Remus West wrote: Mon Jun 11, 2018 11:00 am
Bush received a ton of vitriol from me due to getting us involved in Iraq. We didn't need to go there. Had no legitimate reason to go there. Were lied to to get us there. To me Bush is personally responsible for every drop of blood spilled there. I supported the invasion of Afganistan but the invasion of Iraq was not lawful or needed. The invasion of Iraq put us squarely in the role of international bully even more than we already were.
That said, I do pine for the days of Bush compared to now. I'd rather be the neighborhood bully than Putin's little chew toy.
I know you are addressing one thing and one in which I concur and did so loud and long for as long as the discussion was to be had but it's a longer story. Clinton also had no business in Iraq and once George the Elder commit, he never should have pulled out until Iraq was liberated and the Kurds were... appeased... for lack of a better word. If George the Elder was not prepared to go that far, even he had no business bringing us in and that goes back Reagan's double dealing with foreign interests behind the scenes which then goes back to Carter's inability to work work Iran and the oil criseses of the 70s.
I, personally, hate it all and there's a whole lot of blame to go around domestically and internationally. Iraq should never have been our political toy and their blood is a stain on US hands for at least nearly as long as I've been alive.
Remus West wrote: Mon Jun 11, 2018 11:00 am
Bush received a ton of vitriol from me due to getting us involved in Iraq. We didn't need to go there. Had no legitimate reason to go there. Were lied to to get us there. To me Bush is personally responsible for every drop of blood spilled there. I supported the invasion of Afganistan but the invasion of Iraq was not lawful or needed. The invasion of Iraq put us squarely in the role of international bully even more than we already were.
That said, I do pine for the days of Bush compared to now. I'd rather be the neighborhood bully than Putin's little chew toy.
I know you are addressing one thing and one in which I concur and did so loud and long for as long as the discussion was to be had but it's a longer story. Clinton also had no business in Iraq and once George the Elder commit, he never should have pulled out until Iraq was liberated and the Kurds were... appeased... for lack of a better word. If George the Elder was not prepared to go that far, even he had no business bringing us in and that goes back Reagan's double dealing with foreign interests behind the scenes which then goes back to Carter's inability to work work Iran and the oil criseses of the 70s.
I, personally, hate it all and there's a whole lot of blame to go around domestically and internationally. Iraq should never have been our political toy and their blood is a stain on US hands for at least nearly as long as I've been alive.
hepcat wrote: Sun Jun 10, 2018 7:12 am
Bush never got this level of vitriol from folks around here.
Wait, what? Bush got a different kind of vitriol, I don't know that it was demonstrably less. The difference during the Bush years is that there were folks here that could (or would) present an honest defense of Bush. The only people willing to defend/accept Trump here are shitty trolls that people can't stop feeding. That's a combination of a change in board demographics (people leaving, and a selection of people that have been forced out of the GOP since 2008 after they clearly went insane). Well, that and the fact that Trump is the most comically unfit human being to ever be elected to high office. Bush wasn't unfit, not by a long shot.
Bush received a ton of vitriol from me due to getting us involved in Iraq. We didn't need to go there. Had no legitimate reason to go there. Were lied to to get us there. To me Bush is personally responsible for every drop of blood spilled there. I supported the invasion of Afganistan but the invasion of Iraq was not lawful or needed. The invasion of Iraq put us squarely in the role of international bully even more than we already were.
That said, I do pine for the days of Bush compared to now. I'd rather be the neighborhood bully than Putin's little chew toy.
George W. Bush was a terrible president. He lied us into war. He directed immense amounts of hate at LGBT Americans in a fanatical drive to deny us equality under the law. He abetted the transition of the GOP into an anti-democracy party that supports voter roll purging, "voter ID", and restrictions on early voting. He passed a horrifically irresponsible tax cut that ballooned our debt. He badly mismanaged the economy.
But he wasn't a racist. He wasn't a misogynist. He wasn't trying to undermine NATO, the EU, or the Western Alliance. He wasn't personally enriching himself through his office.
