This for me will be what makes him completely unravel. The US system makes changing anything a slow and difficult process. Trump will become increasingly frustrated with the level of beaurocracy and his inability to deliver his knee jerk whims.
Off Topic Trumpy pumpy.
- Thread starter HugoEkitikeN01
- Start date
-
Please bear with us on the new site integration and fixing any known bugs over the coming days. If you can not log in please try resetting your password and check your spam box. If you have tried these steps and are still struggling email [email protected] with your username/registered email address
-
The US system is designed so that they don't elect a king/tyrant/megalomaniac/autocrat - in short, everything that Trump is. This should be making Madison chuckle with satisfaction, if there is such a thing as a heaven for the chief designer of the constitution.
By the way...Twitter is an awesome place to wind up Trumpys...
It's therapeutic...a bit easy but still fun.
It's therapeutic...a bit easy but still fun.
Oooh! I've been added to the "liar" list and "the enemy" list..
As well as been outed as a member of some London extremist mosque...
I'm dangerous!
As well as been outed as a member of some London extremist mosque...
I'm dangerous!
The Clinton Accuser Who Could Bring Down Trump
Editor’s note: The opinions in this article are the author’s, as published by our content partner, and do not necessarily represent the views of MSN or Microsoft.
Among the many surreal moments that made up Donald Trump’s 2016 presidential campaign, one of the most remarkable was the Facebook Live press conference he held before the second presidential debate to help deflect the impact of the now-infamous 2005 Access Hollywood tape. Sitting there with Trump in casual loungewear and a blingy hat, along with two other women who had accused Bill Clinton of sexual assault or harassment, was 49-year-old Arkansan Paula Jones, the woman who had sued a sitting president and likely changed — if you add up the George W. Bush voters who hoped to “restore honor and dignity” to the White House in 2000 — the course of American history. Believe it or not, Jones may not be done influencing history just yet.
Chances are, when President Trump — who once labeled Jones “a loser” in a 1998 NBC News interview — first resurrected her case to help bolster his candidacy, he never contemplated the role it could play in unraveling his presidency. Over two decades ago, Clinton attempted to delay a sexual harassment suit filed against him by Jones until after he left office. In it, she alleged that in 1991, the then Arkansas governor had exposed himself to her in a Little Rock hotel room while she was a 24-year-old state employee. The resulting case, Jones v. Clinton, went all the way to the Supreme Court, which held in a unanimous decision in 1997 that executive privilege did not protect a sitting president from lawsuits filed against him for private conduct.
One major weapon for attacking the policies of a sitting president is through litigating his private conduct.
You know the rest of the story: Clinton was forced to submit to hours of depositions, and the case led Jones’ lawyers to a White House intern named Monica Lewinsky. In addition to humbling one president, the case set a powerful precedent for presidents who misbehave in their private lives — one that could get a workout under Trump’s administration. Jones v. Clinton is “horrible news” for Donald Trump, says Northeastern University law professor Daniel Urman. By far the most litigious president in American history, Trump and his various business entities have been involved in as many as 4,000 lawsuits over the years. Despite paying $25 million to settle three fraud lawsuits against Trump University just days before his inauguration, the new president faces, according to a USA Today count two weeks prior to the inauguration, 75 ongoing cases.
As the Jones case makes clear, Trump will not be able to lean on his duties as president to excuse himself from the proceedings in these cases or to shield himself from liability. The pending litigation will take up time, draw additional scrutiny to his business practices and give political opponents plenty of opportunities to conduct discovery and dig up more dirt, including perhaps a Lewinsky-level smoking gun. And, let’s face it, as with Clinton, one major weapon for attacking the policies of a sitting president is through litigating his private conduct, both in court and in the court of public opinion.
Which brings up a fascinating side note: Many of the same folks who will be helping to defend Trump in these matters have some very close ties to the group of young conservatives — who call themselves “the Elves” (as in Santa’s hidden magical workers) — that spent years lobbing legal grenades at President Clinton from the other side. Case in point: George Conway III, a high-powered D.C. lawyer at the prestigious firm Wachtell, Lipton, Rosen & Katz, and — you guessed it — husband of senior Trump adviser and “alternative facts” proponent Kellyanne Conway. Conway helped write Jones’ Supreme Court brief and also penned an influential op-ed in the Los Angeles Times at the very beginning of the Jones ordeal arguing that Clinton was on shaky legal ground. Granting the president immunity “would place presidents above the law,” Conway observed, and such a situation “smacks of the privilege of a sovereign or an autocrat — not a president of a democratic republic.”
