The US Presidency 2020

[mariomike]

I'm not expecting to see another Eisenhower or Kennedy on TV in my lifetime.

But, it's hard to imagine the current two candidates represent the finest America has to offer.

It might be interesting to keep an eye on VP picks. Will Trump throw Mike under the bus for a woman, possibly of colour ( Nikki? ).

Biden says he will be picking a woman. He also seems to make a point of saying something about ( whoever she will be ) being ready to go as prez on Day 1.

 

[Jarnhamar]

I'm not expecting to see another Eisenhower or Kennedy on TV in my lifetime.

But, it's hard to imagine the current two candidates represent the finest America has to offer.

It might be interesting to keep an eye on VP picks. Will Trump throw Mike under the bus for a woman, possibly of colour ( Nikki? ).

Biden says he will be picking a woman. He also seems to make a point of saying something about ( whoever she will be ) being ready to go as prez on Day 1.

Job qualification requirements for Vice President of the USA: Must be female, visible minority preferred.

 

[OldSolduer]

One day, the Democrats will realize/accept how badly they missed the mark in 2016 (and probably again in 2020).  Pushing Hillary at all costs, did in fact cost them...dearly.  Jonathan Pie nailed it, but the Democratic machine is and still will be in denial.  It will likely be up to Gavin Newsom in 2024 to repair the Dems’ disfunctionality...

I've said this before and I'll say it again:

In a nation of over 300 million people this is the best you can do?  :facepalm:

 

[Brad Sallows]

>Biden says he will be picking a woman. He also seems to make a point of saying something about ( whoever she will be ) being ready to go as prez on Day 1.

A few people are openly discussing the 25th Amendment gambit: get the person they want as president on the ticket as VP; push/drag Biden over the finish line; inaugurate Biden; stand by to declare him incompetent.  If that is done, and seen to be done - and it will be hard to bury now that it has openly been mentioned - it will not be well-received by people who aren't immersed in parliamentary and bureaucratic rules-lawyering.

 

[Kat Stevens]

I think AOC will be a fine president.

 

[tomahawk6]

AOC would not be a vote getter for Biden but maybe a gay VP might help his ticket.

 

[mariomike]

A few people are openly discussing the 25th Amendment gambit: get the person they want as president on the ticket as VP; push/drag Biden over the finish line; inaugurate Biden; stand by to declare him incompetent. 

Or, keep him around like they keep Trump around.

And when they say anything, which they will, they can use the same old reply,

"Oh, he's just a different kind of president. Nothing to see here." "You have Biden Derangement Syndrome".

25th Amendment

https://www.google.com/search?sxsrf=ALeKk00iEMvnpCA5Kcv7HTqHwuwgIqF1aA%3A1586456255451&ei=v2aPXu-UG8qStAb2_aHACw&q=trump+%2225th+amendment%22&oq=trump+%2225th+amendment%22&gs_lcp=CgZwc3ktYWIQDDICCAAyBggAEBYQHjIGCAAQFhAeMgYIABAWEB4yBggAEBYQHjIGCAAQFhAeMgYIABAWEB4yBggAEBYQHjIGCAAQFhAeMgYIABAWEB46BAgjECc6BggAEAcQHjoECAAQHkoKCBcSBjEyLTMwN0oICBgSBDEyLTRQ6B1YwzlglU5oAHAAeACAAYsEiAHvBpIBBzAuMy41LTGYAQCgAQGqAQdnd3Mtd2l6&sclient=psy-ab&ved=0ahUKEwiv8LqM-tvoAhVKCc0KHfZ-CLgQ4dUDCAs#spf=1586456268072

Dementia

https://www.google.com/search?sxsrf=ALeKk03eNtBBFUqJxu3FvaTaYlUIimKcrQ%3A1586456267200&ei=y2aPXvncC867tQasjp_YDQ&q=trump+dementia&oq=trump+dementia&gs_lcp=CgZwc3ktYWIQAzoCCAA6BggAEBYQHjoECCMQJzoICAAQgwEQkQI6BQgAEJECOgoIABCDARAUEIcCOgUIABCDAToHCAAQFBCHAkohCBcSHTYtMTY1ZzIwOWcyMTdnMTY1ZzExMWcxMjBnMjExShMIGBIPNi0xZzFnMWcxZzVnMWczUPnQAlitiwNggJIDaAFwAHgAgAHSAYgBixWSAQYyLjE5LjGYAQCgAQGqAQdnd3Mtd2l6&sclient=psy-ab&ved=0ahUKEwi57oeS-tvoAhXOXc0KHSzHB9sQ4dUDCAs&uact=5#spf=1586456321465

At least Biden released his tax returns. Trump didn't.

All kidding aside, I think any septuagenarian who wants the nuclear launch codes, should first agree to have their head examined.

 

[daftandbarmy]

All kidding aside, I think any septuagenarian who wants the nuclear launch codes, should first agree to have their head examined.

Or rather, any country that would entrust a septuagenarian with the launch codes....

 

[Kat Stevens]

AOC would not be a vote getter for Biden but maybe a gay VP might help his ticket.

I really need to work on my humour delivery, I guess.

 

[kkwd]

Just something a little different amid all the recent news. It comes from The Blaze so some may not have heard of this site.
https://www.theblaze.com/news/fbi-bombshell-reveals-anti-trump-steele-dossier-was-part-of-russian-disinformation-campaign?utm_source=theblaze-dailyAM&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=Daily-Newsletter__AM%202020-04-12&utm_term=TheBlaze%20Daily%20AM%20-%20last%20270%20days

The footnotes reveal that, beginning early on and continuing throughout the FBI's Russia investigation, FBI officials learned critical information streams that flowed to the dossier were likely tainted with Russian Intelligence disinformation. But the FBI aggressively advanced the probe anyway, ignoring internal oversight mechanisms and neglecting to flag the material credibility concerns for a secret court.

Despite later intelligence reports that key elements of the FBI's evidence were the result of Russian infiltration to undermine U.S. foreign relations, the FBI still pushed forward with its probe. It would eventually spill over into the years-long special counsel operation, costing taxpayers more than $30 million and increasing partisan divisions – all based on faulty evidence. In the end, the special counsel concluded that the Trump campaign did not collude with Russia.

A couple of Tweets from Catherine Herridge, you can trust her.
https://twitter.com/CBS_Herridge/status/1248700794226061312
https://twitter.com/CBS_Herridge/status/1248696457915498497

From Chuck Grassley.
https://www.grassley.senate.gov/news/news-releases/fbi-ignored-early-warnings-debunked-anti-trump-dossier-was-russian-disinformation

 

[brihard]

Just something a little different amid all the recent news. It comes from The Blaze so some may not have heard of this site.
https://www.theblaze.com/news/fbi-bombshell-reveals-anti-trump-steele-dossier-was-part-of-russian-disinformation-campaign?utm_source=theblaze-dailyAM&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=Daily-Newsletter__AM%202020-04-12&utm_term=TheBlaze%20Daily%20AM%20-%20last%20270%20days

A couple of Tweets from Catherine Herridge, you can trust her.
https://twitter.com/CBS_Herridge/status/1248700794226061312
https://twitter.com/CBS_Herridge/status/1248696457915498497

From Chuck Grassley.
https://www.grassley.senate.gov/news/news-releases/fbi-ignored-early-warnings-debunked-anti-trump-dossier-was-russian-disinformation

The statement that “ In the end, the special counsel concluded that the Trump campaign did not collude with Russia“ is inaccurate and dishonest. The special counsel did not conclude that. The report concluded that the campaign knew of and expected to benefit materially from Russian interference, but was not able to establish collusion. That’s not the same as ‘there wasn’t any’. Note also that there was refused testimony. Missing, deleted, or unavailable/encrypted data, and false testimony in some cases.

