The US Presidency 2019

[Jarnhamar]

More recently, noted Stat, "Trump's vocabulary is simpler. He repeats himself over and over, and lurches from one subject to an unrelated one." When shown examples of the two Trumps, experts saw symptoms that "can indicate slipping brain function due to normal aging or neurodegenerative disease." ...

What "experts"?

I know lots of "experts" that see symptoms in Trudeau of Borderline Personality Disorder.

Looks like CNN regurgitated a 2 year old opinion piece. I personally trust unnamed experts even less than anonymous sources.

 

[brihard]

More recently, noted Stat, "Trump's vocabulary is simpler. He repeats himself over and over, and lurches from one subject to an unrelated one." When shown examples of the two Trumps, experts saw symptoms that "can indicate slipping brain function due to normal aging or neurodegenerative disease." ...

What "experts"?

I know lots of "experts" that see symptoms in Trudeau of Borderline Personality Disorder.

Not the first time there has been analysis of behavioural traits that Trump has exhibited. The article below compares Trump to himself in years prior, in the context of whether there should be more in place to assess the medical and psychiatric fitness of presidents, as candidates trend older and older.

https://www.theatlantic.com/health/archive/2018/01/trump-cog-decline/548759/

 

[Rifleman62]

Where's the analysis of behavioural traits that Trudeau has exhibited by the MSN? Groping, India, selfies, SNC, etc, etc.

 

[Bruce Monkhouse]

Where's the analysis of behavioural traits that Trudeau has exhibited by the MSN? Groping, India, selfies, SNC, etc, etc.

Don't forget the 100% denial rate.....EVERYONE seems to 'experience' things different. 

 

[Journeyman]

Where's the analysis of behavioural traits that Trudeau has exhibited by the MSN? Groping, India, selfies, SNC, etc, etc.

Perhaps the thread's title should use smaller words;  U.S. means United States, not "us"... and Pres-I-den-cy is  four syllables.  :

 

[Fishbone Jones]

When his detractors lose ground, his mental state is their default TDS excuse. They'll move off this as soon as they think they've found something better to verbally assassinate him with. It's always in the drawer ready to pull out though. This is why they put it out, to distract people. Just like it's doing here. How many times has this been discussed here? Same people, same stances, same results. CNN rates below PBS and the Hallmark Channel. They are the pulp found at supermarket counters. The stopped clock, in the lobby, was name #1 journalist for being right twice a day.

Someone should be doing psych workups on Pelosi, Waters and AOC. Bet there's some pretty wild shit going on up in there.

CNN's not perfect, agreed -- what sources do you consider a bit more trustworthy?

Without numbers or research, some I watch are, The Hill, Bloomberg, Al Jezzeera, Reuters AP and the CSM. Now, everyone gets a story wrong once in a while. However, far and away from either right or left, I found the above to be, at least, fairly centrist.

I really don't look all that hard. I usually know within the first para or so, whether it's true news or hit piece hyperboyle. If I have doubts, I'll check one or two more for accuracy. If I'm really that interested, that is. Lately, all I watch the news for is the weather and they don't get that right 50% of the time. That and local goings on. CBC and Global have been out of my channel program for a few years now. I watch neither and don't support their stations with my viewership. My TV skips right by them, like they're not there. I found it particularly galling to watch a CBC talking head stare at the camera and flat out lie to Canadians.

Come here, hang your hat on something from CNN or Infowars, you should be called on it. Neither reports news, they make up stories. Same goes for the interlopers. There's tons of graphs and tables out there showing what side of the line they fall on. In my mind, if you cite something from the middle to far wings of each side, your source and it's content are fair game and totally suspect. Whether the Huff Post or the NY post.

That was probably more than you were looking for. Apologies.

 

[brihard]

Where's the analysis of behavioural traits that Trudeau has exhibited by the MSN? Groping, India, selfies, SNC, etc, etc.

Go ahead and start a thread for such things pertinent to the Canadian PM if you so choose. Nobody’s stopping you.

 

[Fishbone Jones]

Go ahead and start a thread for such things pertinent to the Canadian PM if you so choose. Nobody’s stopping you.