Trump is so bad, he makes Bush look like Lincoln.
Re: The Trump Presidency Thread
Posted: Mon Jun 11, 2018 1:56 pm
by Fireball
LordMortis wrote: Mon Jun 11, 2018 11:21 am
I know you are addressing one thing and one in which I concur and did so loud and long for as long as the discussion was to be had but it's a longer story. Clinton also had no business in Iraq and once George the Elder commit, he never should have pulled out until Iraq was liberated and the Kurds were... appeased... for lack of a better word. If George the Elder was not prepared to go that far, even he had no business bringing us in and that goes back Reagan's double dealing with foreign interests behind the scenes which then goes back to Carter's inability to work work Iran and the oil criseses of the 70s.
In Bush Sr's defense, he didn't go to war to liberate Iraq or help the Kurds, he went to war to liberate Kuwait from Iraq. That goal was quickly achieved.
Re: The Trump Presidency Thread
Posted: Mon Jun 11, 2018 2:08 pm
by LordMortis
Fireball wrote: Mon Jun 11, 2018 1:56 pm
In Bush Sr's defense, he didn't go to war to liberate Iraq or help the Kurds, he went to war to liberate Kuwait from Iraq. That goal was quickly achieved.
Then is goal was short sighted and his means for achieving it was... I don't have the words. What do you call it when you call on the help from a hopeful set of genocide attempt victims and then abandon them because you've quickly achieved your goals?
Fireball wrote: Mon Jun 11, 2018 1:56 pm
In Bush Sr's defense, he didn't go to war to liberate Iraq or help the Kurds, he went to war to liberate Kuwait from Iraq. That goal was quickly achieved.
Then is goal was short sighted and his means for achieving it was... I don't have the words. What do you call it when you call on the help from a hopeful set of genocide attempt victims and then abandon them because you've quickly achieved your goals?
One can reasonably defend the decision to not go into Iraq and overthrow Hussein in 1991. As Secretary of Defense Dick Cheney (subsequently ironically) articulated at the time, we would basically have had to set ourselves up as an occupying power for a period of uncertain duration. It basically would have been the Iraq War, only in 1991 (at which point there was also *vastly* less domestic political appetite for that sort of thing than there was in 2002, shortly after 9/11).
The harder part to defend is having Bush Sr. explicitly call on the people of Iraq to rise up and overthrow Hussein, and *then* refuse to do anything to help while they get slaughtered. That's disconnected from the decision to invade and limit the war aims to the liberation of Kuwait, though.
Fireball wrote: Mon Jun 11, 2018 1:56 pm
In Bush Sr's defense, he didn't go to war to liberate Iraq or help the Kurds, he went to war to liberate Kuwait from Iraq. That goal was quickly achieved.
Then is goal was short sighted and his means for achieving it was... I don't have the words. What do you call it when you call on the help from a hopeful set of genocide attempt victims and then abandon them because you've quickly achieved your goals?
One can reasonably defend the decision to not go into Iraq and overthrow Hussein in 1991. As Secretary of Defense Dick Cheney (subsequently ironically) articulated at the time, we would basically have had to set ourselves up as an occupying power for a period of uncertain duration. It basically would have been the Iraq War, only in 1991 (at which point there was also *vastly* less domestic political appetite for that sort of thing than there was in 2002, shortly after 9/11).
Yes. We shouldn't have tried to overthrow Hussein in 1991, or 2003. It was always a mistaken strategy.
The harder part to defend is having Bush Sr. explicitly call on the people of Iraq to rise up and overthrow Hussein, and *then* refuse to do anything to help while they get slaughtered. That's disconnected from the decision to invade and limit the war aims to the liberation of Kuwait, though.
Agreed.
Re: The Trump Presidency Thread
Posted: Mon Jun 11, 2018 3:12 pm
by GreenGoo
Good point, El Guapo. I also hated Bush for using the American peoples' desire for a response to 9/11 to facilitate lying them into an unrelated war while Americans accepted his lies more readily because they simply wanted to believe something was being done about 9/11.
He used the American peoples' grief and need for retribution to get them to agree to something they *wanted* to believe would hurt those who had hurt America, even when they knew better.
That was an incredibly shitty thing to do. Of course I blame Cheney for most of that. Bush was just this guy, you know? Cheney was evil.
A personal email account of White House Chief of Staff John Kelly was hacked, according to an email obtained by Buzzfeed via a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request.
...
The FOIA email confirms previous reports from Politico that Kelly used a compromised smartphone for months. If it's the same incident (the White House never confirmed the original reports), the attack happened during Trump's transition in late 2016 while Kelly was secretary of homeland security.
As we discussed in NYC about the toxic atmosphere here in the D.C. cesspool, my folks are nervous about e-mails you send and ask that you no longer include them on any postings. FOIA is real and everyday here in the cesspool, and even federal court action on personal accounts is real. Then there is the hacking which one of my own personal accounts has suffered recently. I do almost everything now by phone or face-to-face comms.
...
It's not clear if Kelly used the email account to conduct government business or if there was anything sensitive on it. Shortly after Trump's inauguration, the NSA reportedly told Trump administration officials to stop using personal cellphones and email accounts, as they could be vulnerable to spying by Russia, China and other US adversaries.
Re: The Trump Presidency Thread
Posted: Mon Jun 11, 2018 3:27 pm
by LordMortis
El Guapo wrote: Mon Jun 11, 2018 2:59 pm
The harder part to defend is having Bush Sr. explicitly call on the people of Iraq to rise up and overthrow Hussein, and *then* refuse to do anything to help while they get slaughtered. That's disconnected from the decision to invade and limit the war aims to the liberation of Kuwait, though.
Color me disconnected. I was a kid. I didn't understand it. I watched in horror from an arcade live as the first shelling started. And I'd quickly have friends earning their education I was suddenly hearing about them dying for something I didn't understand. Then I learned of Anfal, but that wasn't what we were there for. We were there for Kuwait and Kurds fighting also to be liberated just eventually just became a discarded tool.
And so began my first empathy for no blood for oil they kept chanting during the Reagan years when I was even younger and
I've never been particularly liberal and doubt I ever will be but that was my first introduction to "the military industrial complex" and "the multinationals" and it's never left. My heart has been with the Kurds for nearly 30 years. I'd vote for nearly anyone who promised to help them and showed me their viable plan.
I have no words for what we did but it still feels like there is a penance yet to be paid and rather than pay pay we every few years we leverage the mortgage. And it's not Republicans or Democrats doing it. It's my country, no matter who is in power.
Call what Senior did a success. Say Clinton is blameless. Whatever. I don't think even if you hit me with actual solid reasons that I'm capable of the sort of rationality that absolves my government and therefore absolves me of our relationship to the Kurdish people and the price we paid to choose the strategic importance of Kuwait.
We were supposed to be the good guys. And here we are. Today. Capitol Hill, looking at the rest of the world. And we were supposed to be at the head of the table of the good guys... Talk about me being disconnected.
Re: The Trump Presidency Thread
Posted: Mon Jun 11, 2018 3:30 pm
by Fireball
I'm trying to understand your position. Should we have gone to war with Iraq (and Turkey) to establish an independent Kurdish state in 1991? In 2003?
Is it wrong to liberate Kuwait? Or wrong to liberate Kuwait when not also liberating the Kurds?
A personal email account of White House Chief of Staff John Kelly was hacked, according to an email obtained by Buzzfeed via a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request.
...
The FOIA email confirms previous reports from Politico that Kelly used a compromised smartphone for months. If it's the same incident (the White House never confirmed the original reports), the attack happened during Trump's transition in late 2016 while Kelly was secretary of homeland security.
As we discussed in NYC about the toxic atmosphere here in the D.C. cesspool, my folks are nervous about e-mails you send and ask that you no longer include them on any postings. FOIA is real and everyday here in the cesspool, and even federal court action on personal accounts is real. Then there is the hacking which one of my own personal accounts has suffered recently. I do almost everything now by phone or face-to-face comms.
