• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

“Trump believes there’s a coup,”

trixare4kids said:
Well thank you schooling us, but what you wrote above hasn't a thing to do with what I opined above.
The subject is whether Trump thinks this is a coup. It is.

ETA: Furthermore, it's telling how some posters think that subverting/thwarting a duly elected president is acceptable.
Click to expand...

Trump can call it what he wants. The term 'coup d'etat' involves the violent overthrow of a government, not trying to minimize the damage done by the simpleton-in-chief.
 
Harshaw said:
If you read back in the conversation, you will find that the point of contention was whether or not it was happening.
Click to expand...

Oh. Well that's boring.

The letter say's it is. The past reporting of known individuals say it is a continual effort. Two books now capture the environment and push it's happening. Clearly, a lot of people in his Administration, probably across departments, are actively keeping him from completely drowning or pushing the U.S. into irreversible actions.
 
bearpoker said:
What is happening is that some of the president's actions are being thwarted. What is not happening is a coup, either on the part of his own staffers, or on the "deep state", or any other figment of the fevered right wing imagination.
Click to expand...

Yes, some of his actions are being thwarted, which is what I said.

Justifications of it are irrelevant to whether or not it's happening.

And I specifically called the "deep state" stuff "paranoia."
 
bearpoker said:
What is happening is that some of the president's actions are being thwarted. What is not happening is a coup, either on the part of his own staffers, or on the "deep state", or any other figment of the fevered right wing imagination.
Click to expand...

Dude, maybe you don't know what the word thwart means... but thwarting the president's agenda is the very definition of a soft coup.
The people voted for Trump's agenda, his campaign promises to become policy and "senior officials" are preventing this from going forward according to the NY-OP and Woodward's book. Is this okay with you that they are?
 
MSgt said:
Oh. Well that's boring.

The letter say's it is. The past reporting of known individuals say it is a continual effort. Two books now capture the environment and push it's happening. Clearly, a lot of people in his Administration, probably across departments, are actively keeping him from completely drowning or pushing the U.S. into irreversible actions.
Click to expand...

Thank God!

I'm not comfortable with this. It's wrong that unelected staffers are making these decisions. I don't like it, but it's better than Trump unleashed on the country.
 
Harshaw said:
Yes, some of his actions are being thwarted, which is what I said.

Justifications of it are irrelevant to whether or not it's happening.

And I specifically called the "deep state" stuff "paranoia."
Click to expand...

My point is that thwarting the presidents more destructive actions doesn't amount to a coup.
 
Grand Mal said:
Trump can call it what he wants. The term 'coup d'etat' involves the violent overthrow of a government, not trying to minimize the damage done by the simpleton-in-chief.
Click to expand...

Where does the O/P, the opinion piece from Vanity Fair, (not a major news source btw) say that Trump has called this a coup d'etat?
“Trump believes there’s a coup,” a person familiar with his thinking said."
 
bearpoker said:
My point is that thwarting the presidents more destructive actions doesn't amount to a coup.
Click to expand...

It's a soft coup IF in fact thwarting is going on... Unless we have the identity of the alleged senior officials who purportedly have thwarted, we won't know though.
ETA: According to you, define his "destructive actions'?
 
There are supposed to be 3 equal branches of government. It was intended to be our unique form of government, one that insures the nation will self governed under the Constitution.

There is a mentally incapable man in the White House who has constantly attacked and attempted to undermine the Judicial Branch. As much as I can't stand Sessions I'd have to say that the DOJ is the only branch standing up to Trump (at times). The Legislative Branch under the GOP has decided not to challenge the President especially in regards to his often unhinged speech and inexplicable behavior.

As Congress has tacitly approved Trump's often concerning and more frequently bazaar behavior it has in effect relinquished its responsibility to perform as an equal branch in the federal government's system of checks and balances. If democracy existed in some form before Congress has put an end to it.

Who is left to take up the slack for the People? What if, as many believe, Donald Trump is unfit for office? What if he is fit for office? What steps has Congress taken to determine Trump's ability to function in his job? None.

It should not be that a group of people in the Executive Branch have determined that the job of checking the power of the President has come down to them. It has and they have. It shouldn't be that way. That was never intended and it damn sure isn't in the Constitution.

IF the self serving Congress had the balls to do their jobs there would/should be no reason to be concerned about an internal coup. Ironic isn't it? Congress passing bills the majority of the nation does not want. Congress supporting a Gonzo President who refuses to represent all the people and the President and Congress concerned about an internal coup. Compared to what?
 
bearpoker said:
Thank God!

I'm not comfortable with this. It's wrong that unelected staffers are making these decisions. I don't like it, but it's better than Trump unleashed on the country.
Click to expand...

Define what you mean by "Trump unleashed on the country?" And also explain why unelected staffers should be making these decisions. Sounds like you are comfortable with this.
 
Greenbeard said:
No, we didn't. That's not how presidential elections work. Trump's election is the starkest reminder of that in American history.
Click to expand...

You didn't but the people did too vote for his agenda via the electoral college, the only process we have in place historically.
Are you saying that the president is not really the president? Who should be the president then? We don't elect presidents by the popular vote.
 
bearpoker said:
It does if his actions could result in WWIII.
Click to expand...

- You mean like unnecessarily moving an embassy to Jerusalem for ideological purposes?

- Or ending an Iran deal that allows it to go ahead and develop nukes, even with Russia already established as the nuclear Wal-Mart of the Middle East?

