• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

The Trump Presidency: Part 17

Status
Not open for further replies.
Captain_Swoop said:
Donald Trump Jr. Tweeted

This is the dumbest take ever! I mean ****** stupid!!!
Maybe he knew that the scumbag lobbyists and liberal elite in the 94% leftist swamp of DC would behave exactly as they did and therefore shielded a child from that kind of behavior.

That’s great parenting moron!
Click to expand...
Are those *** by the ISF language nanny or did Dump himself to that?
 
Stacyhs said:
More evidence that Trump was LYING when he claimed al-Baghdadi was 'whimpering, screaming, and crying':



https://www.thedailybeast.com/trump...himpering-detail-in-his-baghdadi-raid-account

According to CNN, "officials who worked on the speech"said it "did not resemble the one
Trump gave on Sunday. In other words, Trump went off script as he is wont to do and just pulled it out of his ass because he thought it sounded good.
Click to expand...

Max Boot put it beautifully that the killing of Baghdadi could have been on one of the best moments of Trumps presidency, but he found a way to screw it up.
 
acbytesla said:
There use to be a faction of the Republican party that supported LGBTQ rights called Log Cabin Republicans. I wonder if it still exists.
Click to expand...

There was a falling out when they endorsed Trump this year.

The NH faction has gone on to endorse anti-LGBT Republicans because... I have no idea.

The pro-LGBT New Hampshire Log Cabin Republicans are willing to give elected officials and candidates who have voted against or taken past positions opposed to their point of view another chance moving forward, the group’s chair says.

Jim Morgan, who is also a business executive and Derry Town Councilor, told New Hampshire Primary Source on Wednesday that as the group tries to broaden its attraction to Republicans, gay and otherwise, it has adopted a “mantra” that essentially says: “Forgive but do not forget.”

A case in point is the Log Cabin Republicans’ endorsement this week of former state Rep. Victoria Sullivan for mayor of Manchester. Sullivan’s critics have been pointing out on social media that she voted against legislation that prohibited conversation therapy to attempt to change a person’s sexual orientation. The bill passed and became law last year.

She also opposed legislation prohibiting discrimination based on gender identity – a “transgender rights” bill -- also signed into law by Gov. Chris Sununu last year.

“Our organization is in a party that has a history of votes against the LGBT community,” Morgan said. “Those we talk to who give us commitments that moving forward, they will understand our policies and our pathways, we give them the benefit of the doubt and a clean slate.”

Morgan said, “We’re never going to reach the end of identity politics and the use of it unless we give Republicans a clean slate on their past and look toward their future. And the mantra is we can forgive but we don’t forget, meaning that we’ll give you the benefit of the doubt, but moving forward you’re on the radar.”
Click to expand...

Linky.
 
Skeptic Ginger said:
Given Trump doesn't respect any law anyway, this discussion seems like a wasted effort.
Click to expand...

Right.

You said Trump broke the law by not alerting Congress because he's required to do so. I pointed out that he was authorized by the war on terror authorization.

So, no matter. He doesn't respect the law at all. No need for you to admit you were mistaken or convince me you weren't. If he didn't break this law, then he musta broken a dozen others. Case closed!

Not how I see actual discussion working, but whatever.
 
phiwum said:
Right.

You said Trump broke the law by not alerting Congress because he's required to do so. I pointed out that he was authorized by the war on terror authorization.

So, no matter. He doesn't respect the law at all. No need for you to admit you were mistaken or convince me you weren't. If he didn't break this law, then he musta broken a dozen others. Case closed!

Not how I see actual discussion working, but whatever.
Click to expand...
You still on about this? OK, here's the Authorization text:
Preamble

Joint Resolution

To authorize the use of United States Armed Forces against those responsible for the recent attacks launched against the United States.

Whereas, on September 11, 2001, acts of treacherous violence were committed against the United States and its citizens; and

Whereas, such acts render it both necessary and appropriate that the United States exercise its rights to self-defense and to protect United States citizens both at home and abroad; and

Whereas, in light of the threat to the national security and foreign policy of the United States posed by these grave acts of violence; and

Whereas, such acts continue to pose an unusual and extraordinary threat to the national security and foreign policy of the United States; and

Whereas, the President has authority under the Constitution to take action to deter and prevent acts of international terrorism against the United States: Now, therefore, be it

Resolved by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,

Section 1 – Short Title

This joint resolution may be cited as the 'Authorization for Use of Military Force'.