...
It's not clear if Kelly used the email account to conduct government business or if there was anything sensitive on it. Shortly after Trump's inauguration, the NSA reportedly told Trump administration officials to stop using personal cellphones and email accounts, as they could be vulnerable to spying by Russia, China and other US adversaries.
hepcat wrote: Sat Jun 09, 2018 7:28 pm
That ship sailed. You helped vote in Putin’s Orange Puppet.
I would be happy not to if given the option of someone who would do the things I have proposed.
and here is the part where you prove yourself full of shit. In order to avoid HRC you voted in someone who was openly encouraging Russian interference in our election. You can not do that and claim to be anti-Putin. It just doesn't work. You vote in Putin's bitch you do not get to pretend you were not hoping for a reach around yourself. You make all these claims about what you'd like done and then vote in someone openly embracing the opposite? You're either the biggest idiot on the planet or just trolling.
And frankly, I agree with you that our actions with regard to Putin have been far far too little but never once did I consider voting for Trump based off a desire to be stronger against Russia. I voted HRC partly because of the open Russia hate towards her. They didn't want her as our President. You gave them that.
No, when I let Putin dictate what I do I become his puppet. I was going to vote against HRC no matter who opposed her back when she was pushing red buttons. I already knew the day was coming. The one they cheated her out of to put Obama in.
Re: The Trump Presidency Thread
Posted: Mon Jun 11, 2018 4:23 pm
by LordMortis
Fireball wrote: Mon Jun 11, 2018 3:30 pm
I'm trying to understand your position. Should we have gone to war with Iraq (and Turkey) to establish an independent Kurdish state in 1991? In 2003?
Is it wrong to liberate Kuwait? Or wrong to liberate Kuwait when not also liberating the Kurds?
It was wrong to ignore the Kurds genocide. But we do that. I learned that watching Rwanda the years before hand. It was beyond wrong to use the Kurds to liberate Kuwait in leave them hanging again and again and again.
IMO when we commit liberating Kuwait, if were going to work with Kurds, rather than using their desparation, we should have liberated them too. If that meant toppling Saddam in 91, then we should have gone in with that scope in mind.
I mean what I say. No Blood for Oil meant nothing to me until the liberation of Kuwait.
hepcat wrote: Sat Jun 09, 2018 7:28 pm
That ship sailed. You helped vote in Putin’s Orange Puppet.
I would be happy not to if given the option of someone who would do the things I have proposed.
and here is the part where you prove yourself full of shit. In order to avoid HRC you voted in someone who was openly encouraging Russian interference in our election. You can not do that and claim to be anti-Putin. It just doesn't work. You vote in Putin's bitch you do not get to pretend you were not hoping for a reach around yourself. You make all these claims about what you'd like done and then vote in someone openly embracing the opposite? You're either the biggest idiot on the planet or just trolling.
And frankly, I agree with you that our actions with regard to Putin have been far far too little but never once did I consider voting for Trump based off a desire to be stronger against Russia. I voted HRC partly because of the open Russia hate towards her. They didn't want her as our President. You gave them that.
No, when I let Putin dictate what I do I become his puppet.
No puppet! No puppet! You're the puppet!!
Re: The Trump Presidency Thread
Posted: Tue Jun 12, 2018 7:37 am
by Remus West
Rip wrote: Mon Jun 11, 2018 4:04 pm I was going to vote against HRC no matter who opposed her back when she was pushing red buttons. I already knew the day was coming. The one they cheated her out of to put Obama in.
Ah, so your hatred of HRC surpasses your hatred of Russia to the extent that you'd vote for a Putin appeaser (which is a weak term given how much he has enabled Russian influence to grow and how much damage he is doing to democracy) over her no matter what. You, sir, are a true American patriot putting the nation firs........wait a second. Nope. You're still just a jackass or a troll. I'll let you pick which you'd prefer. Those damned emails.
