Trump's Second and Third year in office
Seems like it was successful , you admitted she's your queen.Quote: ams288This post may have been successful had you used her actual quote.
Quote: petroglyphSeems like it was successful , you admitted she's your queen.
Nonsense.
Quote: petroglyphAs the Queen of the left said, "Why does it matter"?
As the God Emperor of the right said,
"I have a great relationship with the blacks."
"Laziness is a trait in blacks."
"I mean, really, who knows how much the Japs will pay for Manhattan property these days?"
"You have to treat [women] like s***."
"I love the poorly educated."
"I could stand in the middle of Fifth Avenue and shoot somebody, and I wouldn't lose any voters, okay?"
"Grab them by the p***y."
etc., etc., etc.....
Quote: TankoBush started that war after his water boy Colin Powell ....
Doesn’t matter to the gimps. Mention Trump and those pathetic creatures pop out of their boxes, unzip their masks, and squeal the same old, ‘rapist, racist, collusion, crap they’ve been trained to spout for the past two years.
Despite the last paragraph of garbage (there is an active and real investigation into Russian collusion) there is some serious junk to digest here. What is clear is that from colonialism to present day invading nations are terrible at nation-building. Be it the soviet rule of Eastern Europe to the Syrian, Afghan, Libya and Iraqi (and don't forget Yugoslavia) debacles it becomes clear that the best way to rebuild nations is from within.
And in nations with weak leaders the strategy of funding rebels and building democratic movements are likely the most successful way of changing regimes.
Waging war and then attempting to rebuild democracies are extremely expensive and time-consuming. At some point one has to weigh the benefits of attempting regime change with the cost of doing so.
Yet it is a good goal to attempt to remove the world of dictatorships, especially those that pilfer revenue, have terrible human rigths, and support world destabilisation. Just as itnisnanagood goal of trying to feed the poor, help the homeless and rid the world of disease while controlling population growth.
At the same time we roast a science program with 1.7b while wholly supporting a 800 billion defense budget.
My thought is that regime change would be much easier if the worlds leaders had the same goals. But they don't, mainly due to competitive forces and a lack of morals from the leaders of China and Russia who support suppressing dignity at the cost of economic trade and corruotion.
What bothers me about the Trump presidency is that the United States used to be the leader against tyranny. What bothers me about this forum is to take a position that leaving evil dictatorships intact is good for the people living in those conditions.
I agree that war is not the answer. But allowing tyranny and dictatorships to thrive doesn't make me comfortable either.
How did that work out with, say, Qaddafi or Chavez or Castro?Quote: boymimboWhat bothers me about this forum is to take a position that leaving evil dictatorships intact is good for the people living in those conditions.
Quote: boymimboWhat bothers me about this forum is to take a position that leaving evil dictatorships intact is good for the people living in those conditions.
I agree that war is not the answer. But allowing tyranny and dictatorships to thrive doesn't make me comfortable either.
The lesson of Bosnia and Kuwait for the US, is any recent invasion to save a country from another invading country is going to be popular as any war can be. We didn't need to have anything in common with these people. Both Bushes and Clinton were considered heroes there. (this is also true in WW2 for invaded countries).
The lesson from most other wars like Vietnam, Iraq and Afghanistan it's more important to be invited than save people from their bad government, even if you think it must be awful to live under a horrible system. It's like trying to get a drunk to go sober before he is ready. Doesn't work very well.
Quote: SanchoPanzaHow did that work out with, say, Qaddafi or Chavez or Castro?
I don't know what your point is. I think what I am trying to say is that there are better ways to support those who are living in tyranny than waiting war against its leadership. If America is going to take on an isolationist policy (which is exactly what they are doing) where it puts evil dictatorships on the same footing as western leaders (look at trump's actual quotes about Putin, Il) then why are they upping the defense budget by 200 billion?
And more importantly does isolationism make any sense.
more fun with Rudy. the guy's a gas. can't get enough.
Trump is a terrible person. Pretty disappointing that he has the support he does.
Quote: SteverinosTrump is a terrible person. Pretty disappointing that he has the support he does.
"Think about how stupid the average person is. Then realize half of them are stupider than that."
"A person is smart. People are stupid."
I think those are both George Carlin quotes.
The point is that this was an off-the-wall sweeping statement: "What bothers me about this forum is to take a position that leaving evil dictatorships intact is good for the people living in those conditions." And without much to back it up.Quote: boymimboI don't know what your point is. I think what I am trying to say is that there are better ways to support those who are living in tyranny than waiting war against its leadership. If America is going to take on an isolationist policy (which is exactly what they are doing) where it puts evil dictatorships on the same footing as western leaders (look at trump's actual quotes about Putin, Il) then why are they upping the defense budget by 200 billion?
And more importantly does isolationism make any sense.
After all,, even leftist heroes like FDR colluded and consorted with dictatorships like Stalin's. That did not seem to bother the left at the time. Show us the quotation where Trump "puts evil dictatorshipson the same footing as Western leaders."
If you are trying -- unsuccessfully -- to label Trump an isolationist, you should bring up Obama's record in his first 22 months in office to show the difference. The bigger point is that failures in the world of dealing with dictatorships like Venezuela and Cuba abound. They always have. There are no such easy cures as making sweeping statements and insults.
Quote: SteverinosTrump needs Mark Burnett to ensure him he's never used a racial epithet? If you've never used the word before, why would you need a different human being to ensure that for you?
Trump is a terrible person. Pretty disappointing that he has the support he does.
Righties are shaking in their boots.
Despite the MASSIVE amount of evidence that Donald is a racist, they've been faithfully pretending he isn't for years now (specifically because we've never heard him say the N-word).
Well, if a tape gets out of him saying it, they'll have to up their gaslighting to bold new levels...
Quote: ams288
Despite the MASSIVE amount of evidence that Donald is a racist, they've been faithfully pretending he isn't for years now (specifically because we've never heard him say the N-word).
Well, if a tape gets out of him saying it, they'll have to up their gaslighting to bold new levels...
We're already well past that.
His supporters aren't pretending he's not racist. They all know it. As you said, there are many examples of him saying and doing racist things (I posted a few examples the other day). There's no disputing it or arguing otherwise.
They aren't shaking in their boots, and they aren't going to gaslight; they're just going to ignore it, because many of his supporters are racists, too. The ones that aren't racist just don't care because hey, at least he's not a woman/Democrat/liberal.
Quote: TigerWuWe're already well past that.
His supporters aren't pretending he's not racist.
EvenBob and AZ do almost daily over at DT.
Quote: ams288EvenBob and AZ do almost daily over at DT.
They're just doing it to "rile up the libs."
Trump's racist views are well documented and beyond question. There's no reason to take seriously anyone who denies it.
And Donald knows you can say lol after almost anything and it makes it ok, amirite? Lol
Quote: mcallister3200Polls show that most “righties”, don’t even wear boots, much less twerk in them or whatever happy stuff you are talking about. Thank you for showing us your ignorance ;)
And Donald knows you can say lol after almost anything and it makes it ok, amirite? Lol
Don't think I've ever seen a Donald Trump tweet have a "lol" in it. But he definitely knows that you can say almost anything to the "poorly educated" and they'll eat it up.
Quote: SteverinosDon't think I've ever seen a Donald Trump tweet have a "lol" in it. But he definitely knows that you can say almost anything to the "poorly educated" and they'll eat it up.
Donald Trump is what happens when you take Dan Aykroyd at the end of "Trading Places" and give him back his money, but he still stays the disgusting slob in the Santa Claus outfit making a fool of himself at the Christmas party.
Manaforts defense team then RESTED their case without a single witness or piece of evidence
No defense or arguments given
Case now going to the jury
Quote: darkozMueller today rested his case against Manafort
Manaforts defense team then RESTED their case without a single witness or piece of evidence
No defense or arguments given
Case now going to the jury
After closing arguments
Defense - try to pick apart point by point the evidence
Prosecution - The evidence clearly shows he broke the law, make sure the jury knows
I think the evidence is pretty overwhelming.
Manafort is a slime ball. That's not illegal but that's how he comes across
The judge met privately with the jury today. That's unusual.
Been following this case. The judge has been pretty hard on the prosecution and that concerns me.
I am hoping the judge told the jury to not let his criticism of the prosecution effect their decision on determining guilt
I am predicting guilty on most of the counts. With a jury, you never know.
Quote: darkozMueller today rested his case against Manafort
Manaforts defense team then RESTED their case without a single witness or piece of evidence
No defense or arguments given
Case now going to the jury
It's clear Manafort knows he's guilty as sin and is pretty much putting all his eggs in the Presidential pardon basket.
Quote: SteverinosTrump needs Mark Burnett to ensure him he's never used a racial epithet? If you've never used the word before, why would you need a different human being to ensure that for you?
Trump is a terrible person. Pretty disappointing that he has the support he does.
that's not what he said... he said Mark Burnett said there are no tapes of him saying that.
Quote: Steverinos
Trump is a terrible person. Pretty disappointing that he has the support he does.
Ha!
He’ll gain ten points among Southern White Evangelical Christians if audio of him actually using the, “N Word,” comes out. Fifteen points if the preceding word is, “Cottonpatch.”
