Official LRC President Donald J Trump Thread

present, esq. wrote:

First, FH, thanks for the reminder about sleeping. It's enormously important in resisting/recovering from a virus.

But second, unfortunately, this bespeaks a continuing confusion:

Fat hurts wrote: There is no provision in the constitution to remove a president for doing a terrible job.

YES, THERE IS: IMPEACHMENT.

Impeachment is a political process, not a legal process. A high crime or misdemeanor is whatever a majority of the House says it is, and under the Constitution there is no government body with the authority to gainsay the House's definition. Only the voters, eventually, have that power.

Extreme example: Suppose a president simply got tired of "presidenting" and refused to work anymore. Congress absolutely would have the power to impeach-convict-remove that president, even though s/he might have done nothing that matched the legal definition of any crime.

Yes, there is a government body with the authority to gainsay the House's definition. It is called the US Senate. If the senate won't convict for obvious crimes it certainly won't convict for just "doing a lousy job".

I love it when you maths/statistical guys scrap. Next best thing when there's no sport to watch. I think you're ahead on points.

So there is provision in the Constitution. It's just that the only part of the Constitution that matters to Republicans is the right to bear arms. Arms work really well against viruses.

Nerd slap fight.

No hitting with slide rules and watch the eye glasses. In the event of a tie, it goes to D&D.

(though he seems to be a pseudo-mathematician, so it may not be a fair fight)

Yonsinglerct wrote:

https://images.theweek.com/sites/default/files/1_260.jpg?resize=807x807

No sign there's going to be a spike in real leadership. Except perhaps Andrew Cuomo (and a bunch of other governors).

Bottom line, trump & his base will ignore the lessons of Europe on this thing, but scientists and his many enemies won’t.

Trump will also keep dithering about using the military, just like refusing the WHO tests; private sector offers profiteering, favors, whatever.

Yonsinglerct wrote:

Armstronglivs wrote:

I love it when you maths/statistical guys scrap. Next best thing when there's no sport to watch. I think you're ahead on points.

Nerd slap fight.

No hitting with slide rules and watch the eye glasses. In the event of a tie, it goes to D&D.

(though he seems to be a pseudo-mathematician, so it may not be a fair fight)

Any performance enhancing drugs involved?

In the end trump feels the virus is another way to get rich while bankrupting the enterprise (USA in this case).

P & agip are playing the wrong game. The numbers are dependent on human behavior (impossible to model, boys). The whole idea of Americans critiquing better prepared countries is creepy. And yes, trump doesn’t care how many people get infected; he’s got his eyes on trillions in relief funds.

In the case of China, on Jan. 31 — weeks after it was known that the coronavirus was a serious problem — the administration restricted travel for “foreign nationals who had been in China in the last 14 days.”

Looking back, the actions to restrict travel from China was slow.

But I understand those decisions are not easy.

Meanwhile, look at how far and fast this thing spreads even with restrictions.

I don't mind celebrities getting easy access to tests because I think it makes it more real to people when someone they know gets it.

Look at all of the celebrities, athletes and politicians that have tested positive for this.

Have you ever seen so many public facing people get sick at the same time?

But it will be business as usual by Eater.

Fat hurts wrote:

Yes, there is a government body with the authority to gainsay the House's definition. It is called the US Senate. If the senate won't convict for obvious crimes it certainly won't convict for just "doing a lousy job".

The Senate may of course decline to convict, just as it did with President Trump, but that does not perforce imply that it has rejected the House's definition of "high Crime" or "Misdemeanor."

In the example the poster gave of a president who simply declined to work, I can easily envision the Senate's convicting the president.

New stimulus bill, after lengthy negotiations, denies funds to trump businesses. Can’t imagine why ‘pubs would object to that.

P -

Again thanks for the work and answers. It's clear you enjoy your work (mathematical modeling). I appreciate the serious and reasoned answers to my questions.

I don't disagree that there is plenty of information for you to create a model and to track overall rates but the variables you can't take into account are things we've already discussed because at this point there doesn't seem to be answers for them.. for instance, results in China ...basically the disease stopped spreading there.. they have far more people there than the US, yet their problem seems to be done... why?... Japan's results.. SK's results..... we know those countries followed certain procedures but if people aren't all still locked in their homes, it's not logical to me that the disease isn't still spreading in those countries at the rate it is everywhere else.... there are so many other unknown variables out there that seem to impact this situation...

all that said, keep up the good work (if folks don't want to read your results they don't have to)

If folks don’t want to read disinformation from traitors they don’t have to, yes thanks.