Donald Trump and the aftermath of his presidency

[AlterEgo]

FBI have seized his passports (he had 3).

Were they all American?

 

[Giugiaro]

Were they all American?

Same exact question.

 

[ainsworth74]

They have apparently been returned and it sounds like they probably were returned before Trump actually said they'd been taken!

 

[Cloud Strife]

Been thinking for a while that there is a lot of similarities between trump and TV evangelists, both think they are gods gift and promise that if you given them money all your prayers will be answered, but then spend that money on improving their own lives.

"I believe the lord came to me and said get me $18 million by the weekend, so I may build that social media network for the lord, so that I may pay all of my solicitors for the lord, would I lie to you?"

I strongly believe that this is why the evangelicals voted for Trump en masse. He has the same effect on them as their religious leaders do, and it explains why they were willing to overlook the fact that he's anything but Christian in nature.

So, the lawyer who was leading the charge to prove that the election was rigged by people hacking the voting machines has been charged with attempting to hack the voting machines.

I needed to read this sentence four times and I still can't comprehend this.

The same lawyer is now claiming he can't appear in front of a Georgian grand jury because of health issues, but the judge has correctly said that John Madden used to travel all over the US in a bus, so Giuliani can do the same.

I do wonder at what point the Republicans will cut Trump loose, though. They already are cutting him loose to a certain degree, and DeSantis is clearly the favoured candidate among the Republican elite.

 

[nlogax]

I do wonder at what point the Republicans will cut Trump loose, though. They already are cutting him loose to a certain degree, and DeSantis is clearly the favoured candidate among the Republican elite.

These mounting legal issues are beginning to poison the well of L'eau de Trump. His support amongst GOP members is dropping by the day. By the time he does make it into his orange boiler suit* (state or federal, I'm not fussy) he'll be left with a white dwarf of extreme right supporters intent on violence and disruption and DeSantis will be ruling the Republican roost.



*yes, maybe some wishful thinking there

 

[najaB]

By the time he does make it into his orange boiler suit* (state or federal, I'm not fussy) he'll be left with a white dwarf of extreme right supporters intent on violence and disruption and DeSantis will be ruling the Republican roost.

While I'm about 60% confident that he'll actually be charged and brought to trial* for at least one of his many offences, I'm doubtful that he'll actually serve any prison time

*Much more likely that he'll get a deal.

 

[Busaholic]

While I'm about 60% confident that he'll actually be charged and brought to trial* for at least one of his many offences, I'm doubtful that he'll actually serve any prison time

*Much more likely that he'll get a deal.

During my nightly trawl of the output from CNN etc on YouTube I came across an interview with Michael Cohen on Australian TV from a year ago, when he had been released from prison but was 'home prisoning' or whatever it's called, a ludicrous concept imo. It was his first media appearance since coming out of prison: it was obvious that he now hated Trump and was going to devote his life to bringing him down and to account. Something he said, though, that I don't think got enough publicity at the time was that he suspected Trump had, in effect, the ultimate trump card in his possession. It seems crazy to think this is legal or possible, but Trump may have given a Presidential Pardon to himself before leaving office, with the details of it lodged with an attorney of his choosing. Bevan was musing that this could well prevent the charges that should be brought against Trump being successful.

 

[najaB]

It seems crazy to think this is legal or possible, but Trump may have given a Presidential Pardon to himself before leaving office, with the details of it lodged with an attorney of his choosing. Bevan was musing that this could well prevent the charges that should be brought against Trump being successful.

He well might have done that, but there has been considerable discussion - with no consensus reached - over the question of if a President can pardon themselves. While it can be argued that it's allowed by the letter of the law, it goes against the fundamental principle* of US law which holds that everyone is equal under the law. Also, he could only pardon himself for offences that had already occurred - so it wouldn't apply, for example, to charges brought under the Espionage Act or the Presidential Records Act.

*Principle, not practice.

 

[Gloster]

He well might have done that, but there has been considerable discussion - with no consensus reached - over the question of if a President can pardon themselves. While it can be argued that it's allowed by the letter of the law, it goes against the fundamental principle* of US law which holds that everyone is equal under the law.

*Principle, not practice.

And what does the principle of the law matter to Trump? Still, arguing about it could hold things up for years.

