nlogax
Established Member
Oh wait you're being serious?
-
Our booking engine at tickets.railforums.co.uk (powered by TrainSplit) helps support the running of the forum with every ticket purchase! Find out more and ask any questions/give us feedback in this thread!
Donald Trump and the aftermath of his presidency
- Thread starter backontrack
- Start date
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R
RailUK Forums
Do you believe all the nonsense about the immigrants being actively brought in by Biden to vote Democrat, and the stuff from Trump and Elon about the great replacement theory, and the effect on the bloodlines etc?
Because that's all the stuff being said to claim the world has gone to pot, and it's literal nonsense.
The right is doing the same here, saying the exact same things and scaring people into thinking that we're being overrun by immigrants who want to replace us.
DerekC
Established Member
I understand that the US Federal Supreme Court is now considering whether Trump is immune from prosecution for acts committed whilst he was president. Aside from constitutional issues, can anyone explain what the logic for this is?
The logic as to why the Supreme Court is hearing the case? Because the trial court rejected it, so he appealed to the DC Circuit Court which also threw it out, so he appealed to the Supreme Court. They were originally expected to decline to hear the case, but in a bit of a surprise they agreed to hear it. I guess because they want to settle it once and for all. From the justice's questions today it looks like the majority are going to be in favour of sending it back down to the lower court.
Are the seriously unsure how to rule and considering allowing future Presidents to do whatever they want (including trying to overturn elections to become dictators) by giving them outright immunity? As the BBC and others report, this decision could be one of the biggest decisions ever made, as giving anyone outright immunity could destroy democracy.
I would be surprised if they rule that the President is above the law.
Years ago I'd have thought so, but politics is at a point now where, thanks to the court of public opinion (and influence by social media and the likes of Elon Musk and paid bots), it's quite possible that people will think it right to give them immunity because a President has to contend with the 'liberals' trying to hold them to account.
Throw in the misunderstanding of what free speech means, and include the word 'Constitutional' in a rant, and there's a strong case all of a sudden.
If this was something being decided in its own right, that would be concerning, but this is literally to allow Trump to get away with his crimes. That's what makes it even more crazy. Trump could only ever be a problem for another four years*, but this would be a legacy forever more.
* Unless he decides to use his immunity to stay in power for life, although hopefully given his age and health that won't be much longer than four years.
Doesn't matter what the "court of public opinion" thinks, all that matters is the law. I honestly can't see the Supreme Court arguing that anyone is above the law, if only because what's goes for Republicans also goes for Democrats.
brad465
Established Member
Yes by that "logic", Biden could assassinate Trump and claim immunity.
In the UK we have parliamentary privilege, where members of both houses are immune from various legal actions in order that they can carry out their work without having to fend off lawsuits.
Some other countries such as the US have broadened this concept so any actions taken by a member of the legislature or the executive as part of their official duties is protected. Again, the idea is that if you disagree with a law etc. the way to fix it is to get someone elected who will put a different law in place, rather than trying to have a judge doing it.
Trump appears to be trying to stretch this to its limits that anything he did whilst president is therefore covered by immunity.
And something along these lines has been pointed out. Any decision now could mean Biden being able to do what he wants!
Thing is, that already applies to the presidency as far as civil liability is concerned - you can't sue the President personally for actions that form part of the job. What he is attempting to do is expand this doctrine to cover criminal liability.
Bantamzen
Established Member
If he did win, and decide to hold on forever, he could end up turning the US into a North Korea with his family inheriting the seat of power. Can you imagine his sons taking over.... <shudder>
No such thing. The Supreme Court can, and has, overruled its own previous decisions.
Yeah, but it would settle things for the foreseeable future.
But they do so extremely rarely. From 1789 to 2020 they issued 25,544 decisions. They've overruled previous decisions of theirs in only 145 cases. There's normally a fairly high bar for them to decide to overturn prior precedent.
O'Bomber presidency : Russia invades Ukraine. Chaos in the ME.
Trump presidency: Russia doesn't invade Ukraine, relatively peaceful ME. ISIS defeated. Israel signs several peace agreements with Muslim states, for the first time in decades.
Bidet presidency : Russia invades Ukraine. Chaos in the ME.
A second Trump presidency can't come soon enough.
Trump presidency: Russia doesn't invade Ukraine, relatively peaceful ME. ISIS defeated. Israel signs several peace agreements with Muslim states, for the first time in decades.
Bidet presidency : Russia invades Ukraine. Chaos in the ME.
A second Trump presidency can't come soon enough.
birchesgreen
Established Member
I'll have what he's on!
brad465
Established Member
Trump launched two strikes against Syrian government forces in the Syrian Civil war, that was still ongoing during his presidency. He also oversaw the assassination of the top Iranian general at the start of 2020 by a US drone strike. The Yemen Civil war continued throughout this period as well, which is in the Middle East.
