Trump Consciousness

But there is a vast gulf of difference between people who can identify a problem and those who can fix it. Trump has represented himself as THE person who can sort the problem. Now, whether you think he is depends very much on where you get your information. And this is where the debate on Trump turns, frankly, to shit.
Well sometimes in politics, a problem is solved by not doing something. Thus, I have shown you all the evidence I know of that suggests that the idea of damaging the climate with CO2 is false. Given that, withdrawing from the Paris climate agreement was an excellent solution, as was facilitating the extraction of hydrocarbons.

I would have liked him to get together with President Putin to make the world a safer place and also help sort out the Ukraine mess (that mess was caused by the EU's desire to expand its borders). Unfortunately the Dems scuppered that for the time being by the Russia investigation.

David
 
That's fine, but the point isn't whether or not you or I agree with any of those principles (edit: or exceptions), rather that certain people on the forum profess (even if only implicitly) to follow them, only to make self-serving exceptions.
Can you explain that a bit?

David
 
That's fine, but the point isn't whether or not you or I agree with any of those principles (edit: or exceptions), rather that certain people on the forum profess (even if only implicitly) to follow them, only to make self-serving exceptions.
Can you explain that comment?

David
 
Can you explain that comment?

Sure. My original post was replying to Steve's post, which in turn was responding to Jim's post about hypocrisy. Steve pointed out what he perceives to be the hypocrisy of Trump supporters. My post, then, was responding on the theme of hypocrisy. I provided four examples of this, where at least one person from this forum who seems to identify as a conservative professed a principle (even if only implicitly, e.g., by criticising people who failed to conform to the principle), only to then fail to live up to that principle by making a self-serving exception.

Given that my aim was to point out hypocrisy, then, it is not relevant to this aim whether Steve, myself, or anybody else other than those whose hypocrisy was being pointed out agrees or disagrees with the principles or exceptions. That is what my follow-up post was clarifying.
 
Sure. My original post was replying to Steve's post, which in turn was responding to Jim's post about hypocrisy. Steve pointed out what he perceives to be the hypocrisy of Trump supporters. My post, then, was responding on the theme of hypocrisy. I provided four examples of this, where at least one person from this forum who seems to identify as a conservative professed a principle (even if only implicitly, e.g., by criticising people who failed to conform to the principle), only to then fail to live up to that principle by making a self-serving exception.

Given that my aim was to point out hypocrisy, then, it is not relevant to this aim whether Steve, myself, or anybody else other than those whose hypocrisy was being pointed out agrees or disagrees with the principles or exceptions. That is what my follow-up post was clarifying.
Well unless that person was me, I guess I'll let the matter drop!

David
 
Your criticisms of Trump are ridiculous. It's all a bunch of nitpicking personal foibles - actually alleged foibles because we don't the truth of these things - that could be concocted and assembled against anyone, including you or me.

Actually Eric, we do know the truth. There is a mountain of public record. Its a fair comment that we can interpret it differently, but let's not begin by denying it exists.

And its not about nitpicking personals foibles, though I do grant you that goes on, and I have read stuff I know is OTT. But the depth of detail, the consistency of issues raised and the credibility of the authors is sufficient to induce me to believe that where there's smoke there's fire -Trump's pants. Now you may disagree, which you evidently do - so come back with something substantive.

I grant there is bias in anti and pro Trump camps - but it does strike me that one camp delivers evidence and the other only apologetics. I am not invested in this. I got curious about Trump because he was a phenomenon I wanted to know more about. I think the guy has a genius, but pubic good is not his goal. in saying I am not invested, I have to confess I have a bias against him as a business person and a politician. But its not an animus. I am openly left of centre and I have no issue at all with folk who are right of centre. I get that we differ.

You say that the allegations agains Trump could be "concocted and assembled against anyone, including you or me." Well, I have clearly misjudged you, because the following cannot be contrived against me - and I have lived no blameless life by any means. I have done things I am deeply ashamed off and regret profoundly. Here are things for which public record is asserted:
  • Trump has underpaid workers, or refused to pay them [many were, apparently, undocumented]
  • Trump has simply decided he has paid enough to a supplier, and the aggressively counter-sued when action to recover debt has been taken.
  • Rather than repay a loan Trump sued the bank for reckless lending - not because it had done that because he adopted a strategy of aggressively counter suing.
  • Trump lied when he said he was loaned $1m by his father, which he paid back. It is claimed he benefitted to the tune of $400m.
  • Trump is a rotten deal maker, but comes out, often, with personal profit while investors take a bath. He has a history of business failures that are out down to reckless decision making [including bankruptcies] - Trump steaks, his airline, his 'university' for e.g.
  • Trump said that the New York social scene was his "Vietnam" because he avoided getting a STD. Yes, its on record, on video and on YoTube. Did you disrespect your comrades in arms like that? I will bet my house you did not.
  • And the "Access Hollywood" tape? Is that how you talk in your 'locker room'? Not in mine.
  • Trump does not understand economics. China does not pay the tariffs - US customers do. Didn't understand how casinos worked either. That can't be said of me - you?
  • Would you, as POTUS have had, contra every protocol, private solo conversations (2) with Putin in which he alone had a 'translator'?
These are not foibles, they are manifest and gross failings that render him unfit for office (yes, I know that the office of POTUs can be claimed to be occupied by one crook after another - but that does not make crooked conduct okay). And you can't do the deflecting back to Clinton trick endlessly. Clinton was a lousy candidate for a variety of reasons. Its not a case of saying Trump is okay because compared to the alternative.....

Trump racked up a cartload of deficits because being POTUS was never a realistic option. There are doubts he entered the 2016 race with any prospect of winning - but he certainly assembled a talented team to aid him - so I don't buy that. The problem is that Trump's politics were/are crude. He saw globalism as having a negative impact on US industry and he thought US military extension around the globe a bad thing. We can debate that. I see both sides of the debate and have no bias one way or another - save I used to be vehemently anti-US from a military and economic and cultural perspective. Now I have a more moderated POV - which you still won't like.

But when we look at who Trump has engaged to enact his political vision they are a worrisome lot of mostly crackpots.

Trump has poor business, economic and political judgement. He has no good sense of geopolitics. You may care to confess such foibles of yourself, but I do not - even though I know you will disagree.

Many great businessmen have experienced bankruptcy. A huge % of businesses fail. Bankruptcy code was established so people wouldn't be to afraid of total financial destruction to try new things.

No dispute. Its the American business equivalent of redemption and forgiveness. But do check out why Trump went bankrupt and come back to me with the same argument if you can.

A lot of what you refer is just plain "fake news". Someone makes up a story or an angle on a story and the media runs with it and you foolishly believe it.

There's video of Trump saying quite plainly that he was dissing CN and MSNBC for the precise purpose of discouraging his fans from believing negative reports on him. You can go find it and come back to me as to whether you think this is a Trump impersonator employed by CNN (they get all the blame) or not.

Trump is doing great things for America and America is responding well as a result.

?? Find me a credible economist who will back you up here. The US economy was recovering under Obama, and continued to do so under Trump. In Obama's case there was a clear policy foundation for him claiming some credit. Trump claimed the tax cut, but that is disputed by most, if not all, serious economic commentators. The China tariffs have benefited some US manufacturers but harmed others. I have no idea what the net effect is, but I have seen no evidence its a wrong positive. Soy bean farmers have lost the China market probably for good, whom knows. Can they access alternative markets? It ask doubtful if there was spare global capacity ready to take up the China market. These are early days, but the signs are not good.

Trump did the usual POTUS thing of claiming credit for economic performance even when they had nothing to do with it. Current figures suggest a cyclical downward trend.Is he going to claim credit for that as well?

To be precise, what great things is he doing? Please list them so I can understand.

I remember liberals saying that Bill Clinton's personal life was no one's business when he was accused of rape and got caught lying about sex with an intern. Why is Trump's personal life our business?

Totally agree with you re Clinton. Trump's personal life is pertinent, just as Clinton's was, because it attests to two important things - competence and character. You don't want an incompetent POTUS and you don't want one deeply compromised. The White House does background checks on WH staff. You okay with that? But you think the POTUS should not be subject to such scrutiny?

As for impeachment, you are 100% delusional. On what grounds? Answer, there aren't any or the Democrats would have done it already. But you tell me. What grounds? What? Cite the Constitution because that is the law.

Sure, Domestic and Foreign Emoluments clauses - from Wikipedia for convenience:
The Emoluments Clause may refer to the following clauses in the United States Constitution:

  • The Ineligibility Clause, Article I, Section 6, Clause 2, also called the Incompatibility Clause and affects members of Congress
  • The Foreign Emoluments Clause, Article I, Section 9, Clause 8, also called the Title of Nobility Clause and affects the executive branch
  • The Domestic Emoluments Clause, Article II, Section 1, Clause 7, also called the Presidential Emoluments Clause and affects the President's salary
Trump has just handed the Dems his arse on a silver platter. The sticky complexity, thanks to Barr, over the Mueller Report, isn't an issue any more.

I love it when foreigners think they know all about America. They never do. You would d well to allow yourself to be brainwashed by the scurrilous media.