While many criminal charges resulted from the Mueller probe, anything specific to collusion did not. That is a far cry from an exoneration.

 

[Journeyman]

A couple of Tweets from Catherine Herridge, you can trust her.

Is your insight based on anything substantive... you know, besides the last employer to hire her being Fox 'News'?  op:

 

[kkwd]

Is your insight based on anything substantive... you know, besides the last employer to hire her being Fox 'News'?  op:

She works for CBS.

 

[Retired AF Guy]

She works for CBS.

But, prior to joining CBS, Herridge joined Fox in 1996 and was one of their original founding members. She spent the next 23 years as their Chief Intelligence Correspondent.

 

[Brad Sallows]

>That is a far cry from an exoneration.

Exoneration no longer matters.  In recent news, the reputational integrity of the investigations and people involved is deteriorating rapidly.  Claiming that investigations which used untrustworthy sources as militating evidence and disregarded mitigating evidence subsequently failed to "exonerate" is simply admitting what was built in.

 

[kkwd]

But, prior to joining CBS, Herridge joined Fox in 1996 and was one of their original founding members. She spent the next 23 years as their Chief Intelligence Correspondent.

Do you have any evidence she was anything but honest and straightforward during her time at Fox?

 

[brihard]

>That is a far cry from an exoneration.

Exoneration no longer matters.  In recent news, the reputational integrity of the investigations and people involved is deteriorating rapidly.  Claiming that investigations which used untrustworthy sources as militating evidence and disregarded mitigating evidence subsequently failed to "exonerate" is simply admitting what was built in.

And yet there is also an abundance of unassailed investigative material now on the public record, with credible acknowledgement of the things that I stated.

In any case the article he linked claimed that the report found that 'there was no collusion'. I'm merely pointing out that that's patently false; the report nor investigation did no such thing. I'm not here debating what it *did* find, I don't see any reason to circle that drain again. Every mind that is going to be made up has been already, which limits my interest to pointing out dishonest statements that are trying to retroactively change the narrative.

 

[kkwd]

And yet there is also an abundance of unassailed investigative material now on the public record, with credible acknowledgement of the things that I stated.

In any case the article he linked claimed that the report found that 'there was no collusion'. I'm merely pointing out that that's patently false; the report nor investigation did no such thing. I'm not here debating what it *did* find, I don't see any reason to circle that drain again. Every mind that is going to be made up has been already, which limits my interest to pointing out dishonest statements that are trying to retroactively change the narrative.

I guess this is what you are referring to in the statement from Sen Grassley. But is it concerning in the least that the FBI were anything but honest in this entire affair?

In the end, the special counsel concluded that the Trump campaign did not collude with Russia.

 

[brihard]

I guess this is what you are referring to in the statement from Sen Grassley. But is it concerning in the least that the FBI were anything but honest in this entire affair?

That is indeed the quote I was addressing. I'm not interested in getting dragged back in to another repetitive rehash of the matter writ large, so I'll respectfully decline that invite.

 

[brihard]

Well, this isn't going well. Trump claimed he has authority to order states to reopen their economies, stating in response to a reporter's question, "When somebody is the president of the united states, the authority is total. And that'st he way it's gotta be. The governors know that." "The authority of the president of the United States having to do with the subject we're talking about is total." Video:

https://www.axios.com/trump-coronavirus-president-authority-337f62ca-e867-49ec-aa57-f3096787b8ba.html

So yeah, that's basically not at all correct constitutionally. It'll be interesting to see how Governor Cuomo responds to this one.

Am I the only one concerned to see the president claim that his authority to order states to reopen "is total"? At best this shows a really, really bad lack of appreciation for constitutional division of powers. Of potentially greater concern is the belief that he can use this crisis to seize and exert greater executive authority than he actually has.