My understanding is that a president cannot pardon himself, but another one can. But this might just be a widely agreed consensus, so of no concern to Trump.

 

[Purple Train]

He well might have done that, but there has been considerable discussion - with no consensus reached - over the question of if a President can pardon themselves. While it can be argued that it's allowed by the letter of the law, it goes against the fundamental principle* of US law which holds that everyone is equal under the law.

*Principle, not practice.

Indeed, to roughly quote Sir Humphrey Appleby, "That could never be government policy. Only government practice." And, personally, I wouldn't put anything past Trump. His acts of political escapologism put even Boris to shame.

 

[najaB]

And what does the principle of the law matter to Trump? Still, arguing about it could hold things up for years.

Oh, it wouldn't matter at all to him. But, as you say, it wouldn't be up to him to decide if the pardon was valid or not and the arguing could keep him out of prison for years.

 

[Busaholic]

Oh, it wouldn't matter at all to him. But, as you say, it wouldn't be up to him to decide if the pardon was valid or not and the arguing could keep him out of prison for years.

I wonder if counter-terrorism laws might, in the end, do for him. I'd love to think of him in Guantanamo Bay!!

 

[Cowley]

Oh, it wouldn't matter at all to him. But, as you say, it wouldn't be up to him to decide if the pardon was valid or not and the arguing could keep him out of prison for years.

What dealings has Trump had with DeSantis over the years? Are they on good terms or has DT put the boot in at some point?

It could come down to their relationship as to whether this gets stickier in the future.

 

[WatcherZero]

Were they all American?

He had three, an expired personal one, an in date personal one and his diplomatic one which he should have returned when leaving office.

 

[najaB]

What dealings has Trump had with DeSantis over the years? Are they on good terms or has DT put the boot in at some point?

It could come down to their relationship as to whether this gets stickier in the future.

From what I have seen, DeSantis has very much moulded himself in Trump's image and they did enjoy a cordial relationship early in Trump's presidency. However, the temperature cooled substantially now that it's become more and more apparent that the man from Florida sees 2024 as his year, rather than waiting until 2028.

 

[Cowley]

From what I have seen, DeSantis has very much moulded himself in Trump's image and they did enjoy a cordial relationship early in Trump's presidency. However, the temperature cooled substantially now that it's become more and more apparent that the man from Florida sees 2024 as his year, rather than waiting until 2028.

Thanks for that @najaB.

 

[Busaholic]

He had three, an expired personal one, an in date personal one and his diplomatic one which he should have returned when leaving office.

I don't believe they were ever removed from Mar-a-Lago. The FBI provided a list divided into categories, and passports would not fit into those categories. If they'd been seized and then returned someone (probably Trump himself) would claim they'd been tampered with.

 

[Cloud Strife]

From what I have seen, DeSantis has very much moulded himself in Trump's image and they did enjoy a cordial relationship early in Trump's presidency. However, the temperature cooled substantially now that it's become more and more apparent that the man from Florida sees 2024 as his year, rather than waiting until 2028.

DeSantis will have done the maths, and his best chance is 2024. Biden is not in a strong position against such a challenger, whereas a younger Democrat in 2028 will have a strong chance of beating anyone that the Republicans nominate.

I'd actually say that tactically, the Democrats made a huge mistake with nominating Biden. He's a perfectly competent President, but he's always going to struggle against a younger and more energetic challenger.

 

[Gloster]

I'd actually say that tactically, the Democrats made a huge mistake with nominating Biden. He's a perfectly competent President, but he's always going to struggle against a younger and more energetic challenger.

Probably the best thing for the Democrats would be for Biden to make a dignified statement that he will not stand again in good time. Then the party could could choose a younger candidate who could attract swing voters. Whether Kamala (*) Harris is the suitable candidate to step up is a question: she will have the disadvantage in the eyes of some swing voters and some wavering Republicans of being female and black.

* - Spellcheck insisted on Kampala. Is it not kept up to date with current events?

 

[Cloud Strife]

Probably the best thing for the Democrats would be for Biden to make a dignified statement that he will not stand again in good time. Then the party could could choose a younger candidate who could attract swing voters. Whether Kamala (*) Harris is the suitable candidate to step up is a question: she will have the disadvantage in the eyes of some swing voters and some wavering Republicans of being female and black.

* - Spellcheck insisted on Kampala. Is it not kept up to date with current events?

