US Politics - Trump cancels summit having to do with North Korea

Our best bits.
User avatar
KK
Moderator
Joined in 2008
Location: Botswana
Contact:

PostRe: The American Politics Thread
by KK » Wed Mar 01, 2017 10:16 am

Even though he would prefer Buckingham Palace it looks like Trumpus will avoid London & Prince Charles by visiting The Queen while she's at Balmoral in Scotland instead according to some stories in the papers today. COWARD. As late as October has also been bandied about however.

Image
User avatar
Gandalf
Member
Joined in 2008

PostRe: The American Politics Thread
by Gandalf » Wed Mar 01, 2017 10:20 am

KKLEIN wrote:Even though he would prefer Buckingham Palace it looks like Trumpus will avoid London & Prince Charles by visiting The Queen while she's at Balmoral in Scotland instead according to some stories in the papers today. COWARD. As late as October has also been bandied about however.


Charles' beef with Trump is over climate isn't it?

User avatar
Peter Crisp
Member
Joined in 2008

PostRe: The American Politics Thread
by Peter Crisp » Wed Mar 01, 2017 10:28 am

Preezy wrote:
Harry Ola wrote:
the generals ― who are very respected, my generals are the most respected that we’ve had in many decades, I believe.

He continually has to validate and sooth himself with filler comments like this, it's quite irritating.


It's also like he doesn't realise that those generals have been in the military for decades so Trump hasn't exactly had a massive influence on them or their military thinking. It would be like me turning up to a meeting about how to run this place and saying "Wow, since I turned up Karl has really stepped up his game and I obviously told him what to do as I know loads about how to do internet stuff. Telling him to reverse the polarity of the neutron flow was a genuinely genius idea on my part".

Vermilion wrote:I'd rather live in Luton.
User avatar
Peter Crisp
Member
Joined in 2008

PostRe: The American Politics Thread
by Peter Crisp » Wed Mar 01, 2017 10:30 am

KKLEIN wrote:Even though he would prefer Buckingham Palace it looks like Trumpus will avoid London & Prince Charles by visiting The Queen while she's at Balmoral in Scotland instead according to some stories in the papers today. COWARD. As late as October has also been bandied about however.


I'm trying my hardest to be fair here but this could also be because the launch of the new aircraft carrier HMS Queen Elizabeth has been delayed and I think they may want the President to be at that launch. I have no idea why though as it has strawberry float all to do with him.

Vermilion wrote:I'd rather live in Luton.
User avatar
KK
Moderator
Joined in 2008
Location: Botswana
Contact:

PostRe: The American Politics Thread
by KK » Wed Mar 01, 2017 10:34 am

When it comes to the environment Charles is a massive lefty. Harry reportedly doesn't like Trump either.

I'm sure Charles will also be thrilled if the UK ends up importing low-grade foodstuffs; it would basically go against everything his Duchy Of Cornwall range stands for.

Apart from racist jokes from Prince Philip and inherited wealth, I don't think the Royals and Trump have anything remotely in common.

Image
User avatar
KK
Moderator
Joined in 2008
Location: Botswana
Contact:

PostRe: The American Politics Thread
by KK » Wed Mar 01, 2017 5:23 pm

Explain the purpose of this, other than to sell MORE GUNS:

NBC News wrote:Trump Signs Bill Revoking Obama-Era Gun Checks for People With Mental Illnesses

President Donald Trump quietly signed a bill into law Tuesday rolling back an Obama-era regulation that made it harder for people with mental illnesses to purchase a gun.

The rule, which was finalized in December, added people receiving Social Security checks for mental illnesses and people deemed unfit to handle their own financial affairs to the national background check database.

Had the rule fully taken effect, the Obama administration predicted it would have added about 75,000 names to that database.

President Barack Obama recommended the now-nullified regulation in a 2013 memo following the mass shooting at Sandy Hook Elementary School, which left 20 first graders and six others dead. The measure sought to block some people with severe mental health problems from buying guns.

The original rule was hotly contested by gun rights advocates who said it infringed on Americans' Second Amendment rights. Gun control advocates, however, praised the rule for curbing the availability of firearms to those who may not use them with the right intentions.

