Jump to content

Should Trump go to jail?


Recommended Posts

Hypothetical -

- Trump is impeached and convicted

or

- Trump is not re-elected

Should charges be brought and, if convicted, should he spend time in jail?

recent poll of likely Dem primary voters has a majority “lock him up” result. 

Social consequences either way could get ugly. 

https://www.axios.com/impeachment-poll-democrats-early-voting-states-1b9f4a55-4583-4c0f-9102-0e6f49970baf.html

Link to post
Share on other sites

I vote for the Rule of Law to prevail, devoid of any bias.  But if things start to look really bad for the Republicans and Trump can be convinced to resign, they will probably do a Nixon repeat. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

I don’t know. 

If he was found to have abandoned the Kurds because Erdogan threatened his towers? If he was under the sway of Russian Kompromat and acted according his handlers instructions as delivered to him in the Oval Office or during a private meeting with Putin (or some other such communication). 

Essentially, if he blatantly betrayed America then I would stand back. America will want to treat him the way we used to treat traitors.

Getting caught trying to profit off the presidency for personal gain? He better start thinking about his terms of resignation soon rather than wait for the axe to fall.

But all those state crimes? I don’t know if there is a real legitimate way to stop all the investigations underway without undermining our claim to “the rule of law.”

I’d be open to suggestions, though. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

"The Art of the Deal" signaled some serious lawbreaking, long ago. He should have faced the appropriate incarceration then, IMO.

What took the SDNY so long?

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm a little nervous about starting a tradition of prosecuting Presidents after their term. On one hand, it would take us one step closer to banana republic status and discourage good candidates from running or, in the Roman fashion, encourage stealing enough while in office to pay for the defense (or appoint specific judges to help in the defense).  On the other, we have a criminal (alleged) in office in part BECAUSE we let Bush and Cheney off on charges of lying about the reasons for the Iraq invasion (as well as GW's sale of Arbusto but that's small potatoes).  The inability of DC to function while a trial of this nature would cause is a another concern.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

You have plenty of private citizen stuff to prosecute Trump for - just forget about the illegal shit he did as POTUS and hit him for all the shit he did as Donald Trump, private citizen.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, phillysailor said:

But Sloops, could we guarantee an ex prez a unbiased jury of his peers? Could we assure ourselves that prosecuting him wasn’t revenge, or otherwise enabled or motivated by his years as POTUS?

It's going to be tough finding a dozen live ex-presidents to form a jury.

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
34 minutes ago, learningJ24 said:

I'm a little nervous about starting a tradition of prosecuting Presidents after their term. On one hand, it would take us one step closer to banana republic status and discourage good candidates from running or, in the Roman fashion, encourage stealing enough while in office to pay for the defense (or appoint specific judges to help in the defense).  On the other, we have a criminal (alleged) in office in part BECAUSE we let Bush and Cheney off on charges of lying about the reasons for the Iraq invasion (as well as GW's sale of Arbusto but that's small potatoes).  The inability of DC to function while a trial of this nature would cause is a another concern.

I am too, but incarcerating the opposition was one of the primary planks of Trump's 2016 campaign.  The threat has been repeated this campaign.   Maybe we should waive our concern this one time, in respect for President Trump's professed preferences.  

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Sol Rosenberg said:

Anyone should go to jail if they are charged, tried and convicted of a crime. 

Ahh, but how can you convict someone, if you can’t investigate, because you haven’t convicted them yet? (Doggy rules of investigatory procedure)

Link to post
Share on other sites
32 minutes ago, Ishmael said:

It's going to be tough finding a dozen live ex-presidents to form a jury.

Nah, ya just gotta find crooked Republicans. A dime a dozen those folks.

Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Sol Rosenberg said:

Anyone should go to jail if they are charged, tried and convicted of a crime. 

Depending on how rich and/or powerful they are, of course.  We have to protect our royalty.

Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, dacapo said:

I just want him to meet his cell mate Bubba for a few hours.  Karma 

Trump, Rudy and their Home Alone guys, all in one cell.  And no gold toilet.  Add a live feed and make it Trump's latest show.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, garuda3 said:

send him to marine boot camp, now that would be Karma

Nah, I vote for Gitmo. A little enhanced interrogation might refresh his memory and get his mind right.

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, SloopJonB said:

You have plenty of private citizen stuff to prosecute Trump for - just forget about the illegal shit he did as POTUS and hit him for all the shit he did as Donald Trump, private citizen.