Yes, agreed. I wouldn't put Harris forward personally, because race and sex is still a big deal in the suburban swing states. It might not matter in the more hardcore Republican states, but Georgia and Arizona could be swung on this. Obama was the exception that proved the rule, IMO, and Harris doesn't have the charisma or presence of Obama.

 

[ainsworth74]

Probably the best thing for the Democrats would be for Biden to make a dignified statement that he will not stand again in good time. Then the party could could choose a younger candidate who could attract swing voters.

Though there is an element of timing to that. If he'd done straight after inauguration in 2021 then his authority would have instantly drained away as people knew he would be gone in four years and jockeying for the nomination would have no doubt started soon after. I'd be keeping an eye for such a thing happening after the mid-terms personally. Especially if they go badly as he can a) do a bit of falling on the sword for the party and b) he won't be able to achieve much anyway if they lose the Senate or House (or both!) so the loss of authority won't matter much anyway.

 

[Shrop]

I do wonder at what point the Republicans will cut Trump loose, though. They already are cutting him loose to a certain degree, and DeSantis is clearly the favoured candidate among the Republican elite.

The Republicans could have cut Trump loose as soon as he lost the election and was proved to have incited the riots, but instead they chose to back him en masse even after that, which should have damned them for a long time in the eyes of swing voters.

Indeed, to roughly quote Sir Humphrey Appleby, "That could never be government policy. Only government practice." And, personally, I wouldn't put anything past Trump. His acts of political escapologism put even Boris to shame.

Yes, Trump is even better than Boris as escaping, but that's partly because for all his horrendous traits, he's also cleverer than Boris.

However, there are big parallels to be drawn between the UK and US political situations, the main one being that there is no credible opposition to either the Republicans or the Tories. This last year would have been perfect in both cases to find a charismatic leader for the opposition, and to have them well and truly installed and swinging the voters by now, but in both cases this golden opportunity has been all but lost. Biden simply cannot be dynamic enough at his age, he's had his victory at the election and should have stepped aside by now.

Meanwhile in the UK Starmer simply doesn't have the charisma, added to which vast numbers of people are disillusioned with much of what Labour stands for anyway, so they vote Tory through lack of choice. How sad that a new and dynamic Party hasn't come to the fore during this dire lull in excitement of UK politics. It's not as if it couldn't be done, as the highly dubious Farage proved with UKIP in the European Elections in 2014, by taking a small Party and transforming their votes into the largest of any UK Party in Europe, then following this by achieving the third most votes in the UK Parliament the following year. UKIP actually achieved almost THREE TIMES the number of votes as the SNP which had 56 seats, it's only the skewed UK voting system that prevented UKIP from being pretty strong in Parliament.

But no, I'm not pro UKIP, I'm just highlighting what can be done with a charismatic leader, and I have to reluctantly concede that both Trump and Farage have something charismatic about them. If only we (or the US) had someone with both charisma and reasonable morals - then we (or they) might see worthwhile political progress, and perhaps even voters turning out in their droves to vote. Instead we have the present drab shower whose main TV showing (ie PMQ) is neither constructive nor even interesting, which is what leads to the apathy we see at voting time.

So is this what we've come to on both sides of the Atlantic? Neither country can produce anyone with political charisma who also has decent morals?

 

[nlogax]

Yes, Trump is even better than Boris as escaping, but that's partly because for all his horrendous traits, he's also cleverer than Boris.

Was with you up to and beyond this sentence, but I vehemently disagree with this particular point. Trump has just enough deviousness and intelligence to surround himself with people who are far cleverer than him in order to progress his agenda. Add to that the prerequisite brass neck to take the credit for anything that actually works out well. For all his (many pages of) faults Boris Johnson strikes me as being more intelligent, and not just because he can quote the odd line of Latin.

All that said it's the dual-edged sword of charisma and deviousness and that really elevated these two to the top. Intelligence had bugger all to do with it.

 

[Cloud Strife]

the main one being that there is no credible opposition to either the Republicans or the Tories.

The odd thing in the UK is that this is only the case in England. In Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland, there are large parties who oppose the Tories very well on their own turf. This is one reason why the Tories strongly oppose federalism, because there's a very good chance that Scotland/NI/Wales would block English-originated legislation.