Rip wrote: Mon Jun 11, 2018 4:04 pm I was going to vote against HRC no matter who opposed her back when she was pushing red buttons. I already knew the day was coming. The one they cheated her out of to put Obama in.
Ah, so your hatred of HRC surpasses your hatred of Russia to the extent that you'd vote for a Putin appeaser (which is a weak term given how much he has enabled Russian influence to grow and how much damage he is doing to democracy) over her no matter what. You, sir, are a true American patriot putting the nation firs........wait a second. Nope. You're still just a jackass or a troll. I'll let you pick which you'd prefer. Those damned emails.
HE has enabled Russian influence to grow? Don't think they have invaded any sovereign nations on his watch.
Actually after reading Robert Gates book I have softened on Hillary a lot, it would seem she was far more thoughtful and measured than Biden which surprised me. Either way the growth in Russian influence was under the previous administration, they haven't gained any measurable influence the last year. In fact he lost some, not because of anything other than enabling Trump. Much of Europe would be less up in arms about him annexing Ukraine than the high crime of potentially making the path for Trump easier. Perhaps ironically that may get them to actually suck it up and actually support real sanction on Russia that hurt instead of "just for appearances" stuff like they did after Crimea.
Nation first...are you turning into a nationalist? Who am I kidding you obviously put politics first.
Re: The Trump Presidency Thread
Posted: Tue Jun 12, 2018 8:15 am
by Paingod
Rip wrote: Tue Jun 12, 2018 8:07 amHE has enabled Russian influence to grow? Don't think they have invaded any sovereign nations on his watch.
Every time he alienates an ally, he's creating cracks that hostile powers can start to pry at. Every time he applauds Putin, he weakens the US as a leader and hands over more authority to Russia. Every delay in sanctions against Russia is a boon for Russia. Drips and dribbles, but the faucet should be shut off completely - not leaking to fill a basin slowly.
So, yes. He has enabled Russian influence to grow. Putin has demonstrated that he doesn't need to invade a country to sow chaos and disorder there.
I expect you won't respond, though, because it's an inconvenient truth.
Rip wrote: Tue Jun 12, 2018 8:07 amHE has enabled Russian influence to grow? Don't think they have invaded any sovereign nations on his watch.
Every time he alienates an ally, he's creating cracks that hostile powers can start to pry at. Every time he applauds Putin, he weakens the US as a leader and hands over more authority to Russia. Every delay in sanctions against Russia is a boon for Russia. Drips and dribbles, but the faucet should be shut off completely - not leaking to fill a basin slowly.
So, yes. He has enabled Russian influence to grow. Putin has demonstrated that he doesn't need to invade a country to sow chaos and disorder there.
I expect you won't respond, though, because it's an inconvenient truth.
But when the Europeans block sanctions that is just what, prudence? Europe has been far more opposed to harsh penalties against Russia than Trump has ever been.
German Chancellor Angela Merkel criticized the draft of new U.S. sanctions against Russia, targeting EU-Russia energy projects.
Italy, Hungary, Greece, France, Cyprus and Slovakia are among the EU states most skeptical about the sanctions and have called for review of sanctions. The Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orbán stated that Europe "shot itself in the foot" by introducing economic sanctions. Former Bulgarian Prime Minister Boiko Borisov stated, "I don't know how Russia is affected by the sanctions, but Bulgaria is affected severely"; Czech President Miloš Zeman and Slovakian Prime Minister Robert Fico also said that the sanctions should be lifted. In October 2017, the Hungarian Minister of Foreign Affairs and Trade Péter Szijjártó added that the sanctions "were totally unsuccessful because Russia is not on its knees economically, but also because there have been many harms to our own economies and, politically speaking, we have had no real forward progress regarding the Minsk agreement".
The Greek Prime Minister Alexis Tsipras said that Greece would seek to mend ties between Russia and EU through European institutions. Tsipras also said that Greece was not in favour of Western sanctions imposed on Russia, adding that it risked the start of another Cold War.
