Trump 2024 ???

[KG1]

Ann Coulter was bigly onboard with Trump until he dissed Jeff Sessions and supported Tuberville in the Alabama primary for Senate. She was a big Sessions fan, especially for the work he did on illegal immigration while AG, a major issue for her. An issue she feels Trump betrayed voters on because he failed to finish on his campaign promise to build a wall and get Mexico to pay for it. It was the main reason why she supported Trump in 2016.

Coulter tweeted that Sessions was 'the ONE PERSON in the Trump administration who did anything about immigration.'

It's all here what started the rift.

Coulter lashes out at 'disloyal retard' and 'blithering idiot' Trump

Ann Coulter became enraged after Trump tweeted 'Alabama, do not trust Jeff Sessions', his latest attack on his former Attorney General.

www.dailymail.co.uk

'You complete blithering idiot': Ann Coulter turns on 'disloyal actual retard' Trump in Twitter rant over his criticism of former AG Jeff Sessions​

 

[oze]

Ann Coulter was bigly onboard with Trump until he dissed Jeff Sessions and supported Tuberville in the Alabama primary for Senate. She was a big Sessions fan, especially for the work he did on illegal immigration while AG, a major issue for her.

Coulter tweeted that Sessions was 'the ONE PERSON in the Trump administration who did anything about immigration' - an issue she feels Trump betrayed voters on because he failed on his campaign promise to build a wall and get Mexico to pay for it.

It's all here what started the rift.

Coulter lashes out at 'disloyal retard' and 'blithering idiot' Trump

Ann Coulter became enraged after Trump tweeted 'Alabama, do not trust Jeff Sessions', his latest attack on his former Attorney General.

www.dailymail.co.uk

'You complete blithering idiot': Ann Coulter turns on 'disloyal actual retard' Trump in Twitter rant over his criticism of former AG Jeff Sessions​

These words sound just like what Trump would use. Pretty ironic that a man who constantly harps on "loyalty" would be hoisted by his own petard.

 

[oze]

I looked for a non-lefty biased source for this story; I think that The Washington Times qualifies. I bet that we have a resident expert on INGO who can comment further.

Trump disclosed sensitive nuclear sub info to Australian businessman, report claims

Former President Donald Trump reportedly discussed sensitive information about U.S. nuclear submarines with an Australian member of his club at Mar-a-Lago — an allegation that was shared with special counsel Jack Smith as his team investigates Mr. Trump’s handling of classified information.

www.washingtontimes.com

 

[KG1]

These words sound just like what Trump would use. Pretty ironic that a man who constantly harps on "loyalty" would be hoisted by his own petard.

Trump turned on Sessions for not being loyal to him when he recused himself from the Russia collusion turmoil.

 

[oze]

Trump turned on Sessions for not being loyal to him when he recused himself from the Russia collusion turmoil.

I guess that, in the Crazy World of Donald Trump, loyalty is a one-way street. When Trump says "loyalty", he really means "fealty ".

 

[KG1]

I guess that, in the Crazy World of Donald Trump, loyalty is a one-way street. When Trump says "loyalty", he really means "fealty ".

Trump was angry and wanted Sessions as his AG to put an end to the Russia collusion witch hunt but instead he recused himself. I can't say that I blame Trump for feeling that way about Sessions because it WAS a bogus witch hunt that carried on after Sessions recused himself.

 

[KLB]

Trump was angry and wanted Sessions as his AG to put an end to the Russia collusion witch hunt but instead he recused himself. I can't say that I blame Trump for feeling that way about Sessions because it WAS a bogus witch hunt that carried on after Sessions recused himself.

The AG should recuse himself from an investigation of the President.

 

[oze]

The AG should recuse himself from an investigation of the President.

Mmm-hmm

 

[BugI02]

Trump turned on Sessions for not being loyal to him when he recused himself from the Russia collusion turmoil.

Would you say Trump's instincts in that matter proved right or wrong

Would you say ANYONE is willing to give Trump credit for any of his accomplishments without either some qualification or trying to take some of the credit. Have any of the more colorful and deliberately damaging tell-alls by former purported Trump supporters proven to be anything other than overwrought, untrue and self-serving

Is not Coulter now in the bag for DeSantis? Is it possible the real reason Trump needs to be attacked is to stop her boy from falling into single digits? Didn't Nikki just blow by Ron in NH? Funny timing for this little bruhaha, yes?

If DeSantis was leading in the polls, would you be equally suspicious that the Dems wanted to face him in the General with all you insist that implies where Trump is concerned?

Funny how the arrow of truth always points the way you want it to

 

[BugI02]

The AG should recuse himself from an investigation of the President.

You'll excuse me if I don't hold my breath waiting for Garland to do that

This just seems another case of the 'we're better than that' method of slow suicide that is so endemic in conservatives and the west in general. Your opponents do not care and have no fear that you will hold anyone other than your allies to these standards - futilely, I might add because setting a good example in the current reality will not affect anything but your self-esteem

 

[KG1]

Would you say Trump's instincts in that matter proved right or wrong

You'll find my answer to this in a subsequent post to the one you quoted which were both posted prior to yours. Post #6,406 to be exact.

 

[KG1]

And another thing that needs addressing is the notion that I am currently onboard with DeSantis. I once thought of him as a potential viable candidate. I no longer feel that way. I haven't paid any attention to his campaign since it turned into a FUBAR, whereas Coulter continues to support DeSantis. So any attempt to lump me in currently with Coulter is off based.

 

[jamil]

Trump has endorsed Jim Jordan.

No surprise there. I'd rather have Scalise even though he's kinda clad in the establishment. Jordan plays more like he's trying to fund-raise off of youtube clips. I don't know if he actually believes what he's saying/doing. Scalise I think is kinda between MAGA and establishment and would probably be a better unifier.

But he has to push the GOP to change to be more nation/citizen focused. Be the party of individuals. Let Dems be the party of the establishment desperately trying to hang on to power.

 

[jamil]

I looked for a non-lefty biased source for this story; I think that The Washington Times qualifies. I bet that we have a resident expert on INGO who can comment further.

Trump disclosed sensitive nuclear sub info to Australian businessman, report claims

Former President Donald Trump reportedly discussed sensitive information about U.S. nuclear submarines with an Australian member of his club at Mar-a-Lago — an allegation that was shared with special counsel Jack Smith as his team investigates Mr. Trump’s handling of classified information.

www.washingtontimes.com

Hey. He was literally the POTUS! He can declassify anything by whim! Just the mere fact he told something about it demonstrates that he's already declassified it. And no. That's not circular reasoning. Really it's not.

 

[foszoe]

No surprise there. I'd rather have Scalise even though he's kinda clad in the establishment. Jordan plays more like he's trying to fund-raise off of youtube clips. I don't know if he actually believes what he's saying/doing. Scalise I think is kinda between MAGA and establishment and would probably be a better unifier.

But he has to push the GOP to change to be more nation/citizen focused. Be the party of individuals. Let Dems be the party of the establishment desperately trying to hang on to power.

Based on my INGO interactions, I have come to be highly suspicious of anyone from Ohio. I think I would still see Jim as speaker over Steve.

 

[jamil]

And another thing that needs addressing is the notion that I am currently onboard with DeSantis. I once thought of him as a potential viable candidate. I no longer feel that way. I haven't paid any attention to his campaign since it turned into a FUBAR, whereas Coulter continues to support DeSantis. So any attempt to lump me in with Coulter currently is off based.

I think Coulter staying with DeSantis is fine. But I feel like it's a little delusional given the mood of the country. There are two candidates topping the news cycles. That's Trump and Biden. It doesn't look like that will change unless Dems replace Biden. Or someone offs Trump.

Rammy is a little more relevant than DeSantis these days. And he's less relevant than Trump at this point. DeSantis just can't gain traction. In a normal election against normal candidates he'd do fine. With Trump in it with his large personality, DeSantis isn't gonna compete with that.

 

[jamil]

Based on my INGO interactions, I have come to be highly suspicious of anyone from Ohio. I think I would still see Jim as speaker over Steve.

Eh. That was a joke. But I like your enthusiasm.

Kidding aside, I like to hear Jordan "own" Dems. Video shorts with Jordan sound bites have become regular on my Youtube feed. My instincts make me suspicious though. Same with Gaetz. I've learned to be skeptical of people who say things I like hearing. They keep disappointing me when they break character.

 

[Ingomike]

Hey. He was literally the POTUS! He can declassify anything by whim! Just the mere fact he told something about it demonstrates that he's already declassified it. And no. That's not circular reasoning. Really it's not.

That is exactly what several constitutional scholars said when Trump was accused of telling something to the Russians at a meeting. Now post presidency is an interesting question.

This is interesting: “In essence, President Trump is arguing that presidents, even after their terms in office are over, are absolutely immune from criminal prosecutions arising out of their acts in office that fall within the “outer perimeter” of their official responsibilities as president, unless they have first been both impeached and convicted by the House of Representatives and Senate.”

“In Nixon v. Fitzgerald, the Supreme Court ruled that a president has absolute immunity from civil liability for acts within the outer perimeter of his official responsibilities. In short, you cannot sue a former president personally because his official acts harmed you. This is an unquestioned Supreme Court precedent, based on very serious, core separation of powers concerns.”

4 Things To Know About Trump's Presidential Immunity Defense

Trump is arguing that presidents, even after their term, are absolutely immune from criminal prosecutions arising out of their acts in office.

thefederalist.com

 

[jamil]

That is exactly what several constitutional scholars said when Trump was accused of telling something to the Russians at a meeting. Now post presidency is an interesting question.

This is interesting: “In essence, President Trump is arguing that presidents, even after their terms in office are over, are absolutely immune from criminal prosecutions arising out of their acts in office that fall within the “outer perimeter” of their official responsibilities as president, unless they have first been both impeached and convicted by the House of Representatives and Senate.”

“In Nixon v. Fitzgerald, the Supreme Court ruled that a president has absolute immunity from civil liability for acts within the outer perimeter of his official responsibilities. In short, you cannot sue a former president personally because his official acts harmed you. This is an unquestioned Supreme Court precedent, based on very serious, core separation of powers concerns.”

4 Things To Know About Trump's Presidential Immunity Defense

Trump is arguing that presidents, even after their term, are absolutely immune from criminal prosecutions arising out of their acts in office.

thefederalist.com

Hey, I'm not saying that Trump should be prosecuted for it. But this whim thing is just a bit out there. IMHO.

 

[Ingomike]

Hey, I'm not saying that Trump should be prosecuted for it. But this whim thing is just a bit out there. IMHO.

I think it upsets your sense of balance, I do not think this stuff is really taught about presidential powers.

A simple question, just whom or what entity the ultimate authority over an administrations documents and classifications?