Both the House and Senate last week passed the new bill, H.J. Res 40, revoking the Obama-era regulation.

Trump signed the bill into law without a photo op or fanfare. The president welcomed cameras into the oval office Tuesday for the signing of other executive orders and bills. News that the president signed the bill was tucked at the bottom of a White House email alerting press to other legislation signed by the president.

The National Rifle Association "applauded" Trump's action. Chris Cox, NRA-ILA executive director, said the move "marks a new era for law-abiding gun owners, as we now have a president who respects and supports our arms."

Everytown For Gun Safety President John Feinblatt said he expected more gun control rollbacks from the Trump administration. In a statement to NBC News, he called the action "just the first item on the gun lobby's wish list" and accused the National Rifle Association of "pushing more guns, for more people, in more places."

Sen. Chris Murphy, D-Conn., a leading gun control advocate in Congress, called out Republicans over the move.

"Republicans always say we don't need new gun laws, we just need to enforce the laws already on the books. But the bill signed into law today undermines enforcement of existing laws that Congress passed to make sure the background check system had complete information," he said in an emailed statement.

http://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/tru ... al-n727221

It's just ridiculous! You've got to laugh.

Image
User avatar
DML
Member
Joined in 2008

PostRe: The American Politics Thread
by DML » Wed Mar 01, 2017 5:42 pm

Maybe Trump wants to buy a gun?

#sickburn

User avatar
Alvin Flummux
Member
Joined in 2008
Contact:

PostRe: The American Politics Thread
by Alvin Flummux » Wed Mar 01, 2017 5:44 pm

It's the influence of gun lobby cash on policy.

User avatar
captain red dog
Member
Joined in 2008
Location: Bristol, UK

PostRe: The American Politics Thread
by captain red dog » Wed Mar 01, 2017 5:52 pm

It's an interesting issue, I mean personally I am completely anti-gun but in terms of a fair law I could see that potentially being controversial depending on the definition of mental illness.

User avatar
Alvin Flummux
Member
Joined in 2008
Contact:

PostRe: The American Politics Thread
by Alvin Flummux » Wed Mar 01, 2017 5:56 pm

Yep, whenever I've brought up the issue of mental health checks in relation to getting a gun license, the issue of what constitutes mental illness and what constitutes "normal", and who is the arbiter, usually comes up.

User avatar
Meep
Member
Joined in 2010
Location: Belfast

PostRe: The American Politics Thread
by Meep » Wed Mar 01, 2017 7:54 pm

Trump is not actually mentally ill because narcissism is not classed as a mental illness. In order for something to medically defined as illness it has to impair or harm the person who has it, whereas narcissists just to harm everyone else and usually benefit from their selfishness and ability to lie without a flinch.

The problem humanity has with people like this is that our civilisation has grown too large. If we were still living in tribes someone like Trump would have burned every bridge, been exiled and died wondering the wilderness long ago. I'm kind of worried that we may have lost the ability to expel individuals like this from the gene pool.

User avatar
Moggy
"Special"
Joined in 2008
AKA: Moggy

PostRe: The American Politics Thread
by Moggy » Wed Mar 01, 2017 8:45 pm

Meep wrote:Trump is not actually mentally ill because narcissism is not classed as a mental illness. In order for something to medically defined as illness it has to impair or harm the person who has it, whereas narcissists just to harm everyone else and usually benefit from their selfishness and ability to lie without a flinch.

The problem humanity has with people like this is that our civilisation has grown too large. If we were still living in tribes someone like Trump would have burned every bridge, been exiled and died wondering the wilderness long ago. I'm kind of worried that we may have lost the ability to expel individuals like this from the gene pool.


I think you have an overly romantic view of what tribal life would have been like. I'd imagine most tribes ended up ruled by a cruel narcissistic arsewipe that bullied everyone into supporting him.

User avatar
Peter Crisp
Member
Joined in 2008

PostRe: The American Politics Thread
by Peter Crisp » Wed Mar 01, 2017 9:15 pm

Alvin Flummux wrote:Yep, whenever I've brought up the issue of mental health checks in relation to getting a gun license, the issue of what constitutes mental illness and what constitutes "normal", and who is the arbiter, usually comes up.


I'd say being told you can't be trusted to take care of your own money should also make you unfit to own a firearm.

Vermilion wrote:I'd rather live in Luton.
User avatar
Alvin Flummux
Member
Joined in 2008
Contact:

PostRe: The American Politics Thread
by Alvin Flummux » Thu Mar 02, 2017 2:35 am

Jeff Sessions lied to the Senate, possibly while under oath, about having contact with the Russian ambassador. Twice

Then-Sen. Jeff Sessions (R-Ala.) spoke twice last year with Russia’s ambassador to the United States, Justice Department officials said, encounters he did not disclose when asked about possible contacts between members of President Trump’s campaign and representatives of Moscow during Sessions’s confirmation hearing to become attorney general.

One of the meetings was a private conversation between Sessions and Russian Ambassador Sergey Kislyak that took place in September in the senator’s office, at the height of what U.S. intelligence officials say was a Russian cyber campaign to upend the U.S. presidential race.

The previously undisclosed discussions could fuel new congressional calls for the appointment of a special counsel to investigate Russia’s alleged role in the 2016 presidential election. As attorney general, Sessions oversees the Justice Department and the FBI, which have been leading investigations into Russian meddling and any links to Trump’s associates. He has so far resisted calls to recuse himself.

When Sessions spoke with Kislyak in July and September, the senator was a senior member of the influential Armed Services Committee as well as one of Trump’s top foreign policy advisers. Sessions played a prominent role supporting Trump on the stump after formally joining the campaign in February 2016.

At his Jan. 10 Judiciary Committee confirmation hearing, Sessions was asked by Sen. Al Franken, a Minnesota Democrat, what he would do if he learned of any evidence that anyone affiliated with the Trump campaign communicated with the Russian government in the course of the 2016 campaign.

“I’m not aware of any of those activities,” he responded. He added: “I have been called a surrogate at a time or two in that campaign and I did not have communications with the Russians.”


Officials said Sessions did not consider the conversations relevant to the lawmakers’ questions and did not remember in detail what he discussed with Kislyak.

“There was absolutely nothing misleading about his answer,” said Sarah Isgur Flores, Sessions’s spokeswoman.

In January, Sen. Patrick J. Leahy (D-Vt.) asked Sessions for answers to written questions. “Several of the President-elect’s nominees or senior advisers have Russian ties. Have you been in contact with anyone connected to any part of the Russian government about the 2016 election, either before or after election day?” Leahy wrote.

Sessions responded with one word: “No.”

Justice officials said Sessions met with Kislyak on Sept. 8 in his capacity as a member of the armed services panel rather than in his role as a Trump campaign surrogate.


“He was asked during the hearing about communications between Russia and the Trump campaign — not about meetings he took as a senator and a member of the Armed Services Committee,” Flores said.

She added that Sessions last year had more than 25 conversations with foreign ambassadors as a senior member of the Armed Services Committee, including the British, Korean, Japanese, Polish, Indian, Chinese, Canadian, Australian and German ambassadors, in addition to Kislyak.

In the case of the September meeting, one department official who came to the defense of the attorney general said, “There’s just not strong recollection of what was said.”

The Russian ambassador did not respond to requests for comment about his contacts with Sessions.

The Washington Post contacted all 26 members of the 2016 Senate Armed Services Committee to see if any lawmakers besides Sessions met with Kislyak in 2016. Of the 19 lawmakers who responded, every senator, including chairman John McCain (R-Ariz.), said they did not meet with the Russian ambassador last year. The other lawmakers on the panel did not respond as of Wednesday evening.


https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/na ... 6948ca47e0

If all this engulfs Sessions as the near identical charges of lying about contact with the Russian ambassador engulfed Flynn, it could prove much worse Trump, potentially ruining his big "reset" moment. Expect a lot more resistance from the White House on this - after all, this is no mere National Security Adviser we're talking about (though that post is important too), this is the strawberry floating Attorney General.

It'll be interesting to see where this goes.

User avatar
Irene Demova
Member
Joined in 2009
AKA: Karl

PostRe: The American Politics Thread
by Irene Demova » Thu Mar 02, 2017 4:55 am

Just some light treason

User avatar
Gandalf
Member
Joined in 2008

PostRe: The American Politics Thread
by Gandalf » Thu Mar 02, 2017 7:33 am

Albear wrote:
Preezy wrote:What's the American equivalent of "support are troops x"?


"Go team shootbang x"


'America, strawberry float YEAH!'

User avatar
Harry Ola
Member
Joined in 2008

PostRe: The American Politics Thread
by Harry Ola » Thu Mar 02, 2017 8:17 am

The Sessions story is some brilliant journalism by the Washington Post. Not only is the timing glorious, but to have contacted all 26 members of the Senate Intelligence Committee to show none of them had contact is genius.

Image
User avatar
Harry Ola
Member
Joined in 2008

PostRe: The American Politics Thread
by Harry Ola » Thu Mar 02, 2017 8:21 am

Not sure how Sessions survives this. One of his answers is specifically about the campaign, but this is the killer:

“I have been called a surrogate at a time or two in that campaign and I did not have communications with the Russians.”

That is at best deliberately misleading and you can't really have an Attorney General under Oath being deliberately misleading. It does not sit very well the job!

And this must now surely be heading to a special prosecutor. This would be Trump's National Security Advisor and Attorney General both lying about contact with Russia. How much deeper does it have to go before the Republicans are forced to act?

Image
User avatar
Moggy
"Special"
Joined in 2008
AKA: Moggy

PostRe: The American Politics Thread
by Moggy » Thu Mar 02, 2017 8:25 am

Putin must be absolutely pissing himself with laughter.

User avatar
Saint of Killers
Member
Member
Joined in 2008

PostRe: The American Politics Thread
by Saint of Killers » Thu Mar 02, 2017 9:08 am

KKLEIN wrote:Explain the purpose of this, other than to sell MORE GUNS:

NBC News wrote:Trump Signs Bill Revoking Obama-Era Gun Checks for People With Mental Illnesses

President Donald Trump quietly signed a bill into law Tuesday rolling back an Obama-era regulation that made it harder for people with mental illnesses to purchase a gun.

The rule, which was finalized in December, added people receiving Social Security checks for mental illnesses and people deemed unfit to handle their own financial affairs to the national background check database.

Had the rule fully taken effect, the Obama administration predicted it would have added about 75,000 names to that database.

President Barack Obama recommended the now-nullified regulation in a 2013 memo following the mass shooting at Sandy Hook Elementary School, which left 20 first graders and six others dead. The measure sought to block some people with severe mental health problems from buying guns.

The original rule was hotly contested by gun rights advocates who said it infringed on Americans' Second Amendment rights. Gun control advocates, however, praised the rule for curbing the availability of firearms to those who may not use them with the right intentions.

Both the House and Senate last week passed the new bill, H.J. Res 40, revoking the Obama-era regulation.

Trump signed the bill into law without a photo op or fanfare. The president welcomed cameras into the oval office Tuesday for the signing of other executive orders and bills. News that the president signed the bill was tucked at the bottom of a White House email alerting press to other legislation signed by the president.

The National Rifle Association "applauded" Trump's action. Chris Cox, NRA-ILA executive director, said the move "marks a new era for law-abiding gun owners, as we now have a president who respects and supports our arms."

Everytown For Gun Safety President John Feinblatt said he expected more gun control rollbacks from the Trump administration. In a statement to NBC News, he called the action "just the first item on the gun lobby's wish list" and accused the National Rifle Association of "pushing more guns, for more people, in more places."

Sen. Chris Murphy, D-Conn., a leading gun control advocate in Congress, called out Republicans over the move.

"Republicans always say we don't need new gun laws, we just need to enforce the laws already on the books. But the bill signed into law today undermines enforcement of existing laws that Congress passed to make sure the background check system had complete information," he said in an emailed statement.

http://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/tru ... al-n727221

It's just ridiculous! You've got to laugh.


It's so NRA/other massacre apologists can lay the blame on mental illness (instead of easily available guns) when the next mass shooting occurs.

Last edited by Saint of Killers on Thu Mar 02, 2017 9:12 am, edited 1 time in total.

Return to “Archive”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 364 guests