Quote: billryanPenn Gillette evidently is confirming that tapes from the Apprentice would capture Donny using language like that. He says he was in the room when such things were said.
I understand Teller had absolutely nothing to say about it.
Quote: rsactuarythat's not what he said... he said Mark Burnett said there are no tapes of him saying that.
I understand.
Quote: rsactuarythat's not what he said... he said Mark Burnett said there are no tapes of him saying that.
I suspect most reality TV hosts don't need their Executive Producers to reassure them that no tapes exist of them saying the N-word.
"No, he said it."
Sarah Sanders herself says she "can't guarantee" a tape of him saying it doesn't exist.
Quote: Trump.@MarkBurnettTV called to say that there are NO TAPES of the Apprentice where I used such a terrible and disgusting word as attributed by Wacky and Deranged Omarosa. I don’t have that word in my vocabulary, and never have. She made it up. Look at her MANY recent quotes saying....
So, the observation here is, if he denies having ever said the word, why does he need to tell us that Mark Burnett called to tell him that there is no tape of him saying a word that he claims he has never said?
Sarah Huckabee Sanders is taking a more cautious line, she refuses to guarantee that the American public would never hear a video of the president saying it.
I've absolutely never used the word as an insult but have discussed a particular gangster rap group out of Compton, both in the 90s and last year when the movie came out.In this case, I think people are piling on poor Sarah. Not that she doesn't deserve to be scorned and abused. Just not for this.
Penn Gillette was on the show and seemingly is saying if such a tape existed it would have him saying it.
The announcement the WH sent out saying John Brennan's security clearance had been revoked had a date of July 26, 2018. (Three days after they first threatened to revoke security clearances).
Clearly they were keeping this in their back pocket for when they wanted to change a news cycle that wasn't going in their favor (thanks, Omarosa!).
Quote: billryanHow could she possibly be certain no such tape exists? Unlike Mayor Rudie, who now claims he was with Trump 24 hours a day during the campaign, she can only attest to what she knows.
I've absolutely never used the word as an insult but have discussed a particular gangster rap group out of Compton, both in the 90s and last year when the movie came out.In this case, I think people are piling on poor Sarah. Not that she doesn't deserve to be scorned and abused. Just not for this.
Penn Gillette was on the show and seemingly is saying if such a tape existed it would have him saying it.
She should be certain that the tape doesn't exist because Trump said he never said it, therefore there was nothing to be taped.
Is she actually trying to protect her own reputation and credibility now by leaving open the possibility that Trump may be lying?
Trump is pretty vehement on the subject. He didn't say he had no recollection of saying the word (on tape or not), he said the word isn't even in his (speaking) vocabulary.
Whether or not he said it or not isn't really the biggest issue. He has said lots of stuff with little consequences. The bigger issue is his willingness to lie to anyone, at any time, on any subject big or small. It speaks to his character, believability, and credibility.
The revocation of certain security clearances may be a lot of things, but it is ridiculous to consider it an "attempt to silence a critic"...
Since when does a critic of the President (this one or any other one) need a valid security clearance to criticize the President?
It certainly CAN be a lot of other things, many of them not positive:
--you can lose "institutional knowledge" access
--it may look rather petty overall since the person likely is cleared, but you also have to have a "need to know" in order to access classified information. I had a clearance for many years; my job at various times did not have a "need to know", so it isn't like I could just go find classified stuff to read for the hell of it
--it breaks with traditions (though some traditions need broken)
The one thing it does do is fill the news cycle with additional unimportant stuff from both sides...some people will spend a lot of time reporting on this while ignoring other good or bad stories about the news of the day.
Quote: RonCRe: Revoked Security Clearances
The revocation of certain security clearances may be a lot of things, but it is ridiculous to consider it an "attempt to silence a critic"...
Since when does a critic of the President (this one or any other one) need a valid security clearance to criticize the President?
It certainly CAN be a lot of other things, many of them not positive:
--you can lose "institutional knowledge" access
--it may look rather petty overall since the person likely is cleared, but you also have to have a "need to know" in order to access classified information. I had a clearance for many years; my job at various times did not have a "need to know", so it isn't like I could just go find classified stuff to read for the hell of it
--it breaks with traditions (though some traditions need broken)
The one thing it does do is fill the news cycle with additional unimportant stuff from both sides...some people will spend a lot of time reporting on this while ignoring other good or bad stories about the news of the day.
You are forgetting, or ignoring the fact that now the current CIA Director can't consult with them as they are no longer able to discuss classified information with them. The reason retired personnel retain status is so they can be consulted. You can't consult someone who isn't cleared to discuss it.
Brennan loses his for criticism, Flynn keeps his despite being indicted.
Quote: billryanYou are forgetting, or ignoring the fact that now the current CIA Director can't consult with them as they are no longer able to discuss classified information with them. The reason retired personnel retain status is so they can be consulted. You can't consult someone who isn't cleared to discuss it.
Brennan loses his for criticism, Flynn keeps his despite being indicted.
Why would anyone in the current administration want to consult with Brennan? Brennan is scum. Maybe they would want to know how to have the CIA spy on senators? Or maybe on how to lie to Congress? I could go on and on.
CIA directors come and go but the institutional knowledge remains at the CIA with career employees.
Quote: RonCRe: Revoked Security Clearances
The revocation of certain security clearances may be a lot of things, but it is ridiculous to consider it an "attempt to silence a critic"...
Since when does a critic of the President (this one or any other one) need a valid security clearance to criticize the President?
It certainly CAN be a lot of other things, many of them not positive:
--you can lose "institutional knowledge" access
--it may look rather petty overall since the person likely is cleared, but you also have to have a "need to know" in order to access classified information. I had a clearance for many years; my job at various times did not have a "need to know", so it isn't like I could just go find classified stuff to read for the hell of it
--it breaks with traditions (though some traditions need broken)
The one thing it does do is fill the news cycle with additional unimportant stuff from both sides...some people will spend a lot of time reporting on this while ignoring other good or bad stories about the news of the day.
Yeah, it is important for several reasons.
It stops current operatives from using those resources for identifying trends, previous issues that may be related, or their backdoor contacts who have built a conduit with that particular person.
It disrupts efforts to understand and piece together the scope of Russian issues that possibly include many Trump administration and campaign people, including family members and Trump himself.
It threatens other people who have information and/or jobs that depend on them maintainin their security clearances - "this could be you". Brennan's livelihood will likely be affected by this limitation.
Since the thing was dated July 26 and not released for a couple weeks, you have to figure they have an enemies list of them all stacked in a drawer, ready to roll out whenever it's convenient.
It's very similar to what Putin and other autocrats do in kneecapping their political opposition. Attack the person, destroy their careers, hold others hostage to their whims. Next step is physical harm.
It's a basic violation and abuse of people's 1st Amendment rights. There was no claim by the Administration of any leak or violation of secure information, and no reported instance of it. So that leaves it as petty and vindictive retribution against a critic, not pertinent to his clearance status.
Exponentially worse that it's coming from the Office of the President - an abhorrent abuse of the powers WE grant that office.
Quote: FleaswatterI could go on and on.
Please...do.
He straight up admitted he revoked the security clearances as punishment for the Mueller investigation.
An investigation that Trumps claims isn't even about him.
An investigation that may involve Russian collusion, which, again, as Trump claims, isn't even illegal.
Soooooooo...... why punish people if they're not even investigating you for something that isn't even illegal?
I just can't get over how mindbogglingly stupid this man is, and yet a third of the country and most of Congress still supports him.
Quote: SteverinosPlease...do.
Just google "John Brennan failure" to start
Quote: TigerWu
He straight up admitted he revoked the security clearances as punishment for the Mueller investigation.
That was among the many reasons for it. You can read the entire statement here:
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2018/08/15/trumps-full-statement-on-revoking-john-brennans-security-clearance.html
Gabe Sherman at Vanity Fair is reporting that Donald wants Jeff Sessions to arrest Omarosa!
“Death Spiral”: Why Omarosa Totally Triggered Trump
Quote:And Trump told advisers that he wants Attorney General Jeff Sessions to have Manigault Newman arrested, according to one Republican briefed on the conversations. (It’s unclear what law Trump believes she broke.) Another Republican recounted how over the weekend Trump derailed a midterm-election strategy session to rant about Manigault Newman’s betrayal.
Quote: Fleaswatter
That was among the many reasons for it. You can read the entire statement here:
The fact that was even a reason at all should be troubling to every single American.
And no way in hell Trump wrote that statement himself.
Regardless:
".....any benefits that senior officials might glean from consultations with Mr. Brennan are now outweighed by the risks posed by his erratic conduct and behavior."
"Mr. Brennan has a history that calls into question his objectivity and credibility."
"Additionally, Mr. Brennan has recently leveraged his status as a former high-ranking official with access to highly sensitive information to make a series of unfounded and outrageous allegations – wild outbursts on the internet and television..."
"Mr. Brennan’s lying and recent conduct, characterized by increasingly frenzied commentary, is wholly inconsistent with access to the Nation’s most closely held secrets and facilitates the very aim of our adversaries, which is to sow division and chaos."
LOL
If this isn't a textbook example of the pot calling the kettle black, I don't know what is.
