TTLG|Thief|Bioshock|System Shock|Deus Ex|Mobile

View Poll Results: How long will Trump be President?

Voters
142. You may not vote on this poll
  • 1 Term (4 Years)

    26 18.31%
  • 2 Terms (8 Years)

    49 34.51%
  • 1st Term Impeachment/Assassination

    50 35.21%
  • 2nd Term Impeachment/Assassination

    4 2.82%
  • I don't know what's going on!

    13 9.15%

Thread: ✮✮✮ !Trump Dump! ✮✮✮

  1. #13326
    Member
    Registered: May 2004
    Speaking of Obama, you can compare with the last pandemic under his watch here:

    https://www.cdc.gov/flu/pandemic-res...-timeline.html

  2. #13327
    In other news, which has gone completely unreported by the media, Joe Biden is accused of that one thing that we were all told should end a Presidential run. Grabbing a woman by the pussy - against her will. And then telling her she is nothing, to him.

    Former Biden staffer Tara Reade states: “And then his hands were on me and underneath my clothes. And yeah, and then he went — he went down my skirt but then up inside it, and he penetrated me with his fingers.”

    Reade has been told by her wanting to talk about the alleged assault is doing the work of Vladimir Putin.

    In these financial circumstances you'd have to think the odds are slim for Trump, but Hunter Biden's dad is such a soft target that he could only win out of sympathy.

  3. #13328
    Moderator and Priest
    Registered: Mar 2002
    Location: Dinosaur Ladies of the Night
    These are our chosen leaders. We deserve what we get.

  4. #13329
    Moderator
    Registered: Jan 2003
    Location: NeoTokyo
    Biden doesn't exactly hide his wandering hands over women.
    I was in favor of Warren for independent reasons, but this is an issue women candidates are predominantly free from, so just one more reason it'd be better to have one.

    If you're asking for a difference though, in Biden's case, if you were doing this by the book, unless she has further evidence it's a he said/she said situation (I'm assuming he'd deny it), and you'd count that as likely as unlikely (50%), and she couldn't meet a "more likely than not" burden of proof in a civil case. (It's a serious allegation that deserves to be followed up on though. And if some evidence started popping up, like many other instances and corroborating evidence that's survived, like it did for Kavenaugh, then it should be a real factor in people's vote.) Whereas in Trump's case it was a self-admission (boast) of guilt, so 100% likely. We don't know a specific women's name (lots have come forward), but we know it's been more than one and probably many (he used "they").

  5. #13330
    Member
    Registered: May 2004
    Quote Originally Posted by Renzatic View Post
    It's gonna be all Obama's fault by the time all this is said and done.
    Well, you're wrong! He blames all the previous presidents, not just Obama:

    https://twitter.com/richardhine/stat...79768912056322

    Trump today: “I’m not just blaming President Obama... in all fairness to all the former Presidents, none of them ever thought a thing like this could happen.”

    Fact check: 30 members of transition team were briefed by Obama officials on almost this exact scenario.

  6. #13331
    Member
    Registered: May 2004
    "This is the best country in the world to get Coronavirus":


  7. #13332
    Moderator and Priest
    Registered: Mar 2002
    Location: Dinosaur Ladies of the Night
    In a move that surprises no one, Trump says he won’t comply with key transparency measures in the coronavirus stimulus bill.

    He's gonna spend a ton of cash on his own properties.

  8. #13333
    Member
    Registered: May 2004
    Yeah, what a big surprise considering he was just impeached for abuse of power. He really did learn the lesson the Republicans taught him, huh.
    Last edited by Starker; 28th Mar 2020 at 18:44.

  9. #13334
    Moderator and Priest
    Registered: Mar 2002
    Location: Dinosaur Ladies of the Night
    It's not like we'll have any paper proof if he ends up granting himself a couple billion to secure his business. It'll all just be hearsay, and we can dismiss that.

    He learned his lesson. You're just full of hate.

  10. #13335
    Member
    Registered: Aug 2004
    Can we pre-emptively arrest Mnuchin in his stead?

    Make it clear that even if the president is above the law, his officers won't be until he pardons them?

  11. #13336
    Member
    Registered: May 2004
    The next president of the US:


  12. #13337
    Member
    Registered: Jun 2009
    Location: The Spiraling Sea
    Quote Originally Posted by Pyrian View Post
    Can we pre-emptively arrest Mnuchin in his stead?
    No, but we can say hello to Joe!



    Exactly!...

  13. #13338
    Member
    Registered: May 2004
    Yes, Lord Dampnut's plan to open up the country is probably going to make it worse no matter what. I don't see what's so controversial about the statement.

    Edit: Oh, I see what you're doing. You're pretending that this was one single sentence and that he said something nonsensical.

  14. #13339
    Member
    Registered: May 2004
    In related news, Fox News, of all channels, is apparently very worried about the US president's mental health:


  15. #13340
    Member
    Registered: May 2004
    "Nobody could have seen it coming":

    https://news.yahoo.com/senator-says-...003319950.html

    WASHINGTON — Sen. Chris Murphy, a Connecticut Democrat, says that Trump administration officials declined an offer of early congressional funding assistance that he and other senators made on Feb. 5 during a meeting to discuss the coronavirus.

    The officials, including Health and Human Services Secretary Alex Azar, said they “didn’t need emergency funding, that they would be able to handle it within existing appropriations,” Murphy recalled in an interview with Yahoo News’ “Skullduggery” podcast.

    “What an awful, horrible catastrophic mistake that was,” Murphy said.

    On Feb. 5, Murphy tweeted: “Just left the Administration briefing on Coronavirus. Bottom line: they aren't taking this seriously enough. Notably, no request for ANY emergency funding, which is a big mistake. Local health systems need supplies, training, screening staff etc. And they need it now.”

    Murphy told Yahoo News that the funding he and other congressional leaders wanted to allocate nearly two months ago would have paid for essential preventative measures, including hiring local screening and testing staff, researching a vaccine and treatments and the stockpiling of needed medical supplies.

    [...]

    “Had we appropriated money in February to start buying re-agent, we would be in a position to do many more tests today than we are,” Murphy said. ”It was just so clear to us that the administration didn't think this was going to be a problem. We begged them in that meeting to request emergency funding from the Congress and they told us ... that they had everything that they needed on hand, which was false.”

    [...]

    Murphy also criticized the White House’s decision not to take coronavirus test kits offered by the World Health Organization in January, which he said was an especially devastating mistake because that test was ready to go and easily replicable. Murphy said he believes that, as a result of the administration’s testing decisions, only about 20 percent to 30 percent of people who should be tested are able to do so.

    “We didn't appropriate the dollars necessary to build out the testing infrastructure,” Murphy said.

    The administration’s laissez-faire approach has also contributed to the country’s soaring infection rate, Murphy said, because Trump had resisted calls to invoke the Defense Production Act. The Defense Production Act, or DPA, allows the president to compel private companies to manufacture products deemed necessary for national security.

    Trump announced Friday that he was finally invoking the DPA to force General Motors to produce badly needed ventilators. But Murphy said the president had dragged his feet in using the DPA because some of his allies pressured him against invoking it.

    “The president is getting push back from right-wing ideologues, from those who believe that the private sector can fix any and all problems that confront the nation,” Murphy said.
    [...]

  16. #13341
    Moderator and Priest
    Registered: Mar 2002
    Location: Dinosaur Ladies of the Night

  17. #13342
    Member
    Registered: Aug 2004
    That tail, though. You really want the tail to come down before you go off quarantine, lest you get another spike.

  18. #13343
    Moderator and Priest
    Registered: Mar 2002
    Location: Dinosaur Ladies of the Night
    That's the downside to flattening the curve: things linger.