Of course, there is one way that Trump could rise above the law and avoid facing the barrage of private lawsuits — and it’s an escape hatch that comes straight from the Supreme Court’s opinion in Jones v. Clinton itself: “If Congress deems it appropriate to afford the President stronger protection, it may respond with appropriate legislation.”
Let’s hope the Republicans in Congress, some of whom once led the pursuit of Clinton, heed Conway’s words about privilege and autocracy in the litigious days ahead, and abstain from revisiting the 1990s in reverse by taking action again — this time to shield a sitting president from the consequences of his private conduct.
http://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/polit...down-trump/ar-BByZ5bW?li=AAnZ9Ug&ocid=1PRCMSE
Editor’s note: The opinions in this article are the author’s, as published by our content partner, and do not necessarily represent the views of MSN or Microsoft.
Among the many surreal moments that made up Donald Trump’s 2016 presidential campaign, one of the most remarkable was the Facebook Live press conference he held before the second presidential debate to help deflect the impact of the now-infamous 2005 Access Hollywood tape. Sitting there with Trump in casual loungewear and a blingy hat, along with two other women who had accused Bill Clinton of sexual assault or harassment, was 49-year-old Arkansan Paula Jones, the woman who had sued a sitting president and likely changed — if you add up the George W. Bush voters who hoped to “restore honor and dignity” to the White House in 2000 — the course of American history. Believe it or not, Jones may not be done influencing history just yet.
Chances are, when President Trump — who once labeled Jones “a loser” in a 1998 NBC News interview — first resurrected her case to help bolster his candidacy, he never contemplated the role it could play in unraveling his presidency. Over two decades ago, Clinton attempted to delay a sexual harassment suit filed against him by Jones until after he left office. In it, she alleged that in 1991, the then Arkansas governor had exposed himself to her in a Little Rock hotel room while she was a 24-year-old state employee. The resulting case, Jones v. Clinton, went all the way to the Supreme Court, which held in a unanimous decision in 1997 that executive privilege did not protect a sitting president from lawsuits filed against him for private conduct.
One major weapon for attacking the policies of a sitting president is through litigating his private conduct.
You know the rest of the story: Clinton was forced to submit to hours of depositions, and the case led Jones’ lawyers to a White House intern named Monica Lewinsky. In addition to humbling one president, the case set a powerful precedent for presidents who misbehave in their private lives — one that could get a workout under Trump’s administration. Jones v. Clinton is “horrible news” for Donald Trump, says Northeastern University law professor Daniel Urman. By far the most litigious president in American history, Trump and his various business entities have been involved in as many as 4,000 lawsuits over the years. Despite paying $25 million to settle three fraud lawsuits against Trump University just days before his inauguration, the new president faces, according to a USA Today count two weeks prior to the inauguration, 75 ongoing cases.
As the Jones case makes clear, Trump will not be able to lean on his duties as president to excuse himself from the proceedings in these cases or to shield himself from liability. The pending litigation will take up time, draw additional scrutiny to his business practices and give political opponents plenty of opportunities to conduct discovery and dig up more dirt, including perhaps a Lewinsky-level smoking gun. And, let’s face it, as with Clinton, one major weapon for attacking the policies of a sitting president is through litigating his private conduct, both in court and in the court of public opinion.
Which brings up a fascinating side note: Many of the same folks who will be helping to defend Trump in these matters have some very close ties to the group of young conservatives — who call themselves “the Elves” (as in Santa’s hidden magical workers) — that spent years lobbing legal grenades at President Clinton from the other side. Case in point: George Conway III, a high-powered D.C. lawyer at the prestigious firm Wachtell, Lipton, Rosen & Katz, and — you guessed it — husband of senior Trump adviser and “alternative facts” proponent Kellyanne Conway. Conway helped write Jones’ Supreme Court brief and also penned an influential op-ed in the Los Angeles Times at the very beginning of the Jones ordeal arguing that Clinton was on shaky legal ground. Granting the president immunity “would place presidents above the law,” Conway observed, and such a situation “smacks of the privilege of a sovereign or an autocrat — not a president of a democratic republic.”
Of course, there is one way that Trump could rise above the law and avoid facing the barrage of private lawsuits — and it’s an escape hatch that comes straight from the Supreme Court’s opinion in Jones v. Clinton itself: “If Congress deems it appropriate to afford the President stronger protection, it may respond with appropriate legislation.”
Let’s hope the Republicans in Congress, some of whom once led the pursuit of Clinton, heed Conway’s words about privilege and autocracy in the litigious days ahead, and abstain from revisiting the 1990s in reverse by taking action again — this time to shield a sitting president from the consequences of his private conduct.
http://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/polit...down-trump/ar-BByZ5bW?li=AAnZ9Ug&ocid=1PRCMSE
Oh but they will..look at their actions over the Russia investigation. They've literally stopped the investigation at least from Congress side and colluded with the white house because they all have at least commercial connections with Russia too.
They'll back him on this as well. They are all in on Trump unless they see losses looming in the mid terms..
They'll back him on this as well. They are all in on Trump unless they see losses looming in the mid terms..
http://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-39451358
Incredible.
President Donald Trump's ex-national security adviser, Michael Flynn, wants immunity to testify on alleged Russian election meddling, his lawyer says.
Robert Kelner says his client "has a story to tell", but needs to guard against "unfair prosecution".
Congress is investigating the allegations, with one senator warning of Kremlin "propaganda on steroids".
Mr Flynn was sacked in February after misleading the White House about his conversations with a Russian envoy.
Incredible.
President Donald Trump's ex-national security adviser, Michael Flynn, wants immunity to testify on alleged Russian election meddling, his lawyer says.
Robert Kelner says his client "has a story to tell", but needs to guard against "unfair prosecution".
Congress is investigating the allegations, with one senator warning of Kremlin "propaganda on steroids".
Mr Flynn was sacked in February after misleading the White House about his conversations with a Russian envoy.
It seems to me that if a guy fired asks for immunity there must be high crimes he thinks he could be charged with and he will sell trump to avoid them.
Also interesting that no one is taking him up on it...FBI mustn't think they need him.
Maybe they think they can get him hung for treason and trump along side him..
or maybe the fbi are a smokescreen and are in the trump camp all along per the hillary intervention.
Alec Baldwin says he may retire 'satire-resistant' Donald Trump impersonation
Saturday Night Live star says US might not be ‘in the mood to laugh’ at the president when next season resumes in September
https://www.theguardian.com/tv-and-radio/2017/mar/31/alec-baldwin-satire-resistant-donald-trump-snl
Saturday Night Live star says US might not be ‘in the mood to laugh’ at the president when next season resumes in September
https://www.theguardian.com/tv-and-radio/2017/mar/31/alec-baldwin-satire-resistant-donald-trump-snl
So the animal Assad has used Sarin gas on refugees again, Trump will still be blowing Putin who's protecting Assad.
But sure, it's only evil muslim children that we all refuse to rescue..either by accepting them in or by calling Putins bluff once and for all and bombing Assad out of existence.
Never again eh?
But sure, it's only evil muslim children that we all refuse to rescue..either by accepting them in or by calling Putins bluff once and for all and bombing Assad out of existence.
Never again eh?
Not that i'm condoning Assads chemical attack, but i'd much rather Assad (and especially Syria pre rebellion) than IS taking over the joint
Hmmm...personally think ISIS is a result of half assed jobs both in Syria and Iraq. Either follow through with real regime change policy and commit for 30+ years or as so called liberal democracies put our hands up and admit once and for all we don't give a stuff about weapons of mass destruction and left the 2 dictators in power.
But how any of our leaders after ****ing it up so spectacularly can look at the young boy gasping for breath with terror in his eyes or a truck full of semi clothed children's body's..and say don't let refugees in. Or have the gall to hold holocaust rememberence days...
Of Course May is too busy whinging about easter eggs while selling more arms to the Saudis
Oh and this gassing comes a day after the UN stated a way forward including Assad was now the policy...here's his answer as to what he thinks that gave him.