You'd need to neuter him financially to get the women to talk.

so..start with his tax debts.

Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, SloopJonB said:

Do you think Manafort has learned the prison practice of knocking out their front teeth so they can't bite?

he does look jacked.  finally found the time to really work on his pecs and glutes.  Or someone else did!

Link to post
Share on other sites

To the OP...... Probably not. Just because then it would mean that other people who are still in office would have to go, and then we'd have a vacuum, and nature abhors a vacuum.... I think it would not be unacceptable to deport him to ....... Say Nicaragua, or El Salvador, Or Nigeria...... With no hope of ever regaining entry to the USA, and having all of his assets (including Ivanka) denied.....

Link to post
Share on other sites

The demon spawn...... Hopefully the good will overwhelm them.

Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, Jules said:

I vote for the Rule of Law to prevail, devoid of any bias.  But if things start to look really bad for the Republicans and Trump can be convinced to resign, they will probably do a Nixon repeat. 

The pardons can only be for Federal crimes. President Trump is likely worried about the SDNY investigation, as it will expose his finances. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
30 minutes ago, SloopJonB said:

Why would he be afraid of that?

He promised to provide them once the IRS audit was complete didn't he?

And, that promise is worth the same as every other promise he’s made. 

Ask Ivana and Marla about his ability keep a promise. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, Bus Driver said:

The pardons can only be for Federal crimes. President Trump is likely worried about the SDNY investigation, as it will expose his finances. 

Nixon committed crimes.  They chose not to prosecute him for those crimes.  They, even the SDNY, could choose to do the same as part of an agreement for him to resign, and if I were writing the agreement, remove himself completely and permanently from engaging in political discussions or comments of any kind.  If he breaks that agreement, let the trial and punishment phase begin.

Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Jules said:

Nixon committed crimes.  They chose not to prosecute him for those crimes.  They, even the SDNY, could choose to do the same as part of an agreement for him to resign, and if I were writing the agreement, remove himself completely and permanently from engaging in political discussions or comments of any kind.  If he breaks that agreement, let the trial and punishment phase begin.

Didn't Ford pardon Nixon?

Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, bridhb said:

Didn't Ford pardon Nixon?

That was an unconditional pardon for anything and everything Nixon might have committed against the US.  I was referring to the House and Senate agreeing not to proceed with impeachment and a trial in the Senate.  Ford protected Nixon from everyone else.

Link to post
Share on other sites
34 minutes ago, Jules said:

Nixon committed crimes.  They chose not to prosecute him for those crimes.  They, even the SDNY, could choose to do the same as part of an agreement for him to resign, and if I were writing the agreement, remove himself completely and permanently from engaging in political discussions or comments of any kind.  If he breaks that agreement, let the trial and punishment phase begin.

All that would do is delay and obfuscate a prosecution as we've seen that the President is incapable of doing this.  In fact, it would play into his hands as it would introduce delaying tactics about whether he broke the agreement into the issue. This would just enhance his "declaim, deny, distort, distract, delay, obstruct, dissemble, deny, ad infinitum strategy. He's old and has the cash to outlast most opponents. The glacial pace of our justice system when dealing with the well heeled is famous.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hang him from a lamp post.

I hate war. But usually wars are fought after a bunch of high ranking officials get together and agree. I suppose it lends some legitimacy to the action.<_<

Trump decided all on his own (with help from another foreign leader) to do something that has directly  resulted in the deaths of hundreds.

Hang him from a lamp post ..He's a war criminal.

This may not be a technically legal position, but I'm still right.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Shortforbob said:

Hang him from a lamp post.

I hate war. But usually wars are fought after a bunch of high ranking officials get together and agree. I suppose it lends some legitimacy to the action.<_<

Trump decided all on his own (with help from another foreign leader) to do something that has directly  resulted in the deaths of hundreds.

Hang him from a lamp post ..He's a war criminal.

This may not be a technically legal position, but I'm still right.

You've got this wrong for many reasons. If he's a "war criminal" it is the drone strikes given his many utterances that he'd like to kill members of terrorists families combined with reducing restrictions on when pilots can fire that would mark him as such. But that is as much a condemnation of American policy over 10-15 years as it is a condemnation of Trump. We are all painted by that brush, so there'd have to be a lot of room left for more nooses on that lamppost. 

His action in Syria amount to running in the face of the enemy, and it happened because he didn't prepare for a phone call with Erdogan, and ignored months of warnings from his advisors. He likes to think his gut tells him how to conduct foreign policy better than the experts can, and this is a wakeup call for our government that we cannot entrust our future to his dyspepsia. He hasn't killed thousands this way, he's simply giving in to those who likely will.

You're also not right from a cultural perspective, since by striking him down he would become more powerful than you can possibly imagine. There is an ugly undercurrent of resentment and hatred for liberals that we recognize in monster trucks, dark tinted muscle cars and Carhart jackets. They've got to be informed why this man is a threat to their love of ARMY and the flag, not given a martyr to rally round.

Maybe its where you're starting from, but you're upside down on this. Trump has to be seen as unhinged & pathetic: punishment then won't matter because he will have lost his grip on the balls of these "men", and they'll abandon his Twitterverse at lightspeed.

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Jules said:

Nixon committed crimes.  They chose not to prosecute him for those crimes.  They, even the SDNY, could choose to do the same as part of an agreement for him to resign, and if I were writing the agreement, remove himself completely and permanently from engaging in political discussions or comments of any kind.  If he breaks that agreement, let the trial and punishment phase begin.

President Ford granted Richard Nixon a "full and unconditional pardon for any crimes that he might have committed against the United States as president."  Pretty sure that is in regard to federal prosecution.  President Trump is under investigation for possible state crimes.  AFAIK, a federal pardon does not cover that.  Now, a deal could be struck, using possible state crime prosecution, to "encourage" President Trump to resign.  But, Cyrus Vance can do what he wants.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Bus Driver said:

President Ford granted Richard Nixon a "full and unconditional pardon for any crimes that he might have committed against the United States as president."  Pretty sure that is in regard to federal prosecution.  President Trump is under investigation for possible state crimes.  AFAIK, a federal pardon does not cover that.  Now, a deal could be struck, using possible state crime prosecution, to "encourage" President Trump to resign.  But, Cyrus Vance can do what he wants.

But we know the first order of the day will be to protect the Office of President.  So once it's a foregone conclusion that Trump will be removed from office, they will first try to get him to resign.  But we also know Trump doesn't have the reasoning capacity needed to conclude it's best to resign, his ego will be screaming at him, "No fucking way!"  

One thing for certain, it will be interesting to see which side of Trump wins that argument. 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Jules said:

But we know the first order of the day will be to protect the Office of President.  So once it's a foregone conclusion that Trump will be removed from office, they will first try to get him to resign.  But we also know Trump doesn't have the reasoning capacity needed to conclude it's best to resign, his ego will be screaming at him, "No fucking way!"  

One thing for certain, it will be interesting to see which side of Trump wins that argument. 

I envision him becoming more and more like cornered rat.  He will become increasingly more erratic, impulsive and destructive. 

Much like a spoiled toddler, he will try and destroy anything and everything he can, before he's removed. 

Desperation is a nasty thing.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Chess! Trump should go to Yale! He should be taught some manners, and maybe a little bit of History!

 I had a niece who was in Yale.... 8 years. And when she came out she was a fellow.... When My sister heard the news she cried for a week!

Link to post
Share on other sites

The simple fact is Gropenfurher will be a disruptive and expensive entity until the day he dies. 
 

As his doctor has made it quite clear the man, except for nagging bone spurs, is the healthiest big fat slob ever to waddle onntge planet, his continued disruptions will probably go on for many decades. 
in fact , it is likely the states will amend the constitution so Gropenfuhrer can serve multiple terms.....

or at least until the Kurds are entirely wiped from the face of the planet 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
47 minutes ago, Bus Driver said:

impulsive and destructive. 

That’s the scary part. Let’s hope the Veep and Cabinet ate up to the task if it gets too scary. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Bus Driver said:

President Ford granted Richard Nixon a "full and unconditional pardon for any crimes that he might have committed against the United States as president."  Pretty sure that is in regard to federal prosecution.

Exactly - Nixon was always in political life - AFAIK from the time he was a young man he never worked outside the federal political sphere except when he ran for Governor of Cali.

For example, he was never a crooked scumbag property developer.

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Bus Driver said:

I envision him becoming more and more like cornered rat.  He will become increasingly more erratic, impulsive and destructive. 

Much like a spoiled toddler, he will try and destroy anything and everything he can, before he's removed. 

 

Going to be a tough call knowing when that starts.

Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, phillysailor said:

You've got this wrong for many reasons. If he's a "war criminal" it is the drone strikes given his many utterances that he'd like to kill members of terrorists families combined with reducing restrictions on when pilots can fire that would mark him as such. But that is as much a condemnation of American policy over 10-15 years as it is a condemnation of Trump. We are all painted by that brush, so there'd have to be a lot of room left for more nooses on that lamppost. 

His action in Syria amount to running in the face of the enemy, and it happened because he didn't prepare for a phone call with Erdogan, and ignored months of warnings from his advisors. He likes to think his gut tells him how to conduct foreign policy better than the experts can, and this is a wakeup call for our government that we cannot entrust our future to his dyspepsia. He hasn't killed thousands this way, he's simply giving in to those who likely will.

You're also not right from a cultural perspective, since by striking him down he would become more powerful than you can possibly imagine. There is an ugly undercurrent of resentment and hatred for liberals that we recognize in monster trucks, dark tinted muscle cars and Carhart jackets. They've got to be informed why this man is a threat to their love of ARMY and the flag, not given a martyr to rally round.

Maybe its where you're starting from, but you're upside down on this. Trump has to be seen as unhinged & pathetic: punishment then won't matter because he will have lost his grip on the balls of these "men", and they'll abandon his Twitterverse at lightspeed.

A Question.

If a man in charge of a dam had full knowledge that pushing a certain button would likely cause hundreds to drown in the valley, but against advice from people he appointed to give advice, pushed it anyway because his "Gut" told him it would be fine..and hundreds of people drowned, Would their be an inquiry? would he be tried for murder? and would he likely be found guilty?

I don't see how the POTUS is any different. Responsibility comes with authority.

And YES..if there were any natural justice in the world there'd be a lot of decorated lamp posts.

Probably is were I'm starting from. We have faster and easier ways of removing corrupt and vicious heads of state.

Link to post
Share on other sites

This is quite an interesting overview, with a truly optomistic hope that Trump is on the way out.

Quote

There will not be an article of impeachment that includes Donald Trump's latest decisions regarding Syria among his alleged high crimes and misdemeanours. But the strategic disaster unfolding following his capitulation to Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan could well mark the beginning of the end of the Trump presidency.

Trump will survive impeachment - the Republican-controlled Senate is unlikely to convict him - although he continues to be his own worst enemy. The president believes the call with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky was "perfect." The transcript the White House released presents strong evidence a crime was committed.

But Ukraine has already become a domestic political Rorschach test - there was a quid pro quo but many Trump supporters still choose to see a benign image.

Syria is different. It's not something he can blame on Barack Obama or House Democrats. Notwithstanding the administration's intent to punish Turkey with fresh sanctions, this is a crisis largely of Trump's making.

To Trump, his decision to withdraw US forces from the contested areas along the border between Syria and Turkey is consistent with his electoral mandate, extracting US forces from complex and costly Middle East conflicts.

As he tweeted, "it is time for us to get out of these ridiculous Endless Wars," adding with capitalized emphasis, "WE WILL FIGHT WHERE IT IS TO OUR BENEFIT, AND ONLY FIGHT TO WIN."

While it's tempting to ignore his many erratic and contradictory statements and tweets, in this case, Erdogan read Trump like a book, and played him like a fiddle.

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-50049421

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Shortforbob said:

A Question.

If a man in charge of a dam had full knowledge that pushing a certain button would likely cause hundreds to drown in the valley, but against advice from people he appointed to give advice, pushed it anyway because his "Gut" told him it would be fine..and hundreds of people drowned, Would their be an inquiry? would he be tried for murder? and would he likely be found guilty?

I don't see how the POTUS is any different. Responsibility comes with authority.

And YES..if there were any natural justice in the world there'd be a lot of decorated lamp posts.

Probably is were I'm starting from. We have faster and easier ways of removing corrupt and vicious heads of state.

Your dam scenario is far too controlled a situation to be considered analogous to a scant number of US troops in harms way acting as a tripwire between frenemies and the murderous dictator of the country whose lands they are helping a rebel group to occupy. In your scenario there is no risk to the operator, and in fact there is only benefit from doing nothing. There are few operating costs to continued operations, and there are no other mechanisms which could hold back the water.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Shortforbob said:

A Question.

If a man in charge of a dam had full knowledge that pushing a certain button would likely cause hundreds to drown in the valley, but against advice from people he appointed to give advice, pushed it anyway because his "Gut" told him it would be fine..and hundreds of people drowned, Would their be an inquiry? would he be tried for murder? and would he likely be found guilty?

I don't see how the POTUS is any different. Responsibility comes with authority.

And YES..if there were any natural justice in the world there'd be a lot of decorated lamp posts.

Probably is were I'm starting from. We have faster and easier ways of removing corrupt and vicious heads of state.

The Prez has some blanket immunity from decisions made as Prez. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 10/16/2019 at 10:33 AM, phillysailor said:

Your dam scenario is far too controlled a situation to be considered analogous to a scant number of US troops in harms way acting as a tripwire between frenemies and the murderous dictator of the country whose lands they are helping a rebel group to occupy. In your scenario there is no risk to the operator, and in fact there is only benefit from doing nothing. There are few operating costs to continued operations, and there are no other mechanisms which could hold back the water.

But you leave out the phone call he received which indicated that if he didn't open the sluice gates himself, then the dam would get blown up.

He was in a terrible strategic situation, thanks to Hillary's warmongering idiocy and his own inept cowtowing to the swamp which lusts for regime change. He either wears a bit of egg and bails on the Kurds, or he was going to get caught up in a land war he was not prepared for. Both Syria and Turkey were going to be coming heavy. With tanks. They have no air superiority. The americans were only going to be roadkill in this scenario.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Battlecheese said:

But you leave out the phone call he received which indicated that if he didn't open the sluice gates himself, then the dam would get blown up.

He was in a terrible strategic situation, thanks to Hillary's warmongering idiocy and his own inept cowtowing to the swamp which lusts for regime change. He either wears a bit of egg and bails on the Kurds, or he was going to get caught up in a land war he was not prepared for. Both Syria and Turkey were going to be coming heavy. With tanks. They have no air superiority. The americans were only going to be roadkill in this scenario.

If you think Turkey was going to take on America and win, you're smoking crack. Hardly a state in which to discuss military tactics or strategy. Sober up, you fool. "Battlecheese" sounds about right.

Trump was right when he said we could smash their economy, and if we wanted to we could smash their troops, too. The point is, they are "allies" and there was no reason this decision had to be made so abruptly, as if we were scared & at without options at the point of a gun. 

A couple of phone calls, 18 hours, and those spec op types on the ground would be directing the destruction of those Turkish tanks of which you are so fearful. Get those Syrian forces out in the open and watch the metal rain. Sorry, but this is exactly the situation in which our operators thrive. No anguished decisions of "can we kill the guy we are 95% sure is a bad guy"... tanks and aircraft in the open would become a Turkey shoot pun intended.

Calling spec ops types "road kill" in this scenario is pretty pathetic. I think they'd beg to differ. Actually, they'd probably just spit on you and walk away without saying a thing.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, phillysailor said:

If you think Turkey was going to take on America and win, you're smoking crack. Hardly a state in which to discuss military tactics or strategy. Sober up, you fool. "Battlecheese" sounds about right.

Trump was right when he said we could smash their economy, and if we wanted to we could smash their troops, too. The point is, they are "allies" and there was no reason this decision had to be made so abruptly, as if we were scared & at without options at the point of a gun. 

A couple of phone calls, 18 hours, and those spec op types on the ground would be directing the destruction of those Turkish tanks of which you are so fearful. Get those Syrian forces out in the open and watch the metal rain. Sorry, but this is exactly the situation in which our operators thrive. No anguished decisions of "can we kill the guy we are 95% sure is a bad guy"... tanks and aircraft in the open would become a Turkey shoot pun intended.

Calling spec ops types "road kill" in this scenario is pretty pathetic. I think they'd beg to differ. Actually, they'd probably just spit on you and walk away without saying a thing.

I note you seem to presume the americans have air superiority.

Link to post
Share on other sites
22 hours ago, Battlecheese said:

I note you seem to presume the americans have air superiority.

I do believe that within a short period of time we could contest the airspace over our troops, at great cost to any self-declared enemy. I also know that we don't require airspace domination to conduct strikes on forces which operate in that area. Certainly many of our best air assets in the area are currently in Incirlik, and therefore theoretically threatened by that nation if it came to a shooting war. But that's the thing about starting a fight against us. It's generally the first step to a very bad year, and so is carefully avoided. 

Unless, that is, we cut and run before a shot is even fired. Then we just look like a paper tiger.

All of this could have been avoided with more emphasis on a negotiated withdrawal and a longer timeline, but Trump signaled this treachery ten months ago, when he admitted that the Kurds were of very low priority to him, and perhaps as far back as 2015 when he stated that he was quite biased on the issue of Turkey, since he profits off real estate there.  

I note you ignore our CIC's glaring conflict of interest which affected his decision to pull troops out of Syria.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Not only is Trump awarding his own company federal contracts (Trump Doral and the G7), it appears that insider trading may have led to billions of illegal stock trades capitalizing on insider knowledge of presidential decisions, according to an article in Vanity Fair.

"In the last 10 minutes of trading at the Chicago Mercantile Exchange on Friday, September 13, someone got very lucky. That’s when he or she, or a group of people, sold short 120,000 “S&P e-minis”—electronically traded futures contracts linked to the Standard & Poor’s 500 stock index—when the index was trading around 3010. The time was 3:50 p.m. in New York; it was nearing midnight in Tehran. A few hours later, drones attacked a large swath of Saudi Arabia’s oil infrastructure, choking off production in the country and sending oil prices soaring. By the time the CME next opened, for pretrading on Sunday night, the S&P index had fallen 30 points, giving that very fortunate trader, or traders, a quick $180 million profit.

It was not an isolated occurrence. Three days earlier, in the last 10 minutes of trading, someone bought 82,000 S&P e-minis when the index was trading at 2969. That was nearly 4 a.m. on September 11 in Beijing, where a few hours later, the Chinese government announced that it would lift tariffs on a range of American-made products. As has been the typical reaction in the U.S. stock markets as the trade war with China chugs on without any perceptible logic, when the news about a potential resolution of it seems positive, stock markets go up, and when the news about the trade war appears negative, they go down.

The news was viewed positively. The S&P index moved swiftly on September 11 to 2996, up nearly 30 points. That same day, President Donald Trump said he would postpone tariffs on some Chinese goods, and the S&P index moved to 3016, or up 47 points since the fortunate person bought the 82,000 e-minis just before the market closed on September 10. Since a one-point movement, up or down, in an e-mini contract is worth $50, a 47-point movement up in a day was worth $2,350 per contract. If you were the lucky one who bought the 82,000 e-mini contracts, well, then you were sitting on a one-day profit of roughly $190 million.

...But these wins were peanuts compared to the money made by a trader, or group of traders, who bought 420,000 September e-minis in the last 30 minutes of trading on June 28. That was some 40% of the day’s trading volume in September e-minis—making it a trade that could not easily be ignored. By then, President Trump was already in Osaka, Japan—14 hours ahead of Chicago—and on his way to a roughly hour-long meeting with China’s President Xi Jinping as part of the G20 summit. On Saturday in Osaka, after the market had closed in Chicago, Trump emerged from his meeting with Xi and announced that the intermittent trade talks were “back on track.” The following week was a good one in the stock market, thanks to the Trump announcement. On Thursday, June 27, the S&P 500 index stood at about 2915; a week or so later, it was just below 3000, a gain of 84 points, or $4,200 per e-mini contract. Whoever bought the 420,000 e-minis on June 28 had made a handsome profit of nearly $1.8 billion.

 In the last 10 minutes of trading on Friday, August 23, as the markets were roiling in the face of more bad trade news, someone bought 386,000 September e-minis. Three days later, Trump lied about getting a call from China to restart the trade talks, and the S&P 500 index shot up nearly 80 points. The potential profit on the trade was more than $1.5 billion."

Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, phillysailor said:

Not only is Trump awarding his own company federal contracts (Trump Doral and the G7), it appears that insider trading may have led to billions of illegal stock trades capitalizing on insider knowledge of presidential decisions, according to an article in Vanity Fair.

"In the last 10 minutes of trading at the Chicago Mercantile Exchange on Friday, September 13, someone got very lucky. That’s when he or she, or a group of people, sold short 120,000 “S&P e-minis”—electronically traded futures contracts linked to the Standard & Poor’s 500 stock index—when the index was trading around 3010. The time was 3:50 p.m. in New York; it was nearing midnight in Tehran. A few hours later, drones attacked a large swath of Saudi Arabia’s oil infrastructure, choking off production in the country and sending oil prices soaring. By the time the CME next opened, for pretrading on Sunday night, the S&P index had fallen 30 points, giving that very fortunate trader, or traders, a quick $180 million profit.

It was not an isolated occurrence. Three days earlier, in the last 10 minutes of trading, someone bought 82,000 S&P e-minis when the index was trading at 2969. That was nearly 4 a.m. on September 11 in Beijing, where a few hours later, the Chinese government announced that it would lift tariffs on a range of American-made products. As has been the typical reaction in the U.S. stock markets as the trade war with China chugs on without any perceptible logic, when the news about a potential resolution of it seems positive, stock markets go up, and when the news about the trade war appears negative, they go down.

The news was viewed positively. The S&P index moved swiftly on September 11 to 2996, up nearly 30 points. That same day, President Donald Trump said he would postpone tariffs on some Chinese goods, and the S&P index moved to 3016, or up 47 points since the fortunate person bought the 82,000 e-minis just before the market closed on September 10. Since a one-point movement, up or down, in an e-mini contract is worth $50, a 47-point movement up in a day was worth $2,350 per contract. If you were the lucky one who bought the 82,000 e-mini contracts, well, then you were sitting on a one-day profit of roughly $190 million.

...But these wins were peanuts compared to the money made by a trader, or group of traders, who bought 420,000 September e-minis in the last 30 minutes of trading on June 28. That was some 40% of the day’s trading volume in September e-minis—making it a trade that could not easily be ignored. By then, President Trump was already in Osaka, Japan—14 hours ahead of Chicago—and on his way to a roughly hour-long meeting with China’s President Xi Jinping as part of the G20 summit. On Saturday in Osaka, after the market had closed in Chicago, Trump emerged from his meeting with Xi and announced that the intermittent trade talks were “back on track.” The following week was a good one in the stock market, thanks to the Trump announcement. On Thursday, June 27, the S&P 500 index stood at about 2915; a week or so later, it was just below 3000, a gain of 84 points, or $4,200 per e-mini contract. Whoever bought the 420,000 e-minis on June 28 had made a handsome profit of nearly $1.8 billion.

 In the last 10 minutes of trading on Friday, August 23, as the markets were roiling in the face of more bad trade news, someone bought 386,000 September e-minis. Three days later, Trump lied about getting a call from China to restart the trade talks, and the S&P 500 index shot up nearly 80 points. The potential profit on the trade was more than $1.5 billion."

Faithful talking points -

"Complete coincidence.  The President participate in, or allow such a thing to occur."

 

(later)

 

"Just more evidence of his brilliant business sense."

Link to post
Share on other sites

Congress critters have been profiting more or less like that as long as I can remember - trading on advance knowledge of new laws or big economic changes etc.

The shitstain has merely taken it to a new level of blatant criminality - when the Mafia does it it's called Pump & Dump.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm thinking 10,000 hours of community service, working with mentally handicapped legal immigrants......

Link to post
Share on other sites
40 minutes ago, Mrleft8 said:

I'm thinking 10,000 hours of community service, working with mentally handicapped legal immigrants......

By "working with" you mean like a student "works with" a tutor...right? Bcuz Trump has zero to teach anyone anything. Lacks even street crook creds.

Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, SloopJonB said:

Congress critters have been profiting more or less like that as long as I can remember - trading on advance knowledge of new laws or big economic changes etc.

The shitstain has merely taken it to a new level of blatant criminality - when the Mafia does it it's called Pump & Dump.

IT's true but it's also like a dance of the elephants. They have to step very carefully around a fence of law and perception. Conresscritters have been profiteering weasels since the dawn of written history. In US history, a fair number of ended up tossed in the slammer for not being good dancers. Sometimes they even resume their careers and get re-elected when they've paid their debt to society.

But yeah, a chief of staff saying "Fuck yeah we're crooks, get over it" is a new low

- DSK

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 10/19/2019 at 2:25 PM, phillysailor said:

I do believe that within a short period of time we could contest the airspace over our troops, at great cost to any self-declared enemy. I also know that we don't require airspace domination to conduct strikes on forces which operate in that area. Certainly many of our best air assets in the area are currently in Incirlik, and therefore theoretically threatened by that nation if it came to a shooting war. But that's the thing about starting a fight against us. It's generally the first step to a very bad year, and so is carefully avoided. 

Unless, that is, we cut and run before a shot is even fired. Then we just look like a paper tiger.

You are prepared to start a war with a NATO ally over the Kurds? America is in a terrible position, for terrible reasons, doing terrible things. Americans piling into their HumVees and GTFOing certainly looks appalling, but is surrounded on all sides by worse outcomes.

War with anyone is a bad year. They have had 8 bad years so far? When even Turkey is sick of your shit, it's time to change course.

On 10/19/2019 at 2:25 PM, phillysailor said:

All of this could have been avoided with more emphasis on a negotiated withdrawal and a longer timeline, but Trump signaled this treachery ten months ago, when he admitted that the Kurds were of very low priority to him, and perhaps as far back as 2015 when he stated that he was quite biased on the issue of Turkey, since he profits off real estate there.  

I note you ignore our CIC's glaring conflict of interest which affected his decision to pull troops out of Syria.

The Kurds have always been a low priority to america. They're just a convenient proxy army.

The only way american policy is differing now is that Trump doesn't seem to give a fuck who the Syrians choose to be their leader. If there is no imperative to foment war, then yes: the Kurds are not important at all.

I don't like Trump. I didn't vote for him. I think he's a horrible person, and is doing a terrible job as president.

That doesn't mean he can't occasionally do the right thing.

Yes, I note he earns some money from buildings in Turkey. It is certainly a possible conflict. Maybe it impacted his decision. Making the right decision for the wrong reasons does happen. I'll take the win and hope he doesn't get elected again.

There are a multitude of reasons why going in at all was super-dumb. It is never too early to leave a situation like this.

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Battlecheese said:

You are prepared to start a war with a NATO ally over the Kurds? America is in a terrible position, for terrible reasons, doing terrible things. Americans piling into their HumVees and GTFOing certainly looks appalling, but is surrounded on all sides by worse outcomes.

War with anyone is a bad year. They have had 8 bad years so far? When even Turkey is sick of your shit, it's time to change course.

...

The Kurds have always been a low priority to america. They're just a convenient proxy army.

The only way american policy is differing now is that Trump doesn't seem to give a fuck who the Syrians choose to be their leader. If there is no imperative to foment war, then yes: the Kurds are not important at all.

I don't like Trump. I didn't vote for him. I think he's a horrible person, and is doing a terrible job as president.

That doesn't mean he can't occasionally do the right thing.

Yes, I note he earns some money from buildings in Turkey. It is certainly a possible conflict. Maybe it impacted his decision. Making the right decision for the wrong reasons does happen. I'll take the win and hope he doesn't get elected again.

There are a multitude of reasons why going in at all was super-dumb. It is never too early to leave a situation like this.

 

I did not start talking about a war with Turkey. I was responding you your condescending statement :

On 10/18/2019 at 12:35 AM, Battlecheese said:

I note you seem to presume the americans have air superiority.

I note that you don't give a shit about our allies, don't care that Erdogan' security detail stomped some Americans a few years ago, and are ok with Trump having a conflict of interest that favors appeasing Turkey while making decisions for America which appease Turkey. Erdogan is a thug who enjoys playing us off against the Russians. For example, the Turks just purchased some Russian air defense systems while also purchasing F35s from the US.

Trump just had Uncle Sam bend over and take a good Rogering from Erdogan and Putin's forces now has our bases. 

And you are calling it the "right decision."

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, phillysailor said:
On 10/18/2019 at 3:35 PM, Battlecheese said:

I note you seem to presume the americans have air superiority.

I note that you don't give a shit about our allies, don't care that Erdogan' security detail stomped some Americans a few years ago, and are ok with Trump having a conflict of interest that favors appeasing Turkey while making decisions for America which appease Turkey. Erdogan is a thug who enjoys playing us off against the Russians. For example, the Turks just purchased some Russian air defense systems while also purchasing F35s from the US.

Trump just had Uncle Sam bend over and take a good Rogering from Erdogan and Putin's forces now has our bases. 

And you are calling it the "right decision."

As you observe - america is being fucked every which way and has only themselves to blame.

It was the inevitable decision. Idiots have been in charge much longer than Trump's presidency.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes. Trump should go to jail.

 Period. Stop sentence. End of discussion. He's a criminal. Criminals belong in jail.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

If it gets to the point where Trump is definitely fucked and on the way out, Putin might decide to play the final hand in Operation Trump: release information showing Donnie to be a very bad treasonous boy. …...And maybe the legendary piss tapes?

After all, if you've helped install a fuckwit who owes you his financial survival and has been your bitch, you might as well capitalize on his inevitable collapse, showing America that you've fucked 'em big time.

In the history of the KGB/FSB, this will make Putin a legend.

Link to post
Share on other sites