A number of business figures in France and Germany have opposed the sanctions. The German Economy Minister Sigmar Gabriel said that the Ukrainian crisis should be resolved by dialogue rather than economic confrontation, later adding that the reinforcement of anti-Russian sanctions will "provoke an even more dangerous situation… in Europe".
Paolo Gentiloni, Italian Minister of Foreign Affairs, said that the sanctions "are not the solution to the conflict". In January 2017, Swiss Economics Minister and former President of Switzerland Johann Schneider-Ammann stated his concern about the sanctions' harm to the Swiss economy, and expressed hope that they will soon come to an end. Some companies, most notably Siemens Gas Turbine Technologies LLC, were reported to attempt bypassing the sanctions and exporting power generation turbines to the annexed Crimea.
In August 2015, the British think tank Bow Group released a report on sanctions, calling for the removal of them. According to the report, the sanctions have had "adverse consequences for European and American businesses, and if they are prolonged... they can have even more deleterious effects in the future"; the potential cost of sanctions for the Western countries has been estimated as over $700 billion.
In June 2017, Germany and Austria criticized the U.S. Senate over new sanctions against Russia that target the planned Nord Stream 2 gas pipeline from Russia to Germany, stating that the United States was threatening Europe's energy supplies (see also Russia in the European energy sector). In a joint statement Austria's Chancellor Christian Kern and Germany's Foreign Minister Sigmar Gabriel said that "Europe's energy supply is a matter for Europe, and not for the United States of America." They also said: "To threaten companies from Germany, Austria and other European states with penalties on the U.S. market if they participate in natural gas projects such as Nord Stream 2 with Russia or finance them introduces a completely new and very negative quality into European-American relations."
In May 2018, the vice chairman of Free Democratic Party of Germany and the Vice President of the Bundestag Wolfgang Kubicki said that Germany should "take a first step towards Russia with the easing of the economic sanctions" because "this can be decided by Germany alone" and "does not need the consent of others".
Rip wrote: Mon Jun 11, 2018 4:04 pm I was going to vote against HRC no matter who opposed her back when she was pushing red buttons. I already knew the day was coming. The one they cheated her out of to put Obama in.
Ah, so your hatred of HRC surpasses your hatred of Russia to the extent that you'd vote for a Putin appeaser (which is a weak term given how much he has enabled Russian influence to grow and how much damage he is doing to democracy) over her no matter what. You, sir, are a true American patriot putting the nation firs........wait a second. Nope. You're still just a jackass or a troll. I'll let you pick which you'd prefer. Those damned emails.
HE has enabled Russian influence to grow? Don't think they have invaded any sovereign nations on his watch.
Actually after reading Robert Gates book I have softened on Hillary a lot, it would seem she was far more thoughtful and measured than Biden which surprised me. Either way the growth in Russian influence was under the previous administration, they haven't gained any measurable influence the last year. In fact he lost some, not because of anything other than enabling Trump. Much of Europe would be less up in arms about him annexing Ukraine than the high crime of potentially making the path for Trump easier. Perhaps ironically that may get them to actually suck it up and actually support real sanction on Russia that hurt instead of "just for appearances" stuff like they did after Crimea.
Nation first...are you turning into a nationalist? Who am I kidding you obviously put politics first.
Paingod beat me to it so I won't bother to reply.
As for me being a nationalist. No. I'm not and never will be. I am a patriot though and thus would never throw my vote to someone being openly supported and supportive of an enemy of the nation just to spite the other side. Maybe you should have read up on HRC a little more before the election rather than after.
Rip wrote: Mon Jun 11, 2018 4:04 pm I was going to vote against HRC no matter who opposed her back when she was pushing red buttons. I already knew the day was coming. The one they cheated her out of to put Obama in.
Ah, so your hatred of HRC surpasses your hatred of Russia to the extent that you'd vote for a Putin appeaser (which is a weak term given how much he has enabled Russian influence to grow and how much damage he is doing to democracy) over her no matter what. You, sir, are a true American patriot putting the nation firs........wait a second. Nope. You're still just a jackass or a troll. I'll let you pick which you'd prefer. Those damned emails.
