Official LRC President Donald J Trump Thread

President Goober is calling the troops home to defend him.

no self funding wrote:

PS101 wrote:

Ummm... this is already illegal, except for money to Super Pac. So if you ban Super Pac, that will resolve the foreign money issue as well.

As for retirement plan for elected officials, do you know why the Congress passed the Former President Act? Eliminating that will encourage former elected officials to profit from their positions. Wait, you will ban that as well, right? That means you will discourage anyone without wealth from running for office. Yeah, that's great for democracy, isn't it?

Make it no self-funding as well. And ban funding from friends (better--acquaintances) while you are at it.

That will not solve the problem I presented. A wealthy person can run for office without worrying about their financial security after leaving office. That gives them instant advantage over people who have to worry about how to make living after leaving office. But that's the society people like alpha want.

Again, do people here know what happened to Harry Truman after leaving the White House?

PS101 wrote:

Again, do people here know what happened to Harry Truman after leaving the White House?

Flagpole wrote:

Short Answer wrote:

In other words...party over democracy.

BOYCOTT STARBUCKS (even though he is not CEO any longer)!!!!!!!!!!!!

No...not at all. Democrats aren't for him running as a Democrat or even as a Republican. As I already mentioned, in normal times with a normal President, I would agree that this is Party over democracy (but even then just barely as it is more than fair for a Party to be concerned with getting someone who supports their views elected LEGALLY). But, with Trump as President, someone whom Schultz does not like, and someone who is clearly a criminal and damaging what American stands for, it is reasonable to not want Schultz to run as an independent.

This is America over Party in this case.

That’s a great sounding answer. Too bad it’s not correct.

Oh, and when he left the presidency Truman said that he was being promoted.

Trump LOSES, AGAIN! wrote:

https://www.vanityfair.com/news/2019/01/mick-mulvaney-is-already-planning-his-escape

Just sayin'... wrote:

Oh, and when he left the presidency Truman said that he was being promoted.

Yeah, with an income of $112.56 per month (equivalent to $1,054 in 2018) from his army pension. What a promotion!

He took a personal loan and used the proceeds from his memoir to repay the loan.

Fat hurts wrote:

Not in America wrote:

Many Dems think it is okay to threaten financial harm to someone if they run for President.

SMH

Boycotts are used by the left, the right, and everyone in-between. There is nothing whatsoever wrong with it. It's a free country.

Support businesses you like and don't support the ones you don't like.

Good to hear that you think nothing is wrong with starting a boycott to hurt someone financially because someone decided to run as an Indie and not a Dem.

Do you REALLY think there is nothing wrong with that.

agip wrote:

burner phone wrote:

The idiot did not use burner phones, or computers. A true idiot.

Trump knew well enough that when documents were demanded by court orders, the solution was to destroy them rather than hand them over. Thus, the reason for the raid in the first place.

but Stone had months and months to destroy evidence, if that is what he was going to do. The bust surprised exactly nobody.

Weird stuff. Not sure what to make of it.

Could be that there is nothing in those terabytes that needed to be destroyed. Could just be junk on hard drives that will be of no value to the investigation, but needs to be gone through just to make sure.

Just because there is a ton of data does not mean it is useful data.

I have terabytes of info on various hard drives. None of it is incriminating.

And before I get labeled a trumper, I voted for HRC.

Plausible wrote:

And before I get labeled a trumper, I voted for HRC.

Actually, you voted for Trump.

I would be surprised if this wraps up soon. Some pundit somewhere described "almost finished" as being the last few minutes of a basketball game...yes technically the game is almost done, but it can take a while to finish those last few minutes.

It will be interesting to see what happens.

Mueller is coming.

The clown is done.

anarchy wrote:

George Washington wrote:

I would prefer

VI) a no party system

V) Anarchy: a state of disorder due to absence or nonrecognition of authority.

VI) a no party system: a state of disorder due to absence or nonrecognition of authority.

Sorry, but you are the world's biggest fool if you think that a no party system has anything at all to do with "absence or nonrecognition of authority." Have you really been so thoroughly brainwashed by the two main parties??? That's a scary thought.

The authority is the government itself. It has absolutely zero need for any political parties.

Don't think you know better than George Washington!

Fat hurts wrote:

Not in America wrote:

Many Dems think it is okay to threaten financial harm to someone if they run for President.

SMH

Boycotts are used by the left, the right, and everyone in-between. There is nothing whatsoever wrong with it. It's a free country.

Support businesses you like and don't support the ones you don't like.

