Donald J. Trump, 45th President of the US



2013 Answer on Quora suggests a US president can fire a Fed Chair if there is “cause”.


Perhaps Don Jr summed it up best when he tweeted


The new US “all or nothing” approach to North Korea’s nukes/chemical weapons means the Neocons Bolton (remember him from the Iraq war?) and Pompeo have won the internal debate. I don’t think it will work. Maybe we will be talking about regime change in a few months.


Regime change in NK means taking on the Chinese. Are the yanks willing to go that far? If the Chinese are clever they’ll get their regime change in first and get some lad in who’ll ratchet down the retoric and open up the economy to Chinese capital.

#1948 … nt-voting/


The Washington Times is not a credible source.

What does “defend localities that allow illegal immigrants to vote” mean? Defend them in what way?

The article is intended to make people think the Democrats voted to allow illegal immigrants to vote. They didn’t.


My guess would be turning a blind eye to illegal voting and forms of voter fraud as unofficial official policy. Not supporting moves for ID at the ballot box. Under-resourcing enforcement. You know, Politics


No, I’m not looking for a guess. The article stated that Democrats voted to defend localities that allow illegal immigrants to vote, so I’m asking for the specific thing they voted for.

Kind of thing you might expect a journalist to include in the article?


Here you are … use-bill/1

This bill addresses voter access, election integrity, election security, political spending, and ethics for the three branches of government.

Specifically, the bill expands voter registration and voting access, makes Election Day a federal holiday, and limits removing voters from voter rolls.

The bill provides for states to establish independent, nonpartisan redistricting commissions.

The bill also sets forth provisions related to election security, including sharing intelligence information with state election officials, protecting the security of the voter rolls, supporting states in securing their election systems, developing a national strategy to protect the security and integrity of U.S. democratic institutions, establishing in the legislative branch the National Commission to Protect United States Democratic Institutions, and other provisions to improve the cybersecurity of election systems.

This bill addresses campaign spending, including by expanding the ban on foreign nationals contributing to or spending on elections; expanding disclosure rules pertaining to organizations spending money during elections, campaign advertisements, and online platforms; and revising disclaimer requirements for political advertising.

This bill establishes an alternative campaign funding system for certain federal offices. The system involves federal matching of small contributions for qualified candidates.

This bill sets forth provisions related to ethics in all three branches of government. Specifically, the bill requires a code of ethics for federal judges and justices, prohibits Members of the House from serving on the board of a for-profit entity, expands enforcement of regulations governing foreign agents, and establishes additional conflict-of-interest and ethics provisions for federal employees and the White House.

The bill also requires candidates for President and Vice President to submit 10 years of tax returns.


Oh I bet it does, LOL


Thanks. I can’t see a part that specifically allows voting by illegal immigrants. My guess is because it’s not there.


I guess all sides engage in wordplay but what’s worse is when it’s legislated wordplay.

Double down gave you gold, dig in, you might find something. I’ve already spotted a few angles within a couple of mins searching, but since you want specifics I suggest you Cmd/Ctrl + F using keywords, being your only man to navigate such a lengthy document.

That is also the Bill that sneak in a few easters eggs too. Stuff about Tax Returns for Presidential Candidates being one.


It’s been a while so I’ll just leave this here. :sunglasses:


Diddle de do Diddle di do Diddle de do… it’s 2017 and the cheek of the Tango Tyrant is epic only a wet half-day in office.

2019 - DC Whispers has a new take on this old outrage!

Meanwhile Donald talks about his use of Twitter (not sure he even writes his tweets tbh).

Very positive coverage form this talking head as highlighted by DJT tweet.

Perhaps a reciprocal turn in media punditry coverage in the positive has begun - is this in part due to The Donalds unwavering support for Israel?

Lining up for 2020.


With the direction the Democrats are moving to its a clever move, but as foreign policy its dumb


Something all the true believers in the idea that Trump is owned by the Russians should read

If Tulsi Gabbard starts to gain ground in the race to lose to Trump in 2020 I expect the MSM to also claim she is controlled from the Kremlin


Well sanders was favoured by the Russian government in the last election, precisely because everyone hated HRC. It would not take much for someone to scream Russia.


Could you outline more what that direction is or at leat how you perceive it? Thanks.


When the Mueller report arrived and some of the reaction began to claim that Mueller must be a Russian agent (marketed for years as the poster-boy hard man to take out Trump) - surely this must be considered a moment a jumping a school of sharks no? :thinking:

Joking aside. There has been much speculation leading to this point about what the true purpose of the Mueller investigation was.

One, it was a cover and play to remove important and incriminating evidence against Clinton, Obama and all those connected.

Another that Mueller had come on side and was actually working with the Trump admin (while saving his own ass at the same time).

There are a few more but I can’t remember them all. :man_shrugging:t2:

I think one was about Russians or something. :wink:


Since last year it has been speculated but probably more anticipated, once the Mueller report arrived and was the no-show many assumed, then it would mark a turning point in the Trump Admins posture, i.e. the Trump admin would begin to push back in a very very serious and legally forceful way.

Is this the beginning of the turn around?

It’s hard not to forget the infamous “you’d be in jail” special prosecutor exchange during the final presidential debate!

Yet, how curious it is that Trump found himself under investigation first for two years, once elected president.

A ponderable peculiar no less. :male_detective:t2: