Trump Consciousness

I have thought a bit about your comment, and right now I watch Fox News and the BBC on the internet, but for things of importance I believe Fox News - Mea Culpa.

My explanation, is that I have repeatedly found Fox News analysis to be more accurate that the BBC or other news outlets. For example, reading/listening to Fox News, I knew for a long time that the Mueller report was likely to be a dead duck because it had no evidence of collusion. They also pointed out the technical point that legal processes never exonerate anyone! When it turned out that Trump could not be impeached for 'collusion', that came as absolutely no surprise to me because I had read FN.

Furthermore, FN reported the various messages between Strzok and his girlfriend Page. Wiki tells us that "Strzok rose to become the Deputy Assistant Director of the Counterintelligence Division, the second-highest position in that division. ", but his messages to his Girlfriend included statements that "Trump will be stopped" (I haven't checked the exact wording). Do you think this was the kind of behaviour to expect of someone in that exalted position, who was tasked with investigating the President of the US? If you don't watch FN, I doubt if you know any of that. Maybe you also do not realise that the Attorney General is conducting an investigation into the origins of a dossier of evidence against Trump that initiated the calls for impeachment. As I understand it, news of this will be out soon, and will probably also come as a bombshell to anyone who relies on CNN or other outlets.

I honestly do not know how many facts Left-leaning Americans are aware of. Are you aware of significance of the company, "Fusion GPS", or of the relevance of the British spy, Christopher Steele ? Are you aware that Hillary Clinton was accused of pressurising a woman not to report her rape, because the person she accused was Bill Clinton? The existence of that accusation is a fact, but obviously since it never got tested in court, I can't say if it was true.) I never heard the BBC mention any of those, lest they make people understand the game that is being played in Washington.

Further back in time, I knew from Fox News that candidate Trump was covering such issues as pulling troops out of Syria and other places, I knew why he and those who voted for him hated "ObamaCare", and I came to realised what his repeated references to 'the swamp' were all about.

By contrast, the BBC paints a vague, disturbing picture of what is going on in the US, incorporating as few actual facts as possible!

David
IMO, this explains exactly why, what appears to be a pure act of desperation, what we are experiencing as the latest "coup attempt" procedure has arisen and parsimony often is accurate.

A "group" (quite a large one) knows what is about to come flooding out. The "FISA abuse" report soon to be followed up by Durham/Barr investigations reports/recommendations/and possible actions.

The reason for the faux impeachment is to try and prevent this tsunami from blowing apart the power structures of this group or to minimize the impact as much as possible. The last hope is that when its all fully out in the open, "the group" has enough "adherents" who will agree with their last stand on it all - that being "We knew we did bad, illegal... indeed ,'wrong things,' but geeeeeze folks, you see 'the monster' (not just Trump, but the blowing up of the Big Lie we have been living under) we were hoping to destroy and so surely you can understand we are the true 'good guys' and had to resort to every possible available means to save us all."

And if it were not for what I have been able to get via FOX News, I probably wouldn't have seen this. I certainly didn't want to. I was perfectly happy believing "the movie."

Thankfully also, there are some real honest folk out there that are what I had always envisioned to be "true journalists" and Catherine Herridge seems to be one and also, John Solomon seems to be one. I think Glenn Greenwald is an honest independent journalist. I could name several more.
 
Its gotten really weird experiencing folks who can only focus on one thing, their hatred for Trump.

Things he does that if it were any other President, they would LOVE, they can never bring themselves to giving him some credit for trying to accomplish. Here's an interesting list based on some recent tweets about Trump where his actions are (IMO) for the best interest of US and the world with regards to the US presence in Syria and the Middle East as a whole.
  1. Ascendant in his own White House.
  2. Realizing nothing good comes from further escalation
  3. Not getting re-elected if he’s in quagmires around the world
  4. Washing his hands of the Arab infighting
  5. Responding to the realpolitik of a vulnerable Saudi Arabia
  6. Understanding that Syria is an Obama-era mess which is now unwinnable.
  7. Telling Israel what the limits of his support is.
  8. Informing our allies the U.S. is not subsidizing their adventures anymore.
  9. Notifying the Neocons that he’s done making deals they won’t keep.
  10. Resetting the conflicts in Syria, Iraq and Afghanistan as unwinnable by neocon/Israeli standards.
From this article here that is focusing on five recent "Tweets."
 
There's much better evidence out there for this perspective than a half assed poll from a corporation, It's been pretty convincingly shown in my opinion that all one needs to 'game' ignorance is a position of authority and ingroup - outgroup distinctions. Ironically this appears to be what the original tweeter is doing, hence why I call it propaganda at best.
Fair enough. Was funny though.
 
Some of that might be that people actually feel afraid to say they will vote for Trump, and so cloak their thoughts by expressing an incoherent hatred of him. I hope so!

David
Informing our allies the U.S. is not subsidizing their adventures anymore.
Yes - and remember, these were all done by sleight of hand - helped by the same crooked media that you have. The Ukraine was destabilised to the point where actual fighting occurred - and for what. In Georgia it would seem that someone in the WH gave the president there the green light to shell pro Russia villages on the border. The result was described as a terrible sign of Russian expansionism.

David
 
Its gotten really weird experiencing folks who can only focus on one thing, their hatred for Trump.

Things he does that if it were any other President, they would LOVE, they can never bring themselves to giving him some credit for trying to accomplish. Here's an interesting list based on some recent tweets about Trump where his actions are (IMO) for the best interest of US and the world with regards to the US presence in Syria and the Middle East as a whole.
  1. Ascendant in his own White House.
  2. Realizing nothing good comes from further escalation
  3. Not getting re-elected if he’s in quagmires around the world
  4. Washing his hands of the Arab infighting
  5. Responding to the realpolitik of a vulnerable Saudi Arabia
  6. Understanding that Syria is an Obama-era mess which is now unwinnable.
  7. Telling Israel what the limits of his support is.
  8. Informing our allies the U.S. is not subsidizing their adventures anymore.
  9. Notifying the Neocons that he’s done making deals they won’t keep.
  10. Resetting the conflicts in Syria, Iraq and Afghanistan as unwinnable by neocon/Israeli standards.
From this article here that is focusing on five recent "Tweets."
The thing is, will (or can) he do it? [edit: otherwise it's all more false rhetoric, like we got from Obama]
https://www.latimes.com/world-nation/story/2019-10-11/us-sends-more-troops-to-middle-east

For what it's worth (on a Trump-based thread) I'd vote Bernie Sanders, now tell me he's not a true Independent.
 
Last edited:
Trump is criticized for blunt speaking but his opponents get a free pass. Why is that? Cognitive bias.

Trump supporters don't see Trump as worse than the opposition. They see an unfair double standard.

https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/con...rses-trump-call-impeachment/story?id=60153668
New Congresswoman Rashida Tlaib not apologizing for cursing out Trump in call for impeachment

https://conservativedailypost.com/maxine-waters-calls-for-public-harassment-against-trump-officials/
Maxine Waters Calls For Public Harassment Against Trump Officials
Waters issued a dangerous call to action, urging people to harass Trump officials and supporters in public.

https://townhall.com/tipsheet/kevin...obama-calls-americans-bitter-clingers-n718551
FLASHBACK: Obama Calls Americans "Bitter Clingers"

https://time.com/4486502/hillary-clinton-basket-of-deplorables-transcript/
Read Hillary Clinton's 'Basket of Deplorables' Remarks About Donald Trump Supporters
...
“You know, to just be grossly generalistic, you could put half of Trump’s supporters into what I call the basket of deplorables. Right?” Clinton said. “The racist, sexist, homophobic, xenophobic, Islamaphobic—you name it. And unfortunately there are people like that. And he has lifted them up.”
 
For what it's worth (on a Trump-based thread) I'd vote Bernie Sanders, now tell me he's not a true Independent.
My main objection to Bernie is that he seems to totally believe in the 'Climate Emergency'.

Beyond that, I don't think people like Sanders realise how quickly socialist ideas can turn sour. My partner began life behind the iron curtain, and she can't stand Socialism, even though she doesn't like Capitalism. The real answer has yet to be invented. Stability is everything in politics.

I'm not a Capitalist (LOL) but at least in the West we know the beast, and maybe we can tame it enough to be acceptable.

I suppose a fair measure of socialism is on show with the Dems right now:

1) Show trials of people like Brett Kavanaugh . I mean what sort of respect for the "Me Too" movement is it to use their movement for poitical gamesmanship?

2) A willingness to abuse the rules that make politics work - e.g. you do not use impeachment simply because you don't like the guy who got elected.

3) A willingness to support mob rule if it is on your side.

4) Forcing people out of their jobs for political reasons.

From what I have heard, these were all commonplace under communism, particularly just after WWII.

If the Dems got elected, they would not revert to how they used to be, that sort of behaviour would become the default.

The only way to reset the Dems to something like they used to be (e.g. early Obama years) is to beat them soundly in the next elections.

David
 
This is what we have been waiting for ;;/?

David
Partly. The DOJ IG - Department of Justice Inspector General - is concerned with the actions of employees of the Department of Justice, which includes the FBI. He is concerned with whether employees followed correct procedures and he can refer crimes for prosecution. The attorney general would then go through a process of deciding whether to actually prosecute.

The Attorney General is supposedly already investigating these and other issues not within the jurisdiction of the DOJ IG, but is waiting for this report before announcing specific indictments and prosecutions.

And the Attorney General is not bound by this report, He could decide to prosecute or not regardless of what is in the report.

So Trump supporters are hopeful that the report recommends prosecutions for high level FBI and DOJ officials involved in the fake Russia probe based on fake evidence provided to Judges (and exculpatory evidence withheld) for warrants and other crimes (including FBI faking notes from interviews with witnesses) involved in this attempted coup. But ultimately whether or not there will be prosecutions will be decided by the Attorney general and any such prosecutions (or lack of prosecutions) will be announced at a later date by the Attorney General. And I don't know when that is likely to happen. And after indictments would come trials.

John Huber is a federal prosecutor who was supposedly investigating other crimes by the Obama administration. No one knows if he declined to prosecute or if he is also waiting for this report to announce indictments.

The Russia hoax and now the Ukraine hoaxes are attempted coups involving the CIA which is outside the jurisdiction of the DOJ IG. The Russia hoax "insurance policy" (illegal invstigation of Trump) was initiated by Obama. True justice would rock the nation. No one knows yet what is really going to happen.

So yes, this report is a long awaited step in the process, but it is not the end of the process. What Trump supporters are really waiting for is announcements by the Attorney General of actual prosecutions of crimes committed by the the deep state and by the highest officials of the Obama administration.

But even if indictments are eventually announced there are many hurdles before justice is handed down, When brought before a judge, the judge can dismiss a case for various reasons, if Trump is not re-elected, the new administration could withdraw the cases, and the juries in criminal trials might not find defendants guilty. And any convictions can be appealed and overturned, and the President or a future Democrat President might issue pardons.

These articles reveal a small fraction of the illegal activity that ought to be prosecuted:

https://www.breitbart.com/politics/...mmitted-crime-but-wont-recommend-prosecution/
James Comey Admits Hillary Might Have Committed Crime, But Won’t Recommend Prosecution

https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2018/apr/21/james-comeys-crimes-its-memos/
James Comey's high crimes and misdemeanors: It's in the memos

https://www.christiannewsalerts.com/gowdy-exposes-lynchs-crime/
ALERT: Trey Gowdy Exposes Loretta Lynch’s Crime On Live TV

https://www.whiteoutpress.com/list-attorney-general-eric-holder-scandals/
List of Attorney General Eric Holder Scandals

https://www.nationalreview.com/2017...ign-members-obama-administration-fbi-cia-nsa/
Susan Rice’s White House Unmasking: A Watergate-style Scandal

https://thefederalist.com/2019/03/06/four-different-lies-james-clapper-told-about-lying-to-congress/
4 Different Lies James Clapper Told About Lying To Congress

https://chaletbooks.com/chaletrepor...-russia-and-harry-reid-to-frame-trump-part-a/
CIA Crimes: How John Brennan Weaponized the CIA and FBI, and Conspired with Russia and Harry Reid to Frame Trump—PART A

https://www.foxnews.com/opinion/dou...-reported-cia-post-raises-troubling-questions
Several news organizations have reported that the whistleblower behind the “Ukraine impeachment” feeding frenzy is a CIA officer who was detailed to the White House.
 
Last edited:
My main objection to Bernie is that he seems to totally believe in the 'Climate Emergency'.
Of course if you don't agree that there is a Climate Emergency, then you're not going to agree/support Sanders. And whether the changes in climate are human-made or due to cyclical action in the Solar System, it is undeniable that something is going on with the weather. Trump's denial of these climate-change events enables him to do f-k-all about it. No 'let's leave the rest of the fossil fuels in the ground for future generational needs', no 'let's use some of the brilliant minds in the population to seek and install alternative free-energy sources'.

Just because I don't approve of the corrupt centralised-power, self-centred, individual-orientation of Capitalism, doesn't mean that I support the corrupt, centralised-power, communal-orientation of Communism. They appear to lead to similar outcomes. Neither are true Socialism, or at least both are liable to extremist exclusivity, and power-grabbing.

And don't forget America is a rich land, efficient in exploiting and appropriating the wealth of many other countries. That may be where much of its success lies.
 
Of course if you don't agree that there is a Climate Emergency, then you're not going to agree/support Sanders. And whether the changes in climate are human-made or due to cyclical action in the Solar System, it is undeniable that something is going on with the weather.
Well the official measured temperature change from 1880-now is somewhere between 0.8C and 1.0C, depending on a variety of assumptions. That is all that can be attributed to CO2. Of course weather is always changing, they used to grow grapes in northern England in mediaeval times, and there was a period when the Thames froze in London sufficiently for fairs to be run - with fires to keep people warm!.. These sorts of changes happen for all sorts of reasons, as you suggest. If we ever get a natural climate emergency - a new ice age - we really might be in difficulty.
Trump's denial of these climate-change events enables him to do f-k-all about it. No 'let's leave the rest of the fossil fuels in the ground for future generational needs', no 'let's use some of the brilliant minds in the population to seek and install alternative free-energy sources'.
I have read his book, and I think he gets the gist of what is wrong. It is a wonderful example of broken science - just like so many other things we discuss here. Do you want to come in on a private discussion on this topic? There is some interesting stuff there. I am wary of having such discussions out here in the open, because we attracted a group of climate trolls a few years ago, that were extremely troublesome, and this topic is somewhat on he Skeptiko fringe.
Just because I don't approve of the corrupt centralised-power, self-centred, individual-orientation of Capitalism, doesn't mean that I support the corrupt, centralised-power, communal-orientation of Communism. They appear to lead to similar outcomes. Neither are true Socialism, or at least both are liable to extremist exclusivity, and power-grabbing.
The problem is, every socialist group claims to be different, but what seems to happen is that power gets into the hands of too few people.
And don't forget America is a rich land, efficient in exploiting and appropriating the wealth of many other countries. That may be where much of its success lies.
Well it is fashionable to knock the US heritage, just as people knock the British heritage over here. However remember that a lot of ordinary people had to work very hard to make that wealth. My view is that politics driven by a sense of guilt produces really awful results. For example, the UK signed up to give 0.7% of its GDP to developing countries. Incredibly the government 'outsourced' the job of distributing that money to a private company. This company now makes a huge profit out of giving this aid away, and people are realising that very little of it reaches the genuinely needy. Part of the trouble is that it isn't that easy to give large sums of money away in such a way that local politicians don't trouser most of it.

David
 
Last edited:
And don't forget America is a rich land, efficient in exploiting and appropriating the wealth of many other countries. That may be where much of its success lies.
Then are you against multinational corporations raping undeveloped countries (globalism) and support people in their own countries defending themselves against globalists (nationalism)?


And don't forget America is a rich land, efficient in exploiting and appropriating the wealth of many other countries. That may be where much of its success lies.
That myth was invented by oppressive foreign governments for two purposes: 1) To maintain power by keeping their own population from demanding economic freedom and rule of law so their countries could become rich like America. 2) To weaken the US because we support human rights in other countries.

The US and most other wealthy countries get their wealth from two factors: rule of law and economic freedom.
 
Last edited:
Then are you against multinational corporations raping undeveloped countries (globalism) and support people in their own countries defending themselves against globalists (nationalism)?
yes
That myth was invented by oppressive foreign governments
It's not a myth that America is a huge continent rich in raw materials and resources, and wealth begets wealth. So much so that you seem to have enough to spend trillions on numerous countless, oppressive, wars in other people's countries.
2) To weaken the US because we support human rights in other countries.
This is paranoia talking - you are not weak, you are (currently) the strongest country on the planet, with the most weapons, which you distribute to select favoured allies, to use on select targeted countries. And you do not support human rights, you violate them. You are the terrorists in fact, because you terrify other countries.
And you're all so tense! I heard that when a balloon goes off in a shopping mall, everyone drops to the floor? Gee, you really need to let go of your guns, you're freaking us all out.

'rule of law' and 'economic freedom' enables wealthy countries to keep the wealth where they want it, i.e. amongst an elite few

yeah, nah, we're not all yelling for your rule of law and 'freedom'
 
they used to grow grapes in northern England in mediaeval times, and there was a period when the Thames froze in London
The Climate Emergency is bigger than the UK, but England of course is at risk of becoming cut off and surrounded by an icy sea current if the gulf stream were to fail. (that sounds like a metaphor :D)
I have read his book
Trump has written a book?! Whoa, I've got to read that.
I'd prefer a public discussion on climate, I like the openminded diversity of the random and unexpected, and I'm not afraid of trolls :)
The problem is, every socialist group claims to be different, but what seems to happen is that power gets into the hands of too few people.
Yes I think the point of Socialism gets lost as we try to force it into an old paradigm. Capitalist or Communist centralised power is the exact opposite of it and only the Greens seem to be proposing de-centralisation. But they never get a chance at demonstrating it.
Well it is fashionable to knock the US heritage, just as people knock the British heritage over here. However remember that a lot of ordinary people had to work very hard to make that wealth.
Look, they need knocking, they have never publicly acknowledged, let alone made reparation for their worldwide theft of other countries wealth. They're not the only ones, it is centred around the Catholic/Christian colonialism of the middle Europeans. And the "lot of ordinary people who had to work very hard" were not the ones to gain from it. Redistribution of wealth does not require "guilt"; it is just, the right thing to do.
Incredibly the government 'outsourced' the job of distributing that money to a private company. This company now makes a huge profit out of giving this aid away, and people are realising that very little of it reaches the genuinely needy. Part of the trouble is that it isn't that easy to give large sums of money away in such a way that local politicians don't trouser most of it.
That was stupid. But I'm afraid you're right :(
 
This is paranoia talking - you are not weak, you are (currently) the strongest country on the planet, with the most weapons, which you distribute to select favoured allies, to use on select targeted countries. And you do not support human rights, you violate them. You are the terrorists in fact, because you terrify other countries.
And you're all so tense! I heard that when a balloon goes off in a shopping mall, everyone drops to the floor? Gee, you really need to let go of your guns, you're freaking us all out.
I'd actually agree with a lot of that (at least in recent times), so why would you oppose the one man who has shown the guts to stand up and say we need to bring the troops home, and who has enabled the US to generate enough petroleum products to become more or less self-sufficient?
'rule of law' and 'economic freedom' enables wealthy countries to keep the wealth where they want it, i.e. amongst an elite few
Every country needs a rule of law - otherwise it is the guy who has the largest gun who gets it all. That doesn't mean that there aren't problems to be sorted out. The trouble with revolutions is they reset everything, people have to live through the terrible times of the past - like feudal England, or the slave-based society in the US. I'm sure many poor whites hated the slave trade because it left them without jobs - now if they had has Trump to vote for.....

David
 
Top