This is correct. I'm not a boycotter, but it is more than fine to boycott a business you don't agree with for whatever reason. Capitalism in action.

agip wrote:

burner phone wrote:

The idiot did not use burner phones, or computers. A true idiot.

Trump knew well enough that when documents were demanded by court orders, the solution was to destroy them rather than hand them over. Thus, the reason for the raid in the first place.

but Stone had months and months to destroy evidence, if that is what he was going to do. The bust surprised exactly nobody.

Weird stuff. Not sure what to make of it.

People have a hard time letting go of stuff - even incriminating evidence. Look at Nixon - could have gotten rid of all the tapes and nobody would have ever known anything.

There is something in the back of their minds that says that these things might prove useful to them so they shouldn't make them irreversibly disappear. At the same time their minds think that there will always be time later to destroy the evidence if necessary. Hence, these crazy raids actually working.

Wurst wrote:

Fat hurts wrote:

Boycotts are used by the left, the right, and everyone in-between. There is nothing whatsoever wrong with it. It's a free country.

Support businesses you like and don't support the ones you don't like.

Good to hear that you think nothing is wrong with starting a boycott to hurt someone financially because someone decided to run as an Indie and not a Dem.

Do you REALLY think there is nothing wrong with that.

Yes, REALLY. There is absolutely nothing wrong with boycotting a business because you don't like the founder.

Wurst wrote:

Fat hurts wrote:

Boycotts are used by the left, the right, and everyone in-between. There is nothing whatsoever wrong with it. It's a free country.

Support businesses you like and don't support the ones you don't like.

Good to hear that you think nothing is wrong with starting a boycott to hurt someone financially because someone decided to run as an Indie and not a Dem.

Do you REALLY think there is nothing wrong with that.

Of COURSE there is nothing wrong with that. Businesses aren't guaranteed our business. People don't join a boycott unless they agree with the idea behind the boycott. Boycotts happen for all kinds of reasons. Perfectly acceptable and even wholly American.

PIO!! wrote:

agip wrote:

but Stone had months and months to destroy evidence, if that is what he was going to do. The bust surprised exactly nobody.

Weird stuff. Not sure what to make of it.

People have a hard time letting go of stuff - even incriminating evidence. Look at Nixon - could have gotten rid of all the tapes and nobody would have ever known anything.

There is something in the back of their minds that says that these things might prove useful to them so they shouldn't make them irreversibly disappear. At the same time their minds think that there will always be time later to destroy the evidence if necessary. Hence, these crazy raids actually working.

Good point. I hope you are right.

alpha wrote:

PS101 wrote:

Ummm... this is already illegal, except for money to Super Pac. So if you ban Super Pac, that will resolve the foreign money issue as well.

As for retirement plan for elected officials, do you know why the Congress passed the Former President Act? Eliminating that will encourage former elected officials to profit from their positions. Wait, you will ban that as well, right? That means you will discourage anyone without wealth from running for office. Yeah, that's great for democracy, isn't it?

There's a very good reason it's called "public servant". A wealthy person who wishes to serve would not be disqualified.

However, any person who uses public office to build wealth should be immediately stripped of said wealth, including stiff additional penalties. The point is to take all financial incentives away from public service.

You seem to have totally missed the point.

Here, let me make it simple for you. To make elected official jobs pay not-so-great and post-earning potential not-so-great will accomplish the following:

1) Anyone who is not independently wealthy will be eliminated from the candidates pool (very bad idea)

2) Corruption will skyrocket (simplest rule on the books on corruption is that it thrives whenever there is a large mismatch between power [elected officials have a lot] and compensation).

So yeah, go ahead and promote a system of government run exclusively by the wealthy and the corrupt. (of course, you will feel obligated to put in a lame joke that this is what we have now - but believe me, it would only get worse. A LOT worse)

agip wrote:

burner phone wrote:

The idiot did not use burner phones, or computers. A true idiot.

Trump knew well enough that when documents were demanded by court orders, the solution was to destroy them rather than hand them over. Thus, the reason for the raid in the first place.

but Stone had months and months to destroy evidence, if that is what he was going to do. The bust surprised exactly nobody.

Weird stuff. Not sure what to make of it.

The FBI had to get a judge to sign off on this kind of raid. I suggest they might have had reason that we don't even know about yet to raid in that way. Also, the raid wasn't exactly as Stone described it...no grenades for example. Also, apparently most of the many people who were there were to carry out the job of collecting data, not apprehending him. I would ALSO suggest that if you are suspected of conspiring with an enemy foreign power and have not been cooperative in an ongoing investigation and even said derogatory things about the investigation, you'd better prepare yourself to be apprehended in that manner.