trump is serious!!!!!

[Gob]

Aussie newspapers tell it like it is;

[Lord Jim]

Yet more proof that not all assholes are Trump supporters:

Thousands send letters, death threats, to pressure Electoral College to avert outcome of presidential election

Republican electors due to cast the votes on Monday that will seal Donald Trump's presidency, are facing death threats and organised campaigns in a ditch bid by desperate opponents to avert the outcome of the US election.

Amid concerns that Russia intervened in the election, members of the Electoral College have been bombarded with calls to post-pone this final seal of approval - or choose a different candidate for the presidency.

"This is absolutely unique," Mary Barket, an elector and long time Republican politician in Pennsylvania, a crucial swing state which broke for Mr Trump, told The Telegraph.

Following one of the most divisive campaigns in electoral history, the intelligence reports that Russian president Vladimir Putin authorised cyber attacks to help Mr Trump get elected have rocked the, usually quieter, transition weeks before the January inauguration.

As Mr Trump continued to openly refute the findings of the intelligence agencies, some 79 of the presidential electors, most of them Democrats, called on James Clapper, the director of national intelligence to authorise a classified briefing on the Russia hacking allegations before the Electoral College vote.

Even as Mr Clapper rejected the call, a barrage of other organisations have taken it upon themselves to campaign to stop the electors on Monday casting the votes, according to centuries old tradition, in accordance with the popular election result in their state.

Last week saw the release of a video of celebrities like Martin Sheen pleading with Republican electors. And on Saturday, Unite for America — the group behind the video — began sending personalised versions to electors in which Mr Sheen and more than a dozen others call them out by name.

Mrs Barket said her in-trays were stuffed and she had an "overflowing box" in her office of post from residents desperate to change her mind before she goes to the state capitol building to join with the other electors and cast he vote a. Her voicemail has been full for weeks.

"There are some which are concerted efforts by groups, and others are personal letters. They say they are afraid of having Donald Trump as president," she said.

As the deadline approaches some of the appeals to electors have turned threatening. Electors around the country have reported being targeted by death threats, harassing phone calls and reams of hate mail.

“I never can imagine harassing people like this," said Jim Rhoades, a Republican elector from Michigan who runs a home inspection service. “I’ve lost a bunch of business.”

In Pennsylvania, the situation has become so serious that the some 20 electors have reportedly been assigned plainclothes state police troopers for protection.

Mrs Barket said she had avoided engaging with risk by refusing to open most of the letters, but she conceded that she feels "very uncomfortable in my environment".

She said she was worried about the effect on her family.

As the hours to the final vote approach Mr Trump's detractors are being forced to admit defeat.

Like most electors Mrs Barket said these efforts will not change her decision about who to vote for: "It's their shot in the dark," she said of the opponents. "But we are solid in our determination to complete the mission we were charged with."

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2016/12 ... l-college/

If people want to express their opinion to their state elector, (afterall, technically they are elected officials) that's one thing...

But death threats, hate mail, and harassment are just as wrong whether they come from Trumpanzees or anti-Trumpanzees...

[Guinevere]

To be clear, the threats and harassment are mostly coming from Trumpanzees who do not want the electors to change their votes. That's their MO, as we have seen time and time again. While many are encouraging the electors to vote their conscience, I have yet to see anyone do so in an abusive or harassing way (and you can imagine, I've seen many many letters and petitions). Oh and PS - some of the electors have responded with their own, nasty and mean responses.

Do not try to draw a moral equivalence between Trumpanzees and those people who actually care about the fate of this nation. To do so is playing right into the hand of the king Trumpanzee himself.

[Econoline]

Exactly, Guin. You beat me to it. "Both sides do it" is what got us into this mess.

[Lord Jim]

Oh brother...

This reminds me of wes saying that all the anti gay notes were written anti-Trump types to make the Trumpanzees look bad...

Everybody on my side is an angel; all the bad guys are in the other camp....


During the campaign, there were numerous documented incidents of anti-Trumpers committing assault, vandalism, random violence, harassment and intimidation...

Why do you find it so difficult to believe that there are some on the anti-Trump side who would engage in similar behavior towards electors pledged to Trump?

Do not try to draw a moral equivalence

I am absolutely going to draw a moral equivalence between those who make death threats, send hate mail, and engage in other behavior designed to terrorize and intimidate, no matter which side they are on.

[Guinevere]

Read what I wrote, please. And do not attribute statements to me that I never said. Just like wes does......

[Burning Petard]

Wonderful, this fabulous American Republic! Today is the real election day.

In honor of all the inspiring quotes we have received from our on-deck benevolent dictator, I share with you his views on imminent domain.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions ... d757a753a2

from the Washington Post, that hobby- scandal sheet-such a failure-toy of Jeff Bezos. Jeff is one of those super-rich innovators and job creators that the Donald admires so much, particularly because Jeff's daddy never had to bail him out.

This suggestion from Catherine Rampell seems so delicious to me because it echoes my handle here--it would mean Trump would be hoisted by his own petard.

Snailgate

[RayThom]

Disregarding all the sex, lies, and videotape, PLUS all of the supposed threats being received by members of the Electoral College, PLUS my personal nausea and disgust with the Bullshit Artiste Supreme, the one thing I'm sure of is that Donald J. Drumpf will be sworn in as my president on January 20th at exactly 12:00 PM. What he does with the office and how it ends will be up to the Great Pumpkin and Congress.

Alea iacta est. And may God bless what's left of America.

[Bicycle Bill]

-"BB"-

[Bicycle Bill]

From "The Week", 12/14/2016

Donald Trump announced Monday that he wouldn't be holding a press conference this week to explain how he'll be separating from his businesses after all, despite his promise to do so.  Now, his campaign says, it'll happen some time next month.  Call me crazy, but I'm guessing that when next month rolls around, it'll get delayed again — should anyone bother to ask, which they may not.  Kind of like Trump's tax returns, which we're never going to see.

It's a small example, but of a larger genre, wherein Trump does or says something (or declines to do something), people respond, "How does he think he can get away with this?" and then, lo and behold, he does.  So why is it that he's able to do things no other politician and no other president can do, and never seem to pay a price?

The answer lies in the very idea of paying a price, and the unspoken assumptions that undergird it.

Let's say you're the president-elect, and you know that previous presidents have divested themselves of their financial holdings or put their investments in a blind trust.  But you don't want to do that — after all, you've spent your entire adult life building this beautiful company, really top-notch, the best.  What are you going to do, sell it off?  What happens after your presidency is over?  You're not going to retire to a ranch.  You're going to be back in the game, making deals, bigger than ever.  So you decide to let your kids run it while you're away.  Sure, you're still the one cashing the checks, and the opportunities for foreign interests and governments to curry your favor by lining your pockets are enormous.  But what's to stop you?

To outside observers, this looks utterly appalling.  But it makes clear that there are only three real constraints on a president's behavior — and Donald Trump is essentially immune to all three.

1) Legal restraint
As Trump is fond of pointing out, the president is exempt from most of the laws covering conflicts of interest, which means he can't be forced to divest himself of his holdings.  That doesn't mean he's immune from prosecution for outright bribery, but that would be awfully hard to prove, especially if we're talking about a situation where a foreign government subtly directs money his way through a third party, like a developer who gives Don Jr. and Eric extremely favorable terms on a deal to license the Trump name to a hotel.

Trump is still covered by the Emoluments Clause of the Constitution, which bans payments from foreign governments.  And some have argued that he'll be violating it as soon as he takes office, since his Washington, D.C., hotel is encouraging foreign diplomats to stay there when in the nation's capital, which means more money for Donald Trump.  But the only path to accountability for that kind of violation is impeachment, and the chances that the Republican Congress would impeach a Republican president are approximately zero.

2) Political restraint
This is what holds most politicians to the straight and narrow, keeping them from doing things that are unethical or just look bad, but which aren't actually illegal.  Trump, however, has learned by now that there's almost nothing he can't get away with.  After all, during the campaign he said racist things, encouraged violence at his rallies, had it revealed that he doesn't pay taxes and that his "foundation" is essentially a scam, and was caught on tape bragging about sexual assault — and he still won.  The lesson he surely took from all that was that he can get away with pretty much anything, no matter how much criticism he gets in the short term.

He also knows that Republicans, who are eager to get on with cutting taxes for the wealthy, removing regulations on Wall Street, restricting abortion, and shredding the safety net, are not inclined to make him pay a price for what he does.  As long as they stand behind him, any controversy looks to the public like just one more partisan squabble, which he'll be convinced he can ride out.  He also knows that it will be almost impossible for him to lose the support of his base no matter what he does.  As he said during the campaign, "I could stand in the middle of Fifth Avenue and shoot somebody, and I wouldn't lose any voters, okay?"  And he was right.

3) Moral restraint
Every ordinary politician has some line they won't cross, not just because they're worried that they could face legal consequences and not just because it might damage them politically, but because their own sense of morality forbids it.  Where is that line for Donald Trump?  The president-elect is a man who reportedly cheats small-time contractors, who allegedly walks in on teenage girls in their dressing rooms, and who advocates killing the families of suspected terrorists.  While he presumably has some moral limits, they have not yet made themselves known.

With none of these restraints operating on Trump, he knows that his freedom to upend established norms, to court scandal, even to use the presidency to get rich, is almost without limit.  When he ran for president, his supporters were thrilled by the fact that he wasn't like ordinary politicians.  Now we're discovering the full measure of what that means.

-"BB"-

[wesw]

the Clinton bus is a bumpy ride..., what with all of the folks being tossed beneath it...

LOSERS!!!!!!

[Bicycle Bill]

W H A T   I S   T H I S ?

Sign language for "Donald Trump" — the "Sign of the Year" as selected by the Swiss Deaf Association.
It beat out several submissions, including "Netflix", "vegan", and "deportation" as shown below.



-"BB"-

[Big RR]

If I'm not mistaken, that is also the sign for Curly of the Three Stooges.

[Econoline]

[RayThom]

Calm down girls. They are supposedly both married.

[BoSoxGal]

Frankly at his age and in his shape I doubt Trump can perform without assistance, but I'd also bet Melania keeps him as much at arms' length as possible. I detect no genuine warmth or passion between them in any of their photos or body language when filmed together.

[RayThom]

... Frankly at his age and in his shape I doubt Trump can perform without assistance, but I'd also bet Melania keeps him as much at arms' length as possible. I detect no genuine warmth or passion between them in any of their photos or body language when filmed together.

I'm fairly sure that's exactly why Melania has chosen to live in the Golden Tower of Trump. Especially after the “Access Hollywood" bus video went global she has had enough -- just like the other two. She'll let 'The Donald' have his all sweetness and light photo-ops at White House functions but little will be heard from her while Drumpf is in office. Arm candy, mostly.

I predict a Melania/Donald divorce in four year, possibly eight... who know, maybe even sooner.

[BoSoxGal]

Eastern European women are generally more tolerant of infidelity than American women (or so I have read); given that Trump is unlikely to desire a retread by age 74/78, I predict she sticks around for the full access to the monthly allowance and then inheritance.

[Gob]

[Burning Petard]

I suspect the youngest child of the Donald and his particular circumstances are the major reason the current first spouse elect is delaying the move to DC.

snailgate