idk if he's ever coming back
Joe Biden? Sometimes I think he's too confrontational
Michael Bloomberg?

Man, that's all I got.

 

[Joey D]

Who are some people who could start to bring the country back together (maybe as president)? Ideally it would be someone tolerable to both sides, even if not exactly loved by either. It will probably need to be somebody notable enough to be taken seriously, but definitely not a celebrity.

John Kasich is one I often see capable of this.
Al Franken ? Idk if he's ever coming back
Joe Biden? Sometimes I think he's too confrontational
Michael Bloomberg?

Man, that's all I got.

The obvious choice is Kanye West

But really I think Kasich is a good choice. I wish he would've won the GOP nomination.

 

[PocketZeven]

Who are some people who could start to bring the country back together (maybe as president)? Ideally it would be someone tolerable to both sides, even if not exactly loved by either. It will probably need to be somebody notable enough to be taken seriously, but definitely not a celebrity.

John Kasich is one I often see capable of this.
Al Franken ? Idk if he's ever coming back
Joe Biden? Sometimes I think he's too confrontational
Michael Bloomberg?

Man, that's all I got.

Isnt there now even more anamosity between parties then before? I just hope your country isnt devided too much by the current presidency that a candidate that genuinly wants both parties to work together with respect just wont be elected. The only one I know of is Joe Biden who is known for his bi-partisan work. The best question to ask is which democrat is respected the most by republicans and which republican is respected the most by democrats? Those 2 should run for president in 2020.

 

[Biggles]

Who are some people who could start to bring the country back together (maybe as president)? Ideally it would be someone tolerable to both sides, even if not exactly loved by either. It will probably need to be somebody notable enough to be taken seriously, but definitely not a celebrity.

John Kasich is one I often see capable of this.
Al Franken ? Idk if he's ever coming back
Joe Biden? Sometimes I think he's too confrontational
Michael Bloomberg?

Man, that's all I got.

The immediate goal would be for the Democrats to win back the House & (not very likely) the Senate in the midterms. This would inject some element of the "checks & balances" back into US politics. I think it will be very difficult for any Republican moderate to win the GOP nomination in the present climate - Trump has stirred up a hornet's nest of anger & mistrust in the Republican base. I think Trump would have to be thoroughly discredited by a MAJOR scandal for him to lose the support of the "populist" base & allow the political landscape to be reset.

 

[PocketZeven]

The immediate goal would be for the Democrats to win back the House & (not very likely) the Senate in the midterms. This would inject some element of the "checks & balances" back into US politics. I think it will be very difficult for any Republican moderate to win the GOP nomination in the present climate - Trump has stirred up a hornet's nest of anger & mistrust in the Republican base. I think Trump would have to be thoroughly discredited by a MAJOR scandal for him to lose the support of the "populist" base & allow the political landscape to be reset.

Like he said in one of his own speaches, he could shoot someone in the middle of the street and still be supported. There is only 1 thing worse then a murderer and I dont think even Trump has gone that far. He has proven pretty much bullet proof. Hopefully tax fraud will wake some people up.

 

[Danoff]

Like he said in one of his own speaches, he could shoot someone in the middle of the street and still be supported. There is only 1 thing worse then a murderer and I dont think even Trump has gone that far. He has proven pretty much bullet proof. Hopefully tax fraud will wake some people up.

There's only 1 thing worse than a murderer? Not sure I can agree with that. What do you think that is?

 

[BobK]

What Trump has done, is divide the country into "us & them" - the most divisive President in decades.

I don't think you can hang that one on him. It's true he hasn't helped the situation, but the left and the media had already set the divisive climate.

 

[TexRex]

the left and the media had already set the divisive climate.

What a 🤬 CROCK!!!

 

[Johnnypenso]

I don't think you can hang that one on him. It's true he hasn't helped the situation, but the left and the media had already set the divisive climate.

To coin a phrase from Marshall McLuhan, "The left is the media"

It sounded more clever in my head but whatever

But you're absolutely correct. The right/left division in the mainstream media make it virtually impossible now for any candidate to receive broad support across the aisle. The movement of large numbers of people from the somewhat tame version of the news on major networks towards the much more partisan and often less well researched "news" on the internet only makes the divisions deeper. The only thing that will bring Americans together like that at this point is a justifiable war and that's not on the horizon.

 

[Dennisch]

The only thing that will bring Americans together like that at this point is a justifiable war and that's not on the horizon.

Canada has to take one for the team. Grab your hockey gear and invade D.C.

 

[Northstar]

Made a minor change but the truth of it remains.

I'd imagine the list is far bigger than those 2 (and JFK), the only difference is modern presidents have to deal with far more national media than those who served before radio, TV and the internet.

Canada has to take one for the team. Grab your hockey gear and invade D.C.

I can see it now, histories shortest war (It will still cost the U.S. 87 billion dollars though because reasons).

U.S. Border Patrol Guard: "Please, stop invading"
Canadians: "OK, we're sorry".

 

[ryzno]

Anyone else get the "Trump alert" today? So funny watching people get triggered over a FEMA alert.

 

[Northstar]

Anyone else get the "Trump alert" today? So funny watching people get triggered over a FEMA alert.

I admit I was triggered, but only because both me and the guy I was working with have 2 phones so all 4 phones were making annoying sounds at the same time with no way to silence them.