HE has enabled Russian influence to grow? Don't think they have invaded any sovereign nations on his watch.
Actually after reading Robert Gates book I have softened on Hillary a lot, it would seem she was far more thoughtful and measured than Biden which surprised me. Either way the growth in Russian influence was under the previous administration, they haven't gained any measurable influence the last year. In fact he lost some, not because of anything other than enabling Trump. Much of Europe would be less up in arms about him annexing Ukraine than the high crime of potentially making the path for Trump easier. Perhaps ironically that may get them to actually suck it up and actually support real sanction on Russia that hurt instead of "just for appearances" stuff like they did after Crimea.
Nation first...are you turning into a nationalist? Who am I kidding you obviously put politics first.
Paingod beat me to it so I won't bother to reply.
As for me being a nationalist. No. I'm not and never will be. I am a patriot though and thus would never throw my vote to someone being openly supported and supportive of an enemy of the nation just to spite the other side. Maybe you should have read up on HRC a little more before the election rather than after.
From Robert Gates book:
The exchange that followed was remarkable. In strongly supporting a surge in Afghanistan, Hillary told the president that her opposition to the surge in Iraq had been political because she thought she was facing him in the Iowa primary. She went on to say, "The Iraq surge worked." The president conceded vaguely that opposition to the Iraq surge had been political. To hear the two of them making these admissions, and in front of me, was as surprising as it was dismaying.
Robert De Niro, a very Low IQ individual, has received to many shots to the head by real boxers in movies. I watched him last night and truly believe he may be “punch-drunk.” I guess he doesn’t...
...realize the economy is the best it’s ever been with employment being at an all time high, and many companies pouring back into our country. Wake up Punchy!
(Someone doesn't handle dissent well.)
Companies are pouring! Wake up Punchy!
[Edit: also, "to many shots to the head"]
Re: The Trump Presidency Thread
Posted: Tue Jun 12, 2018 5:47 pm
by LordMortis
Everything about this administration going back to his non alignment with Russia and Wikileaks and Murdoch and his team is about what's going to happen in a couple of weeks that never materializes. Hence where I stand on SK.
Re: The Trump Presidency Thread
Posted: Tue Jun 12, 2018 6:07 pm
by GreenGoo
You've got a bag of doorknobs calling other people low IQ.
And get this, you'll never believe this next part: The bag of doorknobs is the president of the USofA.
Re: The Trump Presidency Thread
Posted: Tue Jun 12, 2018 11:08 pm
by Default
GreenGoo wrote: Tue Jun 12, 2018 6:07 pm
You've got a bag of doorknobs calling other people low IQ.
And get this, you'll never believe this next part: The bag of doorknobs is the president of the USofA.
Rip wrote: Mon Jun 11, 2018 4:04 pm I was going to vote against HRC no matter who opposed her back when she was pushing red buttons. I already knew the day was coming. The one they cheated her out of to put Obama in.
Ah, so your hatred of HRC surpasses your hatred of Russia to the extent that you'd vote for a Putin appeaser (which is a weak term given how much he has enabled Russian influence to grow and how much damage he is doing to democracy) over her no matter what. You, sir, are a true American patriot putting the nation firs........wait a second. Nope. You're still just a jackass or a troll. I'll let you pick which you'd prefer. Those damned emails.
HE has enabled Russian influence to grow? Don't think they have invaded any sovereign nations on his watch.
Actually after reading Robert Gates book I have softened on Hillary a lot, it would seem she was far more thoughtful and measured than Biden which surprised me. Either way the growth in Russian influence was under the previous administration, they haven't gained any measurable influence the last year. In fact he lost some, not because of anything other than enabling Trump. Much of Europe would be less up in arms about him annexing Ukraine than the high crime of potentially making the path for Trump easier. Perhaps ironically that may get them to actually suck it up and actually support real sanction on Russia that hurt instead of "just for appearances" stuff like they did after Crimea.
Nation first...are you turning into a nationalist? Who am I kidding you obviously put politics first.
Paingod beat me to it so I won't bother to reply.
As for me being a nationalist. No. I'm not and never will be. I am a patriot though and thus would never throw my vote to someone being openly supported and supportive of an enemy of the nation just to spite the other side. Maybe you should have read up on HRC a little more before the election rather than after.
From Robert Gates book:
The exchange that followed was remarkable. In strongly supporting a surge in Afghanistan, Hillary told the president that her opposition to the surge in Iraq had been political because she thought she was facing him in the Iowa primary. She went on to say, "The Iraq surge worked." The president conceded vaguely that opposition to the Iraq surge had been political. To hear the two of them making these admissions, and in front of me, was as surprising as it was dismaying.
Hours after returning from a trip where he lavished praise on one of the world's worst dictators, President Trump declared that America's biggest enemy is... "fake news."
Re: The Trump Presidency Thread
Posted: Wed Jun 13, 2018 4:42 pm
by El Guapo
tjg_marantz wrote: Tue Jun 12, 2018 5:16 pm
Shocking
Trump's big thing politically is that he exploits (runs a truck through) the fact that everyone reads the initial headline, and very few people read the subsequent correction.
Re: The Trump Presidency Thread
Posted: Wed Jun 13, 2018 4:44 pm
by LawBeefaroni
But his Fake News Awards were great!
Re: The Trump Presidency Thread
Posted: Wed Jun 13, 2018 4:46 pm
by YellowKing
El Guapo wrote:Trump's big thing politically is that he exploits (runs a truck through) the fact that everyone reads the initial headline, and very few people read the subsequent correction.
It's also the same reason people call Trump so "media-savvy." But to me it's equivalent to complimenting a serial killer on his knife skills. I have no respect for how skilled you are at doing something that is morally reprehensible.
President Donald Trump told G7 leaders that Crimea is Russian because everyone who lives there speaks Russian, according to two diplomatic sources.
...
During the dinner, Trump also seemed to question why the G7 leaders were siding with Ukraine. The president told leaders that "Ukraine is one of the most corrupt countries in the world," the source said.
Re: The Trump Presidency Thread
Posted: Thu Jun 14, 2018 1:19 pm
by Daehawk
I wish he'd shut up. Just shut the hell up.
Re: The Trump Presidency Thread
Posted: Thu Jun 14, 2018 1:20 pm
by Zaxxon
I'm not sure whether to be relieved that this news also signifies that the USA is a British colony again, and that we're no longer subject to the rule of the Toddler in Chief, or annoyed that we're no longer an independent nation.
Re: The Trump Presidency Thread
Posted: Thu Jun 14, 2018 1:27 pm
by Daehawk
Id sooner kiss the Queen's wrinkly butt than shake Trump's hand.
Re: The Trump Presidency Thread
Posted: Thu Jun 14, 2018 1:34 pm
by Fitzy
Daehawk wrote: Thu Jun 14, 2018 1:27 pm
Id sooner kiss the Queen's wrinkly butt than shake Trump's hand.
I would shake hands with Trump and call him the greatest ever president before I bow to any monarch.
Re: The Trump Presidency Thread
Posted: Thu Jun 14, 2018 1:39 pm
by LordMortis
Zaxxon wrote: Thu Jun 14, 2018 1:20 pm
I'm not sure whether to be relieved that this news also signifies that the USA is a British colony again, and that we're no longer subject to the rule of the Toddler in Chief, or annoyed that we're no longer an independent nation.
That's what I read.
And this!!!!
During the dinner, Trump also seemed to question why the G7 leaders were siding with Ukraine.
I desperately want the quotes on this because that's been my rallying call since the 2016 primaries where:
“They softened it, I heard, but I was not involved,” Trump said. He then went on to say that Russian President Vladimir Putin will not “go into Ukraine,” seeming not to realize that Russian troops intervened both in Crimea and eastern Ukraine in 2014 and remain there to this day.
“Ukraine is a problem, and we should help them, but let Germany and other countries over there that are directly affected — let them work it,” Trump said. “We’ve got enough problems in this country.”