Furthermore, the fault of Russia invading Ukraine lies solely with Russia. No US administration bears any responsibility for the work of Russian aggression.
That's not me saying things were all rosy under the non-Trump administrations, but this narrative that he was somehow the peaceful one is completely bogus.
Alternative and equally plausible viewpoint:
- 2009-2017: Faced with a strong US administration and a poor domestic image, Putin chooses to meddle in his own backyard (Ukraine, Georgia, etc.)
- 2017-2021: With a weak and compliant US administration, Putin is able to engage in large-scale operations far from home (Syria, Central African Republic, Mali, etc.)
- 2021-present: Again facing a strong US administration that's not afraid to project military muscle if needs be, and needing to score domestic political points quickly, Putin's gaze turns local again and he commits to a full-scale invasion of Ukraine believing that it will be over before the US and allies are able to react.
nlogax
Established Member
Same, though I fear it's not available over the counter.
Strathclyder
Established Member
So you want one of the most powerful nations on Earth to potentially, and voluntarily for a not-insignificant portion of the electorate, vote for a wannabe dictator and shell of a political party hell-bent on bringing the Handmaid's Tale to life and the outright shredding of democracy and representative government? I would ask if you've even considered how the ramifications of such a event would be felt globally, but something tells me you haven't, so I won't waste my breath.
But to say Trump was the peaceful one considering everything that happened or was ongoing during his term, as outlined by @brad465 above, to say nothing of what he plans to do should he regain power (letting Putin do 'whatever the hell he wants' in Ukraine being just one of them) is at best disingenuous and at worst a outright fallacy.
Oh, and I can't believe this needs repeating again, but Putin and Putin alone was responsible for the full-scale invasion of Ukraine, to say nothing of the annexation of Crimea in 2014. Period. Honestly wish you'd pick another dead horse to flog...
AKA, back here in the real world.
Last edited:
Gloster
Established Member
Personally, I think that AI bots’ grammar has improved substantially. They still have a fair way to go with concepts.
Strathclyder
Established Member
It's not the brand of kool-aid I'd personally recommend!
DerekC
Established Member
It's also worth remembering that Trump tore up the nuclear agreement with Iran and in doing so destroyed any chance of further rapprochement between Iran and the USA. A militant Iran is the force behind many of the attacks on Israel today. On the other side of the ME chaos, Trump did everything he could to encourage Netanyahu's extremist regime in Israel, including moving the US embassy to Jerusalem and encouraging Jewish settlements on the West Bank, both calculated to increase the probability of a backlash from Palestinians. I think it's quite fair to say that without Trump, the current war in the Middle East may well not have happened.
Bantamzen
Established Member
Thank you Fox News....
Meanwhile in the real world, chaos has been reigning in the Middle East for decades, Russia has coveted Ukraine for decades, and ISIS are far, far from being defeated. Just ask the people of Iraq. Oh and you forgot one thing, the end of the Trump era saw his supporters storming Capitol Hill to try and keep power from a president defeated in a democratic election. And despite nearly four years of claiming they have evidence of election rigging in 2020, his supporters still cannot provide a shred of evidence that there was any.
I really, really hope you are being sarcastic here...
Who is "O'Bomber" in any case? I don't get that reference and I don't remember a presidential candidate in recent years with a name resembling that.
DerekC
Established Member
Not sure if this breaks Forum rules, but it doesn't contain any bad language and it's really very funny:
https://x.com/Grasshopper2049/status/1783786034070990969?t=cRcwDX8pjGsY3mRBuhLf6A&s=08
I can't possibly provide a transcript and it would lose its effect if I did! Let's just say it's a (fake) conversation between Trump and Putin. Like all the best comedy, there is sad truth behind it.
Edit: Apparently I do have to include an extract of the transcript so here goes (I can't do the music or the facial expressions):
https://x.com/Grasshopper2049/status/1783786034070990969?t=cRcwDX8pjGsY3mRBuhLf6A&s=08
I can't possibly provide a transcript and it would lose its effect if I did! Let's just say it's a (fake) conversation between Trump and Putin. Like all the best comedy, there is sad truth behind it.
Edit: Apparently I do have to include an extract of the transcript so here goes (I can't do the music or the facial expressions):
Last edited:
If he did win, and decide to hold on forever, he could end up turning the US into a North Korea with his family inheriting the seat of power. Can you imagine his sons taking over.... <shudder>
Can I ask that the UK get a constitution in it we are allowed to have well regulated militia to protect us from the King of the US.