I don't think I "know all about America". I am an outsider, often a deeply concerned one bothered about US policies, dragging us into stupid stupid conflicts. I have a deep interest in politics and history. We have been sitting up and paying attention because Trump seems to us to be the loonier of your presidents. And we are entitled to an opinion, because when you guys sneeze we catch a cold.

Oddly, we have a vested interest in good quality information. By comparison, and I do no mean to be unkind, there a standing joke that most Americans think the Middle East is Virginia. We all cop it on YouTube, but do please search Dumb Americans. I am not trying to be cruel here - just pointing out that the US is not only problematic for the rest of us, but it is in the news so much we end up knowing a damned sight more about you than you know about us. So we are entitled to an opinion.

Is it worth much? You know the expression, 'you can't see the forest for the trees'? It applies here. You may not agree with our POV. but you have to cop it. We see stuff you can't, don't or won't.

Scurrilous media? I go back to Trump's admission he set up that contest so his fans would not believe criticisms of him. But because the converse is true you are equally quarantined from the mountain of adverse commentary. You cannot claim the media that says no good of Trump is scurrilous unless you own the truth that the media that 'speaks no ill' is just as scurrilous.

All media is biased. That's a given. But here's a fact to consider. Trump won a vast majority of people who do not have a college education and a small minority of those who do. He won mostly rural districts. Media biases play to these cultural extremes because they are markets first, and targets for political manipulation second. Mostly white, male. lower educated rural folk are a market segment. Commercial and political interests know how to exploit them to a fine degree - as they do all other market segments.

I am concerned that you say my sources are scurrilous media. This is what I hear from others, singing from the same hymn sheet produced by manipulators. Its Trumps's songsheet, not one of an independent mind. Sure, some of my sources are CNN, MSNBC and Fox, the BBC, NPR, SBS and ABC. But let's add academic historians, sociologists, economics, political scientists, reputable journals and sundry other commentators. All scurrilous? You get dangerously close to the sentiment that "all the world's against us, save me and thee" - and that starts to get paranoid.

My brother, a former fundamentalist Christian, observed to me recently that he sees Trump's "movement" (that term's a worry in itself) as a cult. He is intrigued by cult's since his escape, and, like me, he has become fascinated by the Trump phenomenon.

You can think what you like as an American. But you cannot say its none of our business, because we are the ones hurt by idiotic US policies. We don't think Trump is fit for there office of POTUS, and I think I can speak for 80% of the rest of the planet on that matter. You can laugh and deride us, but we are not the ones who's head of state is comically and satirically routinely portrayed as a buffoon around the globe (let alone at home).

If you are right and I am wrong you have a hell of an image problem that is getting worse by the week. You don't care? Then this conversation is a waste of time. The point is that Trump supporters are a heroic minority, and whether you are right is immaterial. Virtually nobody else agrees with you - and that's a problem. That's an image problem. That's a credibility problem.

Please don't misunderstand me. I am not saying you ARE wrong. I am saying I do not agree and I am open to rebuttal that is more than implied insults and cheap shots. Come back to me with specifics and I will do you the courtesy of reading and assessing your counters with intellectual honesty.
 
What did Trump do that merits impeachment, and what is the evidence?
  1. The Mueller report contains a number of specific allegations of obstruction of justice. I have actually gone through the whole report, so unless you have, please don't come back with denials.
  2. Recent evidence of breaches of the Constitutional emoluments clauses forbidding personal profit from the office of POTUS

What does "white supremacist shit" have to do with Trump's immigration policy?

Trump's immigration policy is a continuation of European supremacism which is founded on a religious granting of authority to take the land of heathen and godless peoples. Now you can assert that this is a God given right, or you can assert it as a gross conceit, as I do. Its not a debate that can be resolved. You are either a white Christian supremacist or you are not - if you are of European descent. I used to be a white supremacist and proud of it - but then I changed my POV. I don't condemn those who are, I just deeply disagree with them.

Can you say what actions Trump has taken that show he is Putin's puppet? Because there are a number of things he's done that seem to contradict that view.

Probably the most telling thing was the Helsinki press conference when he openly preferred Putin's denial over US security services' assessment that Russia did interfere with US elections. That's not a matter for dispute anymore.

Second, Trump has held 2 meetings with Putin with no other US party present - just him, Putin and Putin's 'translator'. So there's no independent record of what was said, and only the Russians have a record. Is that okay for you? Virtually nobody in foreign policy or security thinks it is - only Trump supporters. As well, Trump ordered the 'translator' at the one meeting he had with Putin to destroy their notes and not reveal what was spoken of. Why?

Third there are recorded financial links between Trump and Russians going back to the 1980s. There is no 'evidence' Trump is compromised, but he won't show his tax returns, so there is lingering doubt that he might be compromised.

The problem is that Trump acts like he has something to hide, and so long as he is POTUS that has to be a worry, especially when he pushes policies favourable to Russia.

As a public servant I abide by code that says not only must we have no conflict of interest, we must not have any dealings which lead to a perception of a risk of conflict of interest. I do not think it is reasonable for any stakeholder in the position of POTUS - US citizens and the rest of us so long as POTUS is styled as "leader the free world"- to be exposed to unresolved doubts.
Trump:
  • Approved sale of weapons to Ukraine (which Obama would not do). Actually I think this was an Obama initiative that Trump is now holding up
  • Trump is exporting natural gas to Poland to reduce Russian influence in Europe. - That's not practical, and I doubt it is true
  • Trump approved oil pipelines in the US that will supply export facilities. (Obama would not approve them. US exports of oil hurts Russia because Russia also export oil.) Trump has approved oil pipelines opposed under Obama because of environmental risks. I am not sure the US exports oil - need to check that. Russia is closer to Europe that the US so shipping costs are lower. Besides the ME has been exporting oil for ages. I'd say, at a guess that Russian oil can be landed in Europe cheaper than US oil
  • Massacred Russian mercenaries in Syria - Not sure what you mean.
  • Trump authorized a cruise missile attack on Syria, an ally of Russia - but not in a way that gave Russia ground for response. In any case it does seem to have been a largely ineffectual and symbolic attack.
  • US shot down a Syrian military jet. Which was arguably not in Syrian airspace, and was not grounds for Russian retaliation


rump:
  • Lowered business taxes (helps poor US citizens by stimulating economic growth: jobs, wages, working conditions all improve) - I think you will find the impact of the tax cuts hotly disputed - used by corporations to buy back shares, has led to actual tax increases in some cases. I haven't seen an evaluation of the tax cuts for some time.
  • Reducing government regulation (encourages economic growth) - buy rolling back environmental controls, allowing the marketing of toxic substances and so on - you take your pick whether catastrophic health and environmental consequences are worth the growth in jobs. I have a safe white collar job, so I am no judge of people whose lives have been turned to crap because the industry that employed them has bene put out of business because it was killing workers and the environment.
  • Trying to stop illegal immigration (helps poor US citizens by reducing competition for jobs etc) - granted in part, but its would be better to oblige US companies to pay a minimum wage so poor US citizens would take the jobs. And there are not enough poor US citizens to fill the demand, and not enough legal immigrants either.
  • Forced Mexico to police their border. - granted
  • Renegotiated the trade agreement with Canada and Mexico - helps the poor citizens by keeping jobs in the US - hardly.US companies are still sending jobs south.
  • Trying to stop unfair trade practices and intellectual property theft by China - It aint that simple. Intellectual property theft has been curtailed buy better internet security and maybe not hiring Chinese in sensitive areas in US businesses.Tariff wars don't solve the problem of 'unfair trade' in the simple, way the Trump administration thinks.
  • Wiped out ISIS - Didn't. We don't know how many ISIS supporters decamped and melted away. The threat has not gone away - not by along chalk.
  • Decertified the "Iran Deal" I don't agree that was a good thing
  • Banned travel from terrorist producing countries.- Like the UK and Australia? Come on! A narrow band of 'obvious countries was targeted. Was Pakistan, France and the Netherlands on the list?
  • Moved the US embassy in Israel to Jerusalem - Trump makes US policy based on domestic considerations, rather than kow-towing to world opinion. - Thus pissing off more already very unhappy folk, All that did was please crazy Christians eager for the end of the world
  • Terminated TPP - Yay! It was a lousy deal way too much in US favour. Glad to see the end of it. Thank you Donald!
  • Withdrew the US from the Paris climate accord.- IMO a stupid act
  • Approved new oil pipelines in the US (which Obama would not do) - Economy v environment - oil shale from Canada isn't?
  • Forced NATO allies to contribute more to the alliance. I am with you on this. But be aware it may lead to diminished US global strategic relevance, and you guys may not like what that brings.
  • Appointing judges who believe the law should be interpreted according to the intent when it was passed rather than according to their personal preferences.
  • Tariffs on foreign steel and aluminium to protect domestic industries vital to US national security. boosted some business and flattened others.Not sure this is a domestic security matter however.
  • Reversed restrictions on coal powered electricity production helping to keep electricity prices low - high energy costs hurt the poor the most.This is disputed. There are indications that this act is not working - but I haven't looked at the details
  • Veterans Administration: - incompetent hospital employees can be fired. pity incompetent VA officials can't be
  • Criticizes the news media for false reporting.- Seriously? Trump set up the fake news meme back in 2016, telling reporters he was deliberately ensuring his supports would not believe criticism of him. Its on Youtube. Check it out. All media is biased but Trump and Fox actually deny he says things that are on video record - and of course CNN and MSNBC are going to show those videos. So you have a choice of Fake news being content or interpretation. I am sympathetic to objections to biased interpretation - but that's your beloved right to free speech isn't it? I am not sympathetic to editing out Trump being a dick and denying it happened - and then abusing the 'fake news' for faking news. My pro Trump friend actually argues that CNN has a Trump impersonator who enacts Trump speeches to say dumb shit.That's nuts. Its not necessary unless you believe Trump as told to you by Trump and Fox - in which case you have to explain away the endless scenes of him being complete dick. Your choice. But if you choose there fake news option please don't insult the rest of us by asking us to agree.That just causes fights we don't need to have.
  • Refuses to submit to political correctness. (Political correctness is used to censor free speech.) - That's a winner for me. But now he uses political incorrectness to censor free speech. What do you think the Fake News is about?
 
  1. The Mueller report contains a number of specific allegations of obstruction of justice. I have actually gone through the whole report, so unless you have, please don't come back with denials.
  2. Recent evidence of breaches of the Constitutional emoluments clauses forbidding personal profit from the office of POTUS



Trump's immigration policy is a continuation of European supremacism which is founded on a religious granting of authority to take the land of heathen and godless peoples. Now you can assert that this is a God given right, or you can assert it as a gross conceit, as I do. Its not a debate that can be resolved. You are either a white Christian supremacist or you are not - if you are of European descent. I used to be a white supremacist and proud of it - but then I changed my POV. I don't condemn those who are, I just deeply disagree with them.



Probably the most telling thing was the Helsinki press conference when he openly preferred Putin's denial over US security services' assessment that Russia did interfere with US elections. That's not a matter for dispute anymore.

Second, Trump has held 2 meetings with Putin with no other US party present - just him, Putin and Putin's 'translator'. So there's no independent record of what was said, and only the Russians have a record. Is that okay for you? Virtually nobody in foreign policy or security thinks it is - only Trump supporters. As well, Trump ordered the 'translator' at the one meeting he had with Putin to destroy their notes and not reveal what was spoken of. Why?

Third there are recorded financial links between Trump and Russians going back to the 1980s. There is no 'evidence' Trump is compromised, but he won't show his tax returns, so there is lingering doubt that he might be compromised.

The problem is that Trump acts like he has something to hide, and so long as he is POTUS that has to be a worry, especially when he pushes policies favourable to Russia.

As a public servant I abide by code that says not only must we have no conflict of interest, we must not have any dealings which lead to a perception of a risk of conflict of interest. I do not think it is reasonable for any stakeholder in the position of POTUS - US citizens and the rest of us so long as POTUS is styled as "leader the free world"- to be exposed to unresolved doubts.



rump:
  • Lowered business taxes (helps poor US citizens by stimulating economic growth: jobs, wages, working conditions all improve) - I think you will find the impact of the tax cuts hotly disputed - used by corporations to buy back shares, has led to actual tax increases in some cases. I haven't seen an evaluation of the tax cuts for some time.
  • Reducing government regulation (encourages economic growth) - buy rolling back environmental controls, allowing the marketing of toxic substances and so on - you take your pick whether catastrophic health and environmental consequences are worth the growth in jobs. I have a safe white collar job, so I am no judge of people whose lives have been turned to crap because the industry that employed them has bene put out of business because it was killing workers and the environment.
  • Trying to stop illegal immigration (helps poor US citizens by reducing competition for jobs etc) - granted in part, but its would be better to oblige US companies to pay a minimum wage so poor US citizens would take the jobs. And there are not enough poor US citizens to fill the demand, and not enough legal immigrants either.
  • Forced Mexico to police their border. - granted
  • Renegotiated the trade agreement with Canada and Mexico - helps the poor citizens by keeping jobs in the US - hardly.US companies are still sending jobs south.
  • Trying to stop unfair trade practices and intellectual property theft by China - It aint that simple. Intellectual property theft has been curtailed buy better internet security and maybe not hiring Chinese in sensitive areas in US businesses.Tariff wars don't solve the problem of 'unfair trade' in the simple, way the Trump administration thinks.
  • Wiped out ISIS - Didn't. We don't know how many ISIS supporters decamped and melted away. The threat has not gone away - not by along chalk.
  • Decertified the "Iran Deal" I don't agree that was a good thing
  • Banned travel from terrorist producing countries.- Like the UK and Australia? Come on! A narrow band of 'obvious countries was targeted. Was Pakistan, France and the Netherlands on the list?
  • Moved the US embassy in Israel to Jerusalem - Trump makes US policy based on domestic considerations, rather than kow-towing to world opinion. - Thus pissing off more already very unhappy folk, All that did was please crazy Christians eager for the end of the world
  • Terminated TPP - Yay! It was a lousy deal way too much in US favour. Glad to see the end of it. Thank you Donald!
  • Withdrew the US from the Paris climate accord.- IMO a stupid act
  • Approved new oil pipelines in the US (which Obama would not do) - Economy v environment - oil shale from Canada isn't?
  • Forced NATO allies to contribute more to the alliance. I am with you on this. But be aware it may lead to diminished US global strategic relevance, and you guys may not like what that brings.
  • Appointing judges who believe the law should be interpreted according to the intent when it was passed rather than according to their personal preferences.
  • Tariffs on foreign steel and aluminium to protect domestic industries vital to US national security. boosted some business and flattened others.Not sure this is a domestic security matter however.
  • Reversed restrictions on coal powered electricity production helping to keep electricity prices low - high energy costs hurt the poor the most.This is disputed. There are indications that this act is not working - but I haven't looked at the details
  • Veterans Administration: - incompetent hospital employees can be fired. pity incompetent VA officials can't be
  • Criticizes the news media for false reporting.- Seriously? Trump set up the fake news meme back in 2016, telling reporters he was deliberately ensuring his supports would not believe criticism of him. Its on Youtube. Check it out. All media is biased but Trump and Fox actually deny he says things that are on video record - and of course CNN and MSNBC are going to show those videos. So you have a choice of Fake news being content or interpretation. I am sympathetic to objections to biased interpretation - but that's your beloved right to free speech isn't it? I am not sympathetic to editing out Trump being a dick and denying it happened - and then abusing the 'fake news' for faking news. My pro Trump friend actually argues that CNN has a Trump impersonator who enacts Trump speeches to say dumb shit.That's nuts. Its not necessary unless you believe Trump as told to you by Trump and Fox - in which case you have to explain away the endless scenes of him being complete dick. Your choice. But if you choose there fake news option please don't insult the rest of us by asking us to agree.That just causes fights we don't need to have.
  • Refuses to submit to political correctness. (Political correctness is used to censor free speech.) - That's a winner for me. But now he uses political incorrectness to censor free speech. What do you think the Fake News is about?

You're just repeating a bunch of BS.

I have also read the Mueller report.

Unless you're a lawyer - and a lawyer that understands the US Constitution thoroughly (as in expert in that area of law) - you really don't have the creds to comment on topics like obstruction of justice. But, anyhow, what obstruction of justice? How can obstruct when there is no crime? How did Trump obstruct justice? No obstructive actions were taken. Also, Mueller doesn't come to a conclusion about that - you know better than Mueller?. It is the President's right to fire anyone he wishes at any time. of course Bill Clinton's attempted secret meeting with the AG on the tarmac when his wife was under investigation wasn't obstruction of justice. Everyone gets latitude except Trump. Mere nit picking bias on your part (and on the part of cry baby sky screaming libtards).

Rolled back environmental controls? That's a cause for impeachment? LOL. Environmentalism is used as an excuse to weaken America.

The economic recovery is due to Obama? LOL LOL LOL LOL. Obama is the one who said we'd just have to get used to the anemic growth we experienced under his crappy admin. Trump regulation cuts and tax cuts are exactly why the US economy is thriving + his pro-America stance (markets are psychological). I perform economic analysis and I work with "credible" economists. We know exactly what is driving historically high GDP and historically low unemployment (including for minorities) - and it's Trump's policies. Stick to paper shuffling or whatever it is you're paid to do by the government. You're out of your league on this one (as well as others). You're relying on fake anti-Trump media opinions (who are also out of their league).

"As a public servant I...blah blah blah...." Whatever. As public servants the FBI is sworn to uphold the Constitution, as are the other agencies involved in the BS Russia "collusion" scam - and they clearly did not.

Trump may have avoided service in VN, but he's making up for it now as CinC. Some people take longer to figure out the concepts of duty and service. Let's recall that Bill Clinto was also a draft dodger as are many leading anti-Trump figures. I am unimpressed by that line of argument. It's more emotional appeal, which has no place in serious analysis.

There is no evidence of Trump/Russia financial links - only vague allegations, but so what if there were? Obama promised the Russian's that once he was sworn in there'd be more he could do for them (that was caught on a camera that was left on - available everywhere online for review). Hillary oversaw selling Russia uranium rights. Bill Clinton took large sums of money from Russians. George Bush Jr said Putin has a good soul and worked deals with him. And that's all fine with me because - attention hysterical idiots! - Russia is a major player on the world scene and there is no reason to not do business with them. Guess what, most days of the year there are Americans and other nationalities up in the Russian space station with - OMG! - Russians! What a f'ing doltish concept that anyone who talks to or works with Russians is somehow compromised. Only when it comes to Trump of course because this has nothing to do with anything other than hating Trump and trying to smear him.

Trump did not set the "fake news" meme. It was Obama that coined that phrase.

It was the Russians and the Syrian Army that wiped out ISIS - at least Trump didn't interfere with that process like Obama/Clinton did. yes. the Jihadist are pretty much all dead. You should not attempt to speak to matters of which you have no direct knowledge and in which your bratty anti-American/pro-islam attitude clouds your judgment. Also, on that note, it was the Obama/Clinton admin that was assisting the jihadis and then handed Libya to them. What wars has Trump started? Answer = none. He has dodged the pressure from the usual suspects to start wars.

I could on, but there's no point. You have been 100% brainwashed by fake news and you have no idea what you're talking about. You are materially wrong on most points and, on others, you are just offering your uniformed opinion as a bureaucrat big government type.
 
Last edited:
Actually Eric, we do know the truth. There is a mountain of public record. Its a fair comment that we can interpret it differently, but let's not begin by denying it exists.
Michael,

You have to ask yourself why the Dems chose to ignore all the evidence you cite, and concoct a wholly false story about collusion with Russia. The AG is just dotting the i's on a report that will lay out all the facts. The Dems employed a firm FusionGPS to do the dirty work, and also had several insiders near the top of the FBI. That lot must have cost someone a bomb!

There was also the spectacle of Mueller struggling to give evidence before a Congressional hearing. It was obvious to all that his mental powers have waned badly, so you have to wonder why Comey put him in charge of the investigation in the first place.

Once you come to realise that the Russia collusion story was bogus, you have to ask yourself what else on your list might be bogus.

All this was known many months ago to everyone who watched Fox News
- the channel that is supposed to be the purveyor of false news! Thus Eric, Jim, and myself had a pretty good idea how the Mueller investigation would turn out, long before it stunned the reporters at CNN and related channels!

I am convinced that if the Dems had a decent reason to impeach President Trump, we would know about it by now. In reality they want to impeach him because some among them would like the Epstein story hushed up, and because Trump won an election they wanted him to lose!

David
 
Trump:
  • Wiped out ISIS
Evidence please?

My counter evidence:
US Secretary of State Mike Pompeo acknowledged on Tuesday that Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant (ISIL or ISIS) fighters are gaining strength in some areas but said the armed group's capacity to conduct attacks has been greatly diminished.

"It's complicated. There are certainly places where ISIS is more powerful today than they were three or four years ago," Pompeo said in an interview with CBS's This Morning.
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-...s-isis-strong-in-some-areas-cbs-idUSKCN1VA196
 

Poor reading comprehension of selectively chosen and badly written/badly researched article.

The Islamic caliphate has been reduced to an increasingly smaller last stand in Idlib - the remaining town they occupy. They are under attack as we speak. They are just about wiped out, which means that ISIS is no longer running amuck chopping off heads and tormenting non-sunni populations in Syria.

Pompeo's reference is to ideological terror cells developing in other countries, like Afghanistan and Somalia. Entirely different thing from what Trump was saying.

Please at least try to follow the bouncing ball.

In fairness, it was the Russians and Syrians that defeated ISIS (the caliphate) in Syria and the Iraqis that defeated them in Iraq. The US, under Obama/Clinton was supporting jihadis in an effort to remove the Syrian govt. Trump, to his credit, coordinated with the Russians, Iraqi and Syrian govts to allow them to crush ISIS (the caliphate). Under Trump, some US assets were deployed to assist in crushing ISIS (the caliphate in Iraq and Syria). One reason we are still in Afghanistan is that ISIS is gaining support there - of course, limp wristed liberals use our continued presence in Afghanistan as a criticism of Trump. Liberals love to set up damned if you do/damned if you don't situations for Trump because, they just hate Trump and it's easy to heckle from the sidelines while adults try to deal with complex serious situations.
 
Last edited:
I, for one, am very much enjoying having such a thin-skinned, tantrum-prone, baby in The White House.

He is currently in a ‘twitter feud’ with John Legend and Chrissy Teigen (whoever they are). This stuff is priceless! And almost as hilarious as people defending him as a proper, grown-up, President.
 
I, for one, am very much enjoying having such a thin-skinned, tantrum-prone, baby in The White House.

He is currently in a ‘twitter feud’ with John Legend and Chrissy Teigen (whoever they are). This stuff is priceless! And almost as hilarious as people defending him as a proper, grown-up, President.

Some people like to interpret it as being "thin skinned", but that's not what's about. It's carefully selected exchanges that show his base that he thinks like they do. It's a successful and well thought out tactic.

Some people miss that Trump has a sense of humor. These are usually liberals who are unable to understand a joke (it's hard to laugh when the world is so full of injustice and Hitler is in the white house!!!!! Waaaaaaaaaaah!!!!!!!!)
 
Poor reading comprehension of selectively chosen and badly written/badly researched article.

The Islamic caliphate has been reduced to an increasingly smaller last stand in Idlib - the remaining town they occupy. They are under attack as we speak. They are just about wiped out, which means that ISIS is no longer running amuck chopping off heads and tormenting non-sunni populations in Syria.

Pompeo's reference is to ideological terror cells developing in other countries, like Afghanistan and Somalia. Entirely different thing from what Trump was saying.

Please at least try to follow the bouncing ball.

In fairness, it was the Russians and Syrians that defeated ISIS (the caliphate) in Syria and the Iraqis that defeated them in Iraq. The US, under Obama/Clinton was supporting jihadis in an effort to remove the Syrian govt. Trump, to his credit, coordinated with the Russians, Iraqi and Syrian govts to allow them to crush ISIS (the caliphate). Under Trump, some US assets were deployed to assist in crushing ISIS (the caliphate in Iraq and Syria). One reason we are still in Afghanistan is that ISIS is gaining support there - of course, limp wristed liberals use our continued presence in Afghanistan as a criticism of Trump. Liberals love to set up damned if you do/damned if you don't situations for Trump because, they just hate Trump and it's easy to heckle from the sidelines while adults try to deal with complex serious situations.

Ignoring the adlibs, poisoning the well, and other rhetoric, you provide your opinion. - "just about wiped out" would you like to provide any evidence?
 
Some people like to interpret it as being "thin skinned", but that's not what's about. It's carefully selected exchanges that show his base that he thinks like they do. It's a successful and well thought out tactic.

Some people miss that Trump has a sense of humor. These are usually liberals who are unable to understand a joke (it's hard to laugh when the world is so full of injustice and Hitler is in the white house!!!!! Waaaaaaaaaaah!!!!!!!!)


See? This is funny.
 
Ignoring the adlibs, poisoning the well, and other rhetoric, you provide your opinion. - "just about wiped out" would you like to provide any evidence?

Dude,
Do I also need to provide evidence that the sky is blue just because you say it's green?

sigh

Here are a few articles you might want to read (written by people in the intelligence community as opposed to whatever rubbish you use as a source)

https://syria.liveuamap.com/en/2019/29-january-isis-last-pocket-confined-to-no-more-than-3-km

https://turcopolier.typepad.com/sic...operation-idlib-dawn-update-ttg.html#comments

https://turcopolier.typepad.com/sic_semper_tyrannis/2019/08/operation-idlib-dawn-update-ttg.html

https://www.mei.edu/sites/default/files/2019-04/Ford_The_Syrian_Civil_War.pdf
 
Last edited:
I, for one, am very much enjoying having such a thin-skinned, tantrum-prone, baby in The White House.

He is currently in a ‘twitter feud’ with John Legend and Chrissy Teigen (whoever they are). This stuff is priceless! And almost as hilarious as people defending him as a proper, grown-up, President.
Has there ever been a president that has been attacked so relentlessly, even after one of the main planks of the attack has been proven groundless?

David
 
Why is that, do you think?
Social Marxists and corporate globalists, thought that their great revolution, which had begun under Obama, would continue under Hillary. They freaked out that so many Americans reversed their course and that Trump is their leader.

The war all the time club thought they'd get Hillary, who would continue imperial wars and they got Trump, who opposes them.

All kinds of pork munching swamp dwellers who've been riding the gravy train for years fear Trump cutting it all off.

Various sexual pervert nut jobs in Hollyweird that welcome the second coming of Sodom and Ghemora fearing that conservatives are ascendant and their orgy will come to an end.

Various foreign interests seeking to weaken the US and their graft taking tools fearing the end of their plans and graft (think the Mexican dope and human trafficking cartels, China).

Various globalist corporations that have left Americans high and dry and that fund democrats so they can be the real powers behind the throne and that Trump opposes along with his base.

Idiots who believe fake news.

There's a few reasons
 
Last edited:
Back
Top