  19. #13344
    Member
    Registered: Aug 2004
    Hrm. A curve that's merely flattened means the health care system doesn't get overextended, but it still leads to millions of deaths.

  20. #13345
    Moderator and Priest
    Registered: Mar 2002
    Location: Dinosaur Ladies of the Night
    It keeps the overall case load down as well. Less people going out and about means less people getting sick. The less sick people you have, the less the hospitals have to handle. You'll still have people contracting the disease and dying, but in smaller amounts stretched out over a longer period of time.

  21. #13346
    Member
    Registered: Dec 2006
    Location: Washington DC
    Quote Originally Posted by Pyrian View Post
    Hrm. A curve that's merely flattened means the health care system doesn't get overextended, but it still leads to millions of deaths.
    I'm sure it doesn't need to be said, but you get a lot more deaths if COVID patients are dying for lack of ventilators and heart attack/stroke/gunshot/etc patients are dying for lack of hospital beds and doctors.

    I don't think we can stop it entirely. At best we flatten the curve as much as possible before a vaccine becomes available.

  22. #13347
    Member
    Registered: May 2004
    https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/...20677660925952

    Just spoke to my friend MBS (Crown Prince) of Saudi Arabia, who spoke with President Putin of Russia, & I expect & hope that they will be cutting back approximately 10 Million Barrels, and maybe substantially more which, if it happens, will be GREAT for the oil & gas industry!
    Yay for the oil and gas industry, I guess?

  23. #13348
    Member
    Registered: May 2004
    Priorities:

    https://www.nytimes.com/2020/04/03/u...nce-fired.html

    President Trump is firing the intelligence community inspector general whose insistence on telling lawmakers about a whistle-blower complaint about his dealings with Ukraine triggered impeachment proceedings last fall, the president told lawmakers in a letter late Friday.

    The move came as Mr. Trump announced his intent to name a White House aide as the independent watchdog for $500 billion in corporate pandemic aid and notified Congress of other nominees to inspector general positions, including one that would effectively oust the newly named chairman of a panel to oversee how the government spends $2 trillion in coronavirus relief.

    The slew of late-night announcements, coming as the world’s attention is gripped by the coronavirus pandemic, raised the specter of a White House power play over the community of inspectors general, independent officials whose mission is to root out waste, fraud and abuse within the government.

    Mr. Trump is ousting the intelligence community inspector general, Michael K. Atkinson, because he lost confidence in him, the president wrote in a letter to leaders of the two congressional intelligence committees. He gave no further explanation.

    “As is the case with regard to other positions where I, as president, have the power of appointment, by and with the advice and consent of the Senate, it is vital that I have the fullest confidence in the appointees serving as inspectors general,” Mr. Trump wrote. “That is no longer the case with regard to this inspector general.”

    The president has long discussed his desire to fire several inspectors general, and he has been talking to aides about his desire to oust Mr. Atkinson since last fall, tarring the inspector general as disloyal because he sought to share information with Congress about the president’s efforts to pressure Ukraine into delivering him personal political benefits.
    ...[

  24. #13349
    Member
    Registered: May 2004
    More good news for the oil and gas industry:

    https://www.nytimes.com/2020/04/01/o...standards.html

    President Trump’s rollback on Tuesday of stringent automobile mileage and emissions standards torpedoes the biggest single step any nation has taken to fight the climate crisis. In dispensing with Obama-era rules in the name of imaginary regulatory reform, he will damage the health of the planet, our pocketbooks and even the very auto industry he thinks will benefit.

    The Obama administration set the standards in 2012 to cut emissions and improve gas mileage roughly 5 percent a year from 2021 to 2025. Thirteen automakers agreed to them.

    Now Mr. Trump’s decision will slash required fuel-efficiency improvements to just 1.5 percent a year, beginning in 2021, but that won’t even be achieved because of various credits automakers can receive for making vehicles that run on natural gas or employ more efficient air-conditioning refrigerants — even if emissions aren’t reduced. The 2025 new-vehicle fleet would average 31.8 real-world m.p.g., compared with 37.5 m.p.g. under the rules Mr. Trump is eviscerating, according to Consumer Reports.

    Under the Trump plan, which is almost certain to face a court challenge by states and environmental groups, including ours, by 2040, vehicles will burn 142 billion additional gallons of gasoline and emit as much as 1.5 billion more tons of pollutants that warm the planet, an Environmental Defense Fund analysis found. That’s the equivalent of the pollution of 68 coal plants operating for five years, according to the E.D.F.

    Those numbers certainly are not good for consumers, who will pay about $3,200 more in fuel costs for a 2026 model year vehicle than they would under the Obama rules, according to Consumer Reports. Or for the climate.

    [...]

    A study funded by automakers, comparing the Obama and Trump plans, suggests that the “positive effects on the economy” of the Obama rules “are ultimately larger in magnitude than the negative effects, primarily because the fuel savings are quite large relative to technology costs.” Although the study was premised on an earlier version of the Trump plan that suggested no improvements in fuel efficiency, rather than the current meager advances, it remains applicable. As Margo Oge, a former top official in the E.P.A.’s vehicle-emissions program argues, the rollback will result in no progress and will do more harm than good. Notably, a co-author of the report was John Graham, who led President George W. Bush’s deregulatory campaign.

    Similarly, decades of reports by the E.P.A. counter the argument that fuel-efficiency mileage would improve without stringent rules. When the standard remained unchanged from 1989 to 2007, fuel efficiency mileage actually fell, from 21.4 m.p.g. to 20.6 m.p.g.

    The administration asserts the new rules would save up to 1,000 lives annually in vehicles built through 2029 because consumers would be more inclined to buy new vehicles with greater safety technology if they didn’t have to also pay for greater efficiency. But experts and safety statistics have disproved that theory.
    [...]

  25. #13350
    Member
    Registered: May 2004
    Quote Originally Posted by Starker View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Renzatic View Post
    It's gonna be all Obama's fault by the time all this is said and done.
    Well, you're wrong! He blames all the previous presidents, not just Obama:

    https://twitter.com/richardhine/stat...79768912056322

    Trump today: “I’m not just blaming President Obama... in all fairness to all the former Presidents, none of them ever thought a thing like this could happen.”

    Fact check: 30 members of transition team were briefed by Obama officials on almost this exact scenario.
    Oh, and of course it's Biden's fault:

    https://www.yahoo.com/news/trump-cam...010100032.html

    WASHINGTON — President Donald Trump's re-election campaign urged surrogates in a call Wednesday to capitalize on the coronavirus pandemic to attack his rival Joe Biden and other Democrats as "the opposition" in Trump's war against the outbreak, according to a person who participated in the call.

    "This is the bottom line: President Trump is leading the nation in this war against the coronavirus, and Joe Biden, the Democrats and the media have decided to be the opposition in that war," Tim Murtaugh, the campaign's director of communications, said in a phone conversation with surrogates, according to the source.

    [...]

    "I know everyone is worried making sure everyone thinks the president is doing a great job on this," [campaign manager] Parscale said, according to the source, but "we need to continue to pick up the pace" on Biden.

    Trump continues to appear daily on television, holding briefings from the White House that frequently stretch over an hour and draw millions of viewers.

    "Because 84 percent of people are watching right now the press conferences, a large amount of people watching news and your hits, this is an opportunity for you to really establish a narrative on Biden," Parscale said, according to the source. "If all of you on the phone could really kind of double down on Biden during this and the contrast ... between how President Trump is handling this and how Biden is handling it."
    [...]

Page 534 of 540 FirstFirst ... 34284434484489494499504509514519524529530531532533534535536537538539 ... LastLast

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •