Now that Donald Trump has Won


Aside from the extremely obvious conflict of interest this represents. And even, in some ways the giant walking conflict of interest that is president trump. A thing that really bothers me about this is the precedent it sets. If you’re already extremely rich, why not seek the presidency and use it to maximize your own profits?

Like honestly, why not do that?


[quote=“Naoza, post:463, topic:125”]
Like honestly, why not do that?
[/quote]If the US learns anything from this mess, a set of revised, robust and strict laws regarding presidents profiting from their office.

If not…Er, dunno.



LBJ’s company was in his wife’s name from the get go but he basically ran it from the Whitehouse. He set the precedent.


Because the Presidency is a helluva a lot of work, and a lot of risk as Trump’s finding out. Better to put someone in office who’d be more flexible to your views.

The office ages people and Trump isn’t exactly in the best of shape.


I wasn’t alive in the 60s to complain about that but I would have if I could have, I’m alive now and I’m complaining.


Bye bye Bannon!


It’s good to know that Trump’s ego is that easily bruised.


H. R. McMaster sounds both like the coolest name and the most made up name I’ve ever heard.


@Greg I think you might like this news.

Get the song here.


Yeah the Springsteen media has been nuts about it but I don’t want to give another website my credit card information and Grushecky isn’t letting me pay any other way. I’m waiting for somewhere else to offer it, streaming or purchase.


Someone finally uploaded the song to YouTube.

Here’s something I wrote this morning on the subject:

So I purposefully avoided reading up on this song (as much as someone deep in the Springsteen media can) until it was made available for me to hear it. I feel like it’s being blown out of proportion. It’s a pretty generic and bland message. It doesn’t have the heartbreak of Sinaloa Cowboys, the brutal honesty of 41 Shots, and it’s not addressing anything underrepresented like Streets of Philadelphia did. Even Death to My Home Town from just five years ago felt more powerful than this. When you get past the controversy and listen to it as a song, it’s pretty rocking. It got me nodding my head and excited like Wrecking Ball did. Glad to see Grushecky finally getting some public love from Bruce, too. As long as Bruce has been a big name he’d make cameos at Grushecky shows, but nobody outside New Jersey or the Springsteen fandom has really heard of him.


Not sure where to post this but the creator of the /r/theredpill being exposed as an elected republican has been one of the funniest things of all time. His quotes are just so absurd.





What part of “Congress shall make no law” do people not understand?


ACLU’s gonna ACLU. They probably take the position that, as a publicly-funded university, Berkeley is also obliged not to restrict speech.


As a member of the ACLU and soon to be Community Board Member of my chapter of the NYCLU, I greatly disagree with their statement in this instance because the group that invited Coulter to speak withdrew their invitation. Coulter can show up on campus at any time to say whatever she wants to say, but she is not entitled to an invitation and hosting by a student group.


I’m gonna go out on a limb and say the part they don’t understand is the core concept.


@Greg What part of the 14th amendment’s equal protection and due process clauses do you not understand?

All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.

Edit: forgot to nention the due process clause

As Berkeley is a state institution, it falls under the purview of the 14th amendment and, therefore, the first amendment as well.

@Kate_Monster If the group withdrew their invitation, that’s one thing, although if the rationale was due to being concerned about the security of their guest… that is certainly a frightening concept, but more one due to individuals blocking free speech than to a government institution blocking free speech.