- Or suspending TTIP for a year, despite Russia's exponential geoeconomic/geopolitical influences across Europe?

- Or doing nothing as Russia conducts military adventures in the Middle East, while annexing the territory of its neighbors?

- Or crushing the TPP deal, thereby leaving our Asian allies to fend for themselves against a growing Chinese geoeconomic/geopolitical presence?


Clearly, with Trump systematically removing American influence in virtually every region on the planet, while encouraging our global opponents to fill voids, there is nothing to be concerned about. Now, what about those football players and their kneeling?!
 
trixare4kids said:
You didn't but the people did too vote for his agenda via the electoral college, the only process we have in place historically.
Are you saying that the president is not really the president? Who should be the president then? We don't elect presidents by the popular vote.
Click to expand...

Of course he's the president. He won the electoral vote.

What he lost was the vote of the people, the plurality of whom voted for someone else's agenda.
 
Risky Thicket said:
There are supposed to be 3 equal branches of government. It was intended to be our unique form of government, one that insures the nation will self governed under the Constitution.

There is a mentally incapable man in the White House who has constantly attacked and attempted to undermine the Judicial Branch. As much as I can't stand Sessions I'd have to say that the DOJ is the only branch standing up to Trump (at times). The Legislative Branch under the GOP has decided not to challenge the President especially in regards to his often unhinged speech and inexplicable behavior.

As Congress has tacitly approved Trump's often concerning and more frequently bazaar behavior it has in effect relinquished its responsibility to perform as an equal branch in the federal government's system of checks and balances. If democracy existed in some form before Congress has put an end to it.

Who is left to take up the slack for the People? What if, as many believe, Donald Trump is unfit for office? What if he is fit for office? What steps has Congress taken to determine Trump's ability to function in his job? None.

It should not be that a group of people in the Executive Branch have determined that the job of checking the power of the President has come down to them. It has and they have. It shouldn't be that way. That was never intended and it damn sure isn't in the Constitution.

IF the self serving Congress had the balls to do their jobs there would/should be no reason to be concerned about an internal coup. Ironic isn't it? Congress passing bills the majority of the nation does not want. Congress supporting a Gonzo President who refuses to represent all the people and the President and Congress concerned about an internal coup. Compared to what?
Click to expand...


There is no proof Trump has demonstrated what you call bizarre behavior or needs to be checked by congress.
It is, however, wishful thinking by his resisters, and makes a for a great left wing, anti-Trump narrative though. ;)


Like the President's agenda or not, and it's clear that you don't, the people who voted for him, for the most part, still support his agenda.
 
Greenbeard said:
Of course he's the president. He won the electoral vote.

What he lost was the vote of the people, the plurality of whom voted for someone else's agenda.
Click to expand...

So what?

Need a tissue?
 
trixare4kids said:
It's a soft coup IF in fact thwarting is going on... Unless we have the identity of the alleged senior officials who purportedly have thwarted, we won't know though.
ETA: According to you, define his "destructive actions'?
Click to expand...

Breaking the trade agreement with South Korea would be a destructive action.

Now lets define "soft coup".
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Soft_coup
Soft coup is a coup d'état without the use of violence, but based on a conspiracy or plot that has as its objective the taking of the State power by partially or wholly illegal means, in order to operate an exchange of political leadership - and in some cases also of the current institutional order.

These people are not trying to take over the government or remove Trump from office. This is not a coup at all not soft, not hard, not medium. It's not a coup.
 
Harshaw said:
Insofar as the op-ed evidences that there ARE people on the inside working against him, that much is true. How can you say it isn't, unless the op-ed was a fabrication?

That doesn't make all the "deep state" paranoia true. But it does show at least that.
Click to expand...
I thought Trumpco and customers said that op-ed was pure poppycock invented whole cloth, no basis in reality.
 
The Fat Orange Pig is proving over and over he is insane, much like all mad dictators he sees everyone round them as conspirators.
 
trixare4kids said:
There is no proof Trump has demonstrated what you call bizarre behavior or needs to be checked by congress.
Click to expand...

Indeed there is no proof but certainly among real Republicans and even Trump Republicans there is growing warranted suspicion.

Like the President's agenda or not, and it's clear that you don't, the people who voted for him, for the most part, still support his agenda.
Click to expand...

And you know Trump is mentally competent, how?
 
bearpoker said:
Thank God!

I'm not comfortable with this. It's wrong that unelected staffers are making these decisions. I don't like it, but it's better than Trump unleashed on the country.
Click to expand...

It made me uncomfortable at first too. But then I realized that this is not unprecedented. There have been times when the un-elected have had to step back and recognize when a President was undermining the very principles of our democracy (A. Johnson, F. Roosevelt, Nixon).

Of course, I also considered that this whole letter thing is a sham, created by Trump and his closest circle, to generate more of a "deep state" narrative against Trump.
 
MSgt said:
It made me uncomfortable at first too. But then I realized that this is not unprecedented. There have been times when the un-elected have had to step back and recognize when a President was undermining the very principles of our democracy (A. Johnson, F. Roosevelt, Nixon).

Of course, I also considered that this whole letter thing is a sham, created by Trump and his closest circle, to generate more of a "deep state" narrative against Trump.
Click to expand...

My theory as to the op-ed writers motive is that it was meant to reassure concerned Republicans and Independents that they wouldn't let Trump burn down the country. Meaning that it's still okay to vote Republican in the midterm and 2020.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom