• Security incident: ISF was recently accessed by intruders. Please change your password, and change it anywhere else you used it. Read more

The Trump Presidency 15

Status
Not open for further replies.
Wonder what this was all about?

How to create the deepest irony?

The biggest bully of all time calling someone a bully.

I'm beginning to think the thread on Trump being mentally ill should be amended to "People who still support Trump have a dangerous mental illness."
 
The GOP Finally Rejects Trump by Russell Berman

On some level, this vote was about conservatives in Congress returning
to their Tea Party roots, standing up against a Big Government deal that
would rip up the Budget Control Act of 2011—perhaps the signal victory
of the right’s anti-spending push in the Barack Obama era. Yet what makes
this vote peculiar is that it’s hard to read it as anything other than
a rebuke of Trump, even as the same lawmakers who have led the charge
against the budget deal have risen to the president’s defense against
all manner of alleged transgressions. It’s the latest sign of tensions
among Republicans in Washington that have recently bubbled to the surface.

“This is a bad deal for the president. It’s a bad deal for conservatives,”
wrote Representatives Mark Meadows of North Carolina, Jody Hice of Georgia,
and Warren Davidson of Ohio—all members of the House Freedom Caucus and
stalwart Trump backers—in a USA Today op-ed. “Most importantly, it’s a bad
deal for the forgotten men and women who voted to shake up Washington,
D.C. when they sent President Trump to the White House. This is not
draining the swamp—it’s feeding the swamp and entrenching the status quo.”


More cartilage than spine.
 
Trump Tweets

Consideration is being given to declaring ANTIFA, the gutless Radical Left Wack Jobs who go around hitting (only non-fighters) people over the heads with baseball bats, a major Organization of Terror (along with MS-13 & others). Would make it easier for police to do their job!
 
Trump Tweets

Consideration is being given to declaring ANTIFA, the gutless Radical Left Wack Jobs who go around hitting (only non-fighters) people over the heads with baseball bats, a major Organization of Terror (along with MS-13 & others). Would make it easier for police to do their job!

In theory, this isn't that bad an idea. In practice, though, "antifa" isn't really one organisation. It's a loosely-affiliated or unaffiliated bunch of little groups, often with wildly different agendas and views on methods.

I'm not 100% on this, so please somebody correct me if I'm wrong, but it's my understanding that despite white supremacist violence being responsible for the majority of terrorist events in the US, these groups are not officially designated as terrorist organisations. That would be worthy of consideration, Mr. Trump, rather than calling them "very fine people".
 
I was tempted to start a new thread...

Why in blazes do US elections start so danged *early*? For instance, in the case of Presidential candidates, for the better part of two years in advance they're on the hustings! It's like for half the time pols are in campaign mode. It's gotta impair actual work for which they were elected.

Can it not be possible to shrink this down to *at most* 6 months?

This forever electioneering is hard on the nerves!

It's disgusting and IMO the result of cheap news production. It started more than a decade ago. As investigating reporting budgets were cut, what was cheap to fill the 24/7 hours with? A bunch of 'analysts' giving endless political commentary, press conferences, scandals and lies. It should be no surprise they were ripe for Gaslight Trump TV.


On local news one gets traffic, sports and weather over and over, sometimes interspersed with a positive story or some investigation of a single rip off the news solved for them by letting the perp know the news was on to them.


On France 24 and DW, they have actual news, and you get a little here in the US on the BBC, on the Canadian channel and PBS.
 
Last edited:
More cartilage than spine.

A couple of Rand Paul Libertarians who are still looking at the deficit. I wonder if they voted for the tax cuts? Everything else they claim they want it traded for something else in the budget. That was Rand Paul's reason for denying the 911 health relief fund.
 
Last edited:
When I'm King of the World (KotW)(TM), there'll still be elections, but anyone who expresses the slightest interest in running more than three months before will be forever barred from running for everything.
 
In theory, this isn't that bad an idea. In practice, though, "antifa" isn't really one organisation. It's a loosely-affiliated or unaffiliated bunch of little groups, often with wildly different agendas and views on methods.

I'm not 100% on this, so please somebody correct me if I'm wrong, but it's my understanding that despite white supremacist violence being responsible for the majority of terrorist events in the US, these groups are not officially designated as terrorist organisations. That would be worthy of consideration, Mr. Trump, rather than calling them "very fine people".

In theory or practice it is pretty horrible.

Antifa isn't a group so much as a bunch of groups with diverse causes that have a common goal to counter alt-righters on the streets when they show up.

However, since this is so widespread and undefined, the definition of Antifa can become "anyone who stands in a Nazi's way when they are making a B-line for the synagogue with a Molotov Cocktail". The police can then start giving terrorist charges on anyone they feel like who shows up to Charlottesville 2.0 and isn't marching with the tiki-torch club.

The bigger issue is: on what is this 'terrorist' classification based? Antifa, unlike the folks they oppose, do not have a body count. They have some assault incidents that are murky at their very best, and a host ofalt-right invented incidents. If someone is getting hit with a baseball bat, police should do their freaking job and arrest them on assault & battery charges.
 
You have absolutely zero evidence for that claim, but I suspect that you are correct.

Since when is covfefe, hamberder and all the times his sentences end in bizarre vocabulary not evidence? And he's mumbled whole sentences sounding like his tongue was stuck to the roof of his mouth.

Then there's this:
Despite Trump’s claim that he lives a clean, drug-free lifestyle, rumors that he abused certain types of drugs have circulated for more than two decades. In a February, 1992, Spy Magazine story, investigative reporter John Connolly unearthed a medical record that appeared to show that Trump had visited a New York doctor named Joseph Greenberg who, Connolly reported, was a physician to the stars known for prescribing diet drugs to celebrities — including Trump, Spy Magazine reported....

... But according to the findings in Connolly’s 1992 story, Trump may have used the drug for a period of at least three years, from 1982 to 1985, the period during which he was Greenberg’s patient.

Then there is 'Trump’s Bizarre Sniffing Habit at the Debates'. He sniffs regularly.

So rumors for years, bizarre speech on multiple occasions and his weird sniffing are all evidence. So what, that wouldn't be enough for a court conviction? To say there is zero evidence must mean you aren't looking, or your threshold for evidence is 'proof' not evidence.
 
Last edited:
Did McConnell just basically say that doing what's best for the country is not in the Republicans' best interest?
That is the model they have been using to run the country for the past few decades. Any win for the democrats is a loss for the Republicans. It is totally self serving narcissism and destructive. The only legislation they will pass will be operational bills and bills that appear to be ones that Trump has proposed so that they are the winners.
 
Did McConnell just basically say that doing what's best for the country is not in the Republicans' best interest?

Not really, and God knows I feel like a need a shower after defending McConnell.

He's saying what everybody who's a member of a political party is saying pretty much by definition; that what's good for the party and what's good for the country is the same thing because only their party knows how to run the country.

It's the undercurrent in near all political discourse. No matter what my side is, has, or will do wrong we still have to win because "the other" in power is too horrible to contemplate.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

ISF - Join now!

Every member here is approved by hand. No bots, no spam, just people who care about evidence and honest debate.

Membership is free!

Create your free account

Back
Top Bottom