TSMC chip plant in the US still possible, decision will be taken next year

2. TerryTerius (unregistered)

To be frank, it is a mistake to do that. No president (on their own) has much control over the economy, or buisiness decisions made by companies in the short term. People do that *all the time* giving Presidents way more credit than they really deserve on the economy. People did that for Clinton, Obama, and Bush. And now of course, people are chomping at the bit to give Trump credit for every decision companies will make while he happens to be President. While they can certainly have profound effects over-time, that's a different matter. Unless we're talking about massive events like the Auto-bailout and such programs that have immediate effects.

All I'm saying is, that is fundamentally misunderstanding how much power Presidents have over the economy.

6. mikehunta727 (Posts: 1053; Member since: 12 Sep 2014)

Under investigation by the FBI for possible collusion with Russia which is most likely true. Treason fam

Oh yeah, FBI, NSA, and the DoJ confirmed no one wiretapped Trump and that no one individual can order a wiretap. So Obama couldn't order a wiretap

Just a matter of time before Trump actually resigns or gets impeached now

The future seems a bit brighter now once again

7. joeytaylor (Posts: 901; Member since: 28 Feb 2015)

So Vice President Pence will be President......even better

8. mikehunta727 (Posts: 1053; Member since: 12 Sep 2014)

No he would go down with him and many people in the administration. They are all tied to this. They all knew what they were doing

More then one individual is implicated in this, aka many people in the administration are Absolutely screwed

The whole administration needs to be gutted

9. joeytaylor (Posts: 901; Member since: 28 Feb 2015)

An investigation will make the determination on that

10. mikehunta727 (Posts: 1053; Member since: 12 Sep 2014)

The evidence is surely piling up. Trump ranting on twitter instead of asking for a full fledged open investigation to prove his innocence (if he was truly innocent and has nothing to hide) is only making it worse for him and makes him look dam sure guilty

11. joeytaylor (Posts: 901; Member since: 28 Feb 2015)

But we are talking about the same people who investigated Hillary Clinton..... so we'll see how far things go

13. mikehunta727 (Posts: 1053; Member since: 12 Sep 2014)

Fair enough, we all just have to wait and see... I simply am saying, as a human, that Trump surely is acting "guilty" and not like a innocent person would. A truly innocent person would openly welcome fully transparent, thorough investigations into this to clear their name of any wrong doing. But that's not what Trump is doing or acting, it's kind of the opposite.

He is deflecting, ranting, blaming others, calling everything that is negative about him "fake news" and doing whataboutism

14. joeytaylor (Posts: 901; Member since: 28 Feb 2015)

And Trump acts like that with everything...... I don't think that in of itself proves guilt

15. mikehunta727 (Posts: 1053; Member since: 12 Sep 2014)

No he doesn't... Lol. And he certainly does act like a guilty person when it comes to this. Also the extreme whataboutism by him is classic Russian tactics so..

12. joeytaylor (Posts: 901; Member since: 28 Feb 2015)

Mind you....I want guilty people prosecuted.... so I hope they are also investigating the actual crime committed so far

4. TerryTerius (unregistered)

The president doesn't set tax laws, and he does not exactly have a unilateral authority to either set regulations or to undergo deregulation.

To copy from the hill:

The easiest regulations for a new president to rescind will be those passed at the very end of the previous administration. All recent presidents have suspended the effective date of regulations issued by their predecessors that had not yet gone into effect. While the effective date is suspended, the new administration can decide whether it wants to begin a regulatory process to repeal the regulation, and in doing so perhaps ensure that the regulation never takes effect. In practice, however, this impacts a small number of regulations.

For regulations issued in approximately the last eight months of the previous administration, the new administration can ask Congress to use the Congressional Review Act. This law allows Congress to bypass filibusters in the Senate to overturn recently issued regulations. While this is a more powerful tool, it could not be used on any regulations issued before that eight month timeframe.

Everything else requires Congress, and a filibuster proof majority. What goes on with the various departments is a more complicated answer.

5. joeytaylor (Posts: 901; Member since: 28 Feb 2015)

I did say speculative

16. TerryTerius (unregistered)

Always have an escape hatch. Debating 101. But, my point was just that either way that's not really in the President's wheelhouse.

17. joeytaylor (Posts: 901; Member since: 28 Feb 2015)

Haha.....but in a presidential campaign the distinctions can have a influence in what directions companies want to go..... especially if the President and Congress are roughly on the same page

18. TerryTerius (unregistered)

Yes and no. Correlation is not causation. I really doubt any given company would commit to make extremely expensive investments just because a certain presidential candidate wants it to be so. That doesn't make much sense. The popularity of a given politician and their ability to level sustained public pressure as a result of that plays a significant factor in how effective that could even be.

But, companies do make PR moves all the time. So, public pressure *does* play a factor. Though likely, not the deciding factor. It would have to be a significant incentive, and I guess that'd depend on how big of a corporation we're talking about.

But if we're talking about wanting to get out ahead of a particular legislation or policy shift, that's a different story.

19. joeytaylor (Posts: 901; Member since: 28 Feb 2015)

Not so much towards a Presidential candidate...... but once they have been elected..... and a small point with regards to regulations..... the administration can choose not to enforce them

20. TerryTerius (unregistered)

They can choose not to enforce *certain* regulations, yes.