 

[Purple Train]

So is this what we've come to on both sides of the Atlantic? Neither country can produce anyone with political charisma who also has decent morals?

With the rise of populism, the two are almost at the stage of being mutually exclusive. "Jam tomorrow, and jam yesterday, but never jam today," said Lewis Carroll, and the phrase basically sums up the foundations of populism, and, by extension, modern political charisma. And if they're happy with lying to the entire nation, they're probably happy with other things that could be considered immoral.
(That said, I think it is possible to be politically charismatic and moral - and note the insertion of "politically" before "charismatic", because real charisma is obviously a totally different kettle of fish and unrelated to politics - but I can't identify anyone within Labour who fits the bill.

Crossing the Atlantic, I've given up on politics there - it's so petty and fractious that I far preferred watching the school bullies fight over turf. It's getting to the stage where I'd far rather they had Kermit the Frog as president, as a diversion from the main political scene there*. The only downside of that would be that he would get accused of running a puppet government.

*Oh the disadvantages of the huge political domination of just two parties (certainly relative to Britain) - if those two parties get wholly distracted by pettiness and points-scoring, there aren't really viable alternatives! (And, before anyone makes any guesses at the political beliefs that underpin/undermine (depending on your views) my musings above, I dislike both the Democrats and the Republicans, though I'm more aligned to the Democrats than the Republicans.)

 

[DC1989]

I think if Biden stands to run again it will be a terrible bit of hubris. If they let someone new take over they can present themselves as a completely new government (something which the Tories here do incredibly well)

 

[Shrop]

Was with you up to and beyond this sentence, but I vehemently disagree with this particular point. Trump has just enough deviousness and intelligence to surround himself with people who are far cleverer than him in order to progress his agenda. Add to that the prerequisite brass neck to take the credit for anything that actually works out well. For all his (many pages of) faults Boris Johnson strikes me as being more intelligent, and not just because he can quote the odd line of Latin.

All that said it's the dual-edged sword of charisma and deviousness and that really elevated these two to the top. Intelligence had bugger all to do with it.

Hmm, I don't entirely disagree, and yes Trump does rely on using people more intelligent that himself. However, he has had so much TV airtime that without a fair amount of intelligence he would have tripped up more than just making gaffs such as suggesting drinking bleach to beat Covid. I would say that neither Boris nor Trump are actually plain stupid, they're just fairly intelligent but prone to incredible self-righteousness.

The odd thing in the UK is that this is only the case in England. In Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland, there are large parties who oppose the Tories very well on their own turf. This is one reason why the Tories strongly oppose federalism, because there's a very good chance that Scotland/NI/Wales would block English-originated legislation.

What a glorious dilemma for the Tories! They hate the idea of releasing control of Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland, but at the same time these parts of the UK provide very few seats for them in Parliament, so it would arguably strengthen their position to release them.

I always enjoyed the dilemma that the Channel Tunnel provided for Thatcher and the Tories with their strong bias towards road transport, when they were forced to concede that rail was the only viable means of providing the Tunnel

 

[Ediswan]

such as suggesting drinking bleach to beat Covid.

Not quite. Fortunately, this was on the record (at 00:25) https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-52407177

The suggestion was to investigate whether injecting disinfectant might help. Others mutated that into 'drinking bleach'.

 

[Strathclyder]

Was with you up to and beyond this sentence, but I vehemently disagree with this particular point. Trump has just enough deviousness and intelligence to surround himself with people who are far cleverer than him in order to progress his agenda. Add to that the prerequisite brass neck to take the credit for anything that actually works out well. For all his (many pages of) faults Boris Johnson strikes me as being more intelligent, and not just because he can quote the odd line of Latin.

All that said it's the dual-edged sword of charisma and deviousness and that really elevated these two to the top. Intelligence had bugger all to do with it.

Precisely. Charisma and deviousness doesn't necessarily equate intelligence and it certainly doesn't with Trump. Oh yes, he's just smart enough to rally far more intelligent people (relatively speaking) most of the time around him to further his agenda - and to throw under the bus when they're no longer of any use to him - but that's it. He's a thuggish idiot at the end of the day.

 

[Mag_seven]

Whilst it is useful to draw comparisons with the political situation in the UK with that in the USA we should keep discussion in this thread to Trump and the aftermath of his presidency.

thanks