Ooooo, that sounds like a thread full of Warning Banners.  ;D

 

[Cloud Cover]

Interesting that the former WH Counsel for Obama has been indicted as a result of the Mueller investigation:
https://www.cnn.com/2019/04/11/politics/greg-craig-indicted-mueller-related/index.html

 

[FJAG]

An informative article on the history and extent of Congress's power to look at tax returns.

https://www.huffpost.com/entry/trump-tax-returns-democrats_n_5caf9ae5e4b098b9a2d0e96f

:cheers:

 

[FJAG]

One more interesting article which shows that the problems with American democracy are not a new thing but were brought to the fore as long ago as the presidencies of John and John Quincy Adams:

The second and sixth presidents are seen as failures but their warnings against populist hero worship ring very true today

Nancy Isenberg and Andrew Burstein

Sat 13 Apr 2019 06.00 BST

The Presidents Adams, John and John Quincy, knew that the powerful in government were elitists, no matter what they called themselves.

There were those, like Thomas Jefferson, Andrew Jackson and many of their fellow southerners, who skillfully employed a rhetoric that concealed their class interests. There were those in the Adamses’ New England who dismissed all social inferiors without apology. The two Adamses may have been snobs in their own way but they hated all forms of deception and intimidation, subtle or direct, regardless of its origin. They hated the fact that American politics thrived on the embellishment of larger-than-life personalities as “men of the people”. To the endless frustration of the father and the son, each spent the greater part of his political career facing the charge of holding a dangerous degree of elitist sympathy. Whether guilty or not, they took a perverse pride in refusing to court public opinion through dishonest means – which made them poor politicians.

Nor were the Presidents Adams ever sanguine about the two-party system, which may be the most distinguishing feature in their common political profile. Others forecast a favorable outcome to party competition, convinced voters could safely decide which of two candidates best represented the majority’s interests. The Adamses balked at this vision. They decried the hypnotic sway of “party distinctions” and “party spirit” as the bane of political life. Political parties did not guarantee democracy to everyone; they merely protected the interests of their most influential members. The Adamses would have preferred a system that pitted the visible merits, known competence, and experienced judgment of one prospective leader against another.

They detested the provocative mania parties allowed for, in rousing an intense enthusiasm for select, heroically framed men without objectively assessing their assets and virtues first. History remembers the Adamses as two failed presidents who fell out of step with progressive notions of democracy. Few understand how much they worried about the emergence of one or another form of aristocracy in America, whether it was a moneyed oligarchy or a slave-owning planter contingent that spoke with a single voice. Any faction that held outlandish power over laws and lawmaking threatened good government. Their cure for malignant control was to be found in institutional solutions aimed at preserving a balance of power across society.

In reassessing the roots of the fractured democracy of today, it pays to study the Adamses’ critique. Our backward gaze leave us in history’s majestic haze, and leaves us with many misperceptions. As a modern culture, we must acknowledge when common assumptions are just plain wrong. The biggest of these is the desire to see democracy’s historical inevitability as a function of ethical progress. An orthodox American faith in “government by the people” masks truths. Our hallowed phrases ultimately explain little. They ignore the real question dogging our history: at any given moment, who makes the wheels of power turn? ...

See rest of article here:

https://www.theguardian.com/books/2019/apr/13/john-quincy-adams-jefferson-jackson-trump-the-problem-of-democracy-extract

:cheers:

 

[Kirkhill]

Yup.  No aristocracy in the United States

John Dingell Sr., Democrat

Member of the U.S. House of Representatives
from Michigan's 15th district
In office
March 4, 1933 – September 19, 1955

John Dingell, Democrat

Member of the U.S. House of Representatives
from Michigan (15th/12th/15th/16th District)
In office
December 13, 1955 – January 3, 2015

Debbie Dingell, Democrat  (born Republican, married Democrat)

Member of the
U.S. House of Representatives
from Michigan's 12th district
Incumbent
Assumed office
January 3, 2015

Father to son to wife.

 

[Cloud Cover]

Nobody is "born" a political flavor????

 

[Kirkhill]

These folks are....

 

[Oldgateboatdriver]

Sounds like the Contrade (Borroughs) of Sienna (Italy): If you marry out of your Contrade, you are said to be in a "mixed" marriage.  :nod:  ;D

 

[Fishbone Jones]

Former Obama administration counsel indicted for concealing scope of work with Ukraine

https://www.jurist.org/news/2019/04/former-obama-administration-counsel-indicted-for-concealing-scope-of-work-with-ukraine/

Former Obama administration counsel indicted for concealing scope of work with Ukraine
April 12, 2019 09:23:19 am
Akira Tomlinson

Counsel for the Obama administration Gregory Craig was indicted on Thursday for making false statements to and concealing work-related information he performed for the Ukraine government in 2012 from the US Department of Justice (DOJ).

The DOJ alleges that Craig lied and withheld information in order to avoid registering under the Foreign Agents Registration Act (FARA), which requires individuals who lobby or do public relations on behalf of foreign entities in the US to register with the DOJ and disclose such activities, receipts and disbursements, for work conducted on the prosecution of Yulia Tymoshenko, former prime minister and political opponent to then-President Victor Yanukovych, for the Ukraine government while acting as partner at Skadden, Arps, Meagher, Slate & Flom. According to the indictment, Craig avoided registration under FARA because he believed it would prevent him and others at the firm from being appointed to federal government positions and it would force disclosure of the approximately $4 million payment received by the firm, from a third party, for a report that dictated that Tymoshenko received a fair trial, designed to improve Ukraine’s public image. The indictment also alleges that the firm had a “parallel engagement with Ukraine to assist in the prosecution of Tymoshenko on additional charges.” The DOJ believes these reasons, if disclosed, would have undermined the purpose and autonomy of the report.

Craig denounced the charges against him, referring to them as “unjustified,” as the requirements for registration under FARA did not apply. He maintains that he did not proactively reach out to any US news sources to distribute nor promote the report, but only responded to requests from the New York Times after it was only published by the Ukraine government to “prevent mischaracterization by Ukraine.” According to the indictment, however, and contrary to its initial determination based on Craig’s statement, Craig participated in the public packaging and distribution of the report, and reached out to a US media source.

The allegations against Craig stem from the Robert Mueller investigation.

Craig’s arraignment is scheduled for Friday. The charges carry a maximum sentence of five years each and thousands in fines.

In February 2018, Alex van der Zwaan, former attorney at Skadden pleaded guilty to making false statements under 18 USC § 1001(a)(2) in regards to his work on the Tymoshenko report. In January Skadden settled with the DOJ, allowing it to escape prosecution for the payments received for the report. The terms of the settlement required Skadden to retroactively register its work under FARA, restructure its compliance process and cooperate with further investigations. The settlement did not specifically identify Craig but claimed that a “lead partner, made false and mislead statements including, among other things, that Skadden provided a copy of the Report only in response to requests from the media and spoke to the media to correct misinformation about the report that the media was already reporting,” resulting in the DOJ determining it was not to register under FARA.

 

[observor 69]

"Mr. Craig appeared in federal court in Washington a day after he was indicted on the charges, which grew out of the investigation by the special counsel, Robert S. Mueller III.

Mr. Craig was arraigned before Magistrate Judge Deborah A. Robinson, who released him on relatively unrestrictive terms, ordering that he continue to reside at his current address and not travel outside the Washington metro area.
The indictment alleged that, while a partner at Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom, Mr. Craig took on work on behalf of the government of Viktor F. Yanukovych, then the president of Ukraine. The work was brought to Mr. Craig by Paul Manafort, then a political consultant for Mr. Yanukovych and later the campaign chairman for President Trump in 2016. The charges stated that Mr. Craig lied in order to avoid registering with the Justice Department under the Foreign Agents Registration Act and withheld information about the full scope of his activities.

At the heart of the case is whether Mr. Craig’s interaction with a reporter for The New York Times triggered the requirement for him to register under the foreign lobbying law."

https://www.nytimes.com/2019/04/12/us/politics/gregory-craig-pleads-not-guilty.html

 

[Rifleman62]

Your point is what? Because somehow Trump is involved it needs to be pointed out and get points from the usual source?

 

[kkwd]

"Mr. Craig appeared in federal court in Washington a day after he was indicted on the charges, which grew out of the investigation by the special counsel, Robert S. Mueller III.

Mr. Craig was arraigned before Magistrate Judge Deborah A. Robinson, who released him on relatively unrestrictive terms, ordering that he continue to reside at his current address and not travel outside the Washington metro area.
The indictment alleged that, while a partner at Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom, Mr. Craig took on work on behalf of the government of Viktor F. Yanukovych, then the president of Ukraine. The work was brought to Mr. Craig by Paul Manafort, then a political consultant for Mr. Yanukovych and later the campaign chairman for President Trump in 2016. The charges stated that Mr. Craig lied in order to avoid registering with the Justice Department under the Foreign Agents Registration Act and withheld information about the full scope of his activities.

At the heart of the case is whether Mr. Craig’s interaction with a reporter for The New York Times triggered the requirement for him to register under the foreign lobbying law."

https://www.nytimes.com/2019/04/12/us/politics/gregory-craig-pleads-not-guilty.html

So President Obama can't claim from now on that no members of his administration were ever indicted.

 

[Jarnhamar]

For better or for worse Trump becoming the US president appears to have shaken things up and put a spotlight on unethical and illegal behavior in the US government.

Not saying he isn't guilty of some of the same stuff, quite probably is, but would all of this stuff have came to light if the election went the other way?