Kansas Crimson

RainbowsandUnicorns wrote: ↑Sat Oct 26, 2024 4:07 pm

twocoach wrote: ↑Sat Oct 26, 2024 11:58 am

jfish26 wrote: ↑Sat Oct 26, 2024 10:54 am

Harris should call him on this and they should give both candidates true neutral party administered neurological and psychological evaluations and air it on TV.

Ummmmmm.
That might not be such a good idea. I have little doubt she has considerable psychological issues of her own.

twocoach wrote: ↑Sat Oct 26, 2024 4:49 pm

RainbowsandUnicorns wrote: ↑Sat Oct 26, 2024 4:07 pm

twocoach wrote: ↑Sat Oct 26, 2024 11:58 am

Harris should call him on this and they should give both candidates true neutral party administered neurological and psychological evaluations and air it on TV.

Ummmmmm.
That might not be such a good idea. I have little doubt she has considerable psychological issues of her own.

What psychological issues do you feel that a 60 year old former prosecutor has? Not being an expert on everything isn't a psychological issue. It's just being a normal person. CLAIMING you are an expert on everything is.

Is there some sort of psychosis involved in smiling and laughing? No. Good grief. This is why people razz you for corny bothsiderism. That's ridiculous.

twocoach wrote: ↑Wed Oct 23, 2024 10:50 am

KUTradition wrote: ↑Wed Oct 23, 2024 9:54 am judge just ordered release of records related to the Arlington debacle

good

What is "the Arlington debacle"? The photo op at Arlington Natl Cemetery?

KUTradition wrote: ↑Sat Oct 26, 2024 8:54 pm

twocoach wrote: ↑Wed Oct 23, 2024 10:50 am

KUTradition wrote: ↑Wed Oct 23, 2024 9:54 am judge just ordered release of records related to the Arlington debacle

good

What is "the Arlington debacle"? The photo op at Arlington Natl Cemetery?

wtf

https://thehill.com/policy/defense/4954 ... etery/amp/

Overlander wrote: ↑Sun Oct 27, 2024 9:49 pm They are going to launch a barrage of whiney-bitch- loser lawsuits.
Count on it.

RainbowsandUnicorns wrote: ↑Sun Oct 27, 2024 9:58 pm

Overlander wrote: ↑Sun Oct 27, 2024 9:49 pm They are going to launch a barrage of whiney-bitch- loser lawsuits.
Count on it.

My concern is he doesn't lose. If he does, then yeah, I will absolutely count on it.
Like you and I both know, the plan is in place for it to happen.

Over the last week, two billionaire newspaper owners—Jeff Bezos and Patrick Soon-Shiong—have overruled their editorial boards to squelch endorsements of Kamala Harris. Bezos’s decision came just hours before executives at his aerospace company Blue Origin met privately with Trump himself.

Meanwhile, a clutch of top plutocrats were huddling beachside at the Waldorf Astoria in Dana Point, California, wringing their hands over “how to protect themselves and their companies if Trump wins the presidency,” the Washington Post reports.

Team Trump’s message to these titans of industry: You’re right to worry. “I’ve told CEOs to engage as fast as possible, because the clock is ticking,” a Trump adviser told the Post. “If you’re somebody who has endorsed Harris, and we’ve never heard from you at any point until after the election, you’ve got an uphill battle.”

Over the weekend, JVL wrote two bangers capturing this dynamic of elite pre-surrender to Trump, describing how his open promises of lawless rule have led us to this moment. But I want to stress a different point.

What’s alarming isn’t just the prospect that Trump will brazenly violate the law to punish companies he’s decided are his enemies. It’s that he may not even have to. Trump’s proposed mega-tariff economic agenda will give him all the arm-twisting authority he needs to bring America’s moguls to heel.

When we’ve critiqued Trump’s plan to make the federal government run on tariffs in the past, we’ve mostly focused on his cockamamie economic thinking.1 But a massive across-the-board increase of federal tariffs would also mean a massive increase in the president’s discretionary control over various parts of the economy through the distribution of waivers and exclusions.

Trump habitually waves away arguments that his tariffs could damage U.S. companies by pointing to the president’s ability to grant carveouts. “I gave Apple an exception. Tim Cook is a great businessman,” he said at the Economic Club of Chicago earlier this month. “I did it for many companies . . . we do it for small businesses too.”

To punish Harris-backing CEOs, all Trump has to do is hurt their companies with onerous new trade policies, then decline to pick up the phone when they petition for relief.

And just to remind you: A re-elected Trump would likely be able to put his tariff agenda in place without a single additional word of federal legislation.2

Trump might forgo the scalpel for the hatchet, of course, choosing to go after his corporate foes in a more explosive, less legally defensible way. But what I’m trying to suggest is that even explicit economic retribution for political activity Trump dislikes might not look like open authoritarianism. The country may well continue its slide into quasi-dictatorship in much the same style as it has so far: with a whole ecosystem of Trump abetters rolling their eyes and scolding you for making such a fuss, even as it happens.

Overlander wrote: ↑Sun Oct 27, 2024 9:49 pm They are going to launch a barrage of whiney-bitch- loser lawsuits.
Count on it.