Section 2 – Authorization For Use of United States Armed Forces

(a) IN GENERAL- That the President is authorized to use all necessary and appropriate force against those nations, organizations, or persons he determines planned, authorized, committed, or aided the terrorist attacks that occurred on September 11, 2001, or harbored such organizations or persons, in order to prevent any future acts of international terrorism against the United States by such nations, organizations or persons.

(b) War Powers Resolution Requirements-

(1) SPECIFIC STATUTORY AUTHORIZATION- Consistent with section 8(a)(1) of the War Powers Resolution, the Congress declares that this section is intended to constitute specific statutory authorization within the meaning of section 5(b) of the War Powers Resolution.

(2) APPLICABILITY OF OTHER REQUIREMENTS- Nothing in this resolution supersedes any requirement of the War Powers Resolution.
Click to expand...
This is basically an explanation of the ability to make a declaration of war, and an authority to prosecute a war on a very vague set of people who are a non-traditional "enemy". It's a starting-gun, not a new set of rules.

So perhaps you might show us where it excuses the president from complying with the legal requirements before launching such non-covert actions as zapped Al-Baghdadi?
 
Regnad Kcin said:
Hillary Clinton’s New Ad attacks Donald Trump Using Strong Words (His)
Click to expand...
This one starts out good then goes to really blah. That was enough to neutralize the beginning as same old stuff, all the while Trump was spewing his con.

Mirrors
Click to expand...
This one is excellent and I recall liking it in the 2016 campaign.

What's different now is people have had 3+ years of Trump's cons exposed for what they are. And that's what the next batch of campaign ads should illustrate.
 
phiwum said:
Right.

You said Trump broke the law by not alerting Congress because he's required to do so. I pointed out that he was authorized by the war on terror authorization.

So, no matter. He doesn't respect the law at all. No need for you to admit you were mistaken or convince me you weren't. If he didn't break this law, then he musta broken a dozen others. Case closed!

Not how I see actual discussion working, but whatever.
Click to expand...
You are dragging me into someone else's argument that I simply weighed in on. Not worth the time for the reason I said, it's a moot point.
 
Norman Alexander said:
You still on about this? OK, here's the Authorization text:This is basically an explanation of the ability to make a declaration of war, and an authority to prosecute a war on a very vague set of people who are a non-traditional "enemy". It's a starting-gun, not a new set of rules.

So perhaps you might show us where it excuses the president from complying with the legal requirements before launching such non-covert actions as zapped Al-Baghdadi?
Click to expand...

What legal requirements do you have in mind? You showed me a law that applied to covert actions, but we agree that this was not covert.
 
Stacyhs said:
In other words, they are just as spineless in standing up to Trump as the rest of the GOP.
Click to expand...

I hear this sort of thing a lot and I've never really agreed with it. These folks, like to the rest of the GOP, back Trump because they agree with the vast majority of his policies and rhetoric. It's why he maintains such stellar approval ratings among Republicans in anonymous polling where it takes no courage to tell the truth.
 
Armitage72 said:
The book part was him bragging about warning everyone about Osama bin Laden before anyone else knew about him.

"I wrote a book. A really very successful book. And in that book, about a year before the World Trade Center was blown up, I said there's somebody named Osama bin Laden, you better kill him or take him out, something to that effect, he's big trouble."
Click to expand...

Not that anyone needs reminding, but just in case, his characterization of the contents of his book was....creative.

He did mention Bin Laden in it, but only once, and at no point suggested that he be killed. Bin Laden was, as the time, top of the 'most wanted' list so was just an exemplar of a wider point.
 
Cain said:
I hope Democrats realize they can't sink Trump with his own words.

That's pre-2016 thinking. Ted Cruz, who was Trump-friendly early on, made some comments to the effect that he was biding his time for polling front-runner Trump to say something irreversibly stupid, and then swoop in. Trump would indeed go on to make stupid, politically incorrect comments (the highest of which was insulting John McCain's military service). Pretty much nothing happened.
Click to expand...

I don't know bragging about being a sexual predator rates up there too.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom