The Trump Presidency | Biden Inaugurated

Status
Not open for further replies.
Cheesy said:
I'd question the intelligence of anyone who's voting to remain within the EU but votes for the party whose entire platform is for us to leave.:lol:
Click to expand...
How about if you're theoretically against the E.U and think there's a better way to organize yourself in the modern world but could foresee the utter shower of shite leaving under the current Tories would be?

Smarter than being against the EU and voting for the shower of shite. But that's just my opinion.
 
Abizzz said:
How about if you're theoretically against the E.U and think there's a better way to organize yourself in the modern world but could foresee the utter shower of shite leaving under the current Tories would be?

Smarter than being against the EU and voting for the shower of shite. But that's just my opinion.
Click to expand...

UKIP would've been even less prepared for the realities of leaving than the Tories! Although I won't go into it too much here, wrong thread for that.:lol:
 
Cheesy said:
UKIP would've been even less prepared for the realities of leaving than the Tories! Although I won't go into it too much here, wrong thread for that.:lol:
Click to expand...
I'm only devils advocate here, i'm neither for leaving nor for UKIP. But I do think remaining ukipers are smarter than leaving ukipers, them being a tiny minority only strengthens my believe.

It's only the wrong thread on the surface. Remain voting Ukipers is exactly the kind of 3D chess Trumpsters keep on talking about...
 
Is there a tactical benefit for him in picking this fight? Deflection from investigation? Keeping it partisan, in the face of GOP slippage, in the Senate?
 
oneniltothearsenal said:
I only return condescension when it is given to me first as you did at the start of this exchange so you should probably look in the mirror and begin debates with a different tone than how you started this one.

This book is a great summary:



"Byrne does not portray Reagan as a passive, disengaged president victimized by maverick policy makers. Through the use of primary sources, the author demonstrates that Reagan was actively involved in every stage of Iran-Contra from its initiation through the cover up. . . . Byrne provides readers with a cautionary tale about structural issues in the American political system that perpetuate the unchecked abuse of power by the executive branch. this work is a must read for students of the presidency. Highly recommended."—Choice

"At last, the Iran-Contra affair has a comprehensive history worthy of the scandal which, if the system had worked, should have landed many senior White House officials in the slammer. Malcolm Byrne has told this complex story in brilliant fashion."—Seymour M. Hersh, author of Chain of Command: The Road from 9/11 to Abu Ghraib
Click to expand...

That's a ridiculous response. Tell me in your own words why I'm wrong.
 
Tincanalley said:
Is there a tactical benefit for him in picking this fight? Deflection from investigation? Keeping it partisan, in the face of GOP slippage, in the Senate?
Click to expand...
I think there are a number of reasons
1. Politicise the environment so much that any move by the Dems for increased oversight etc is spun as politically motivated
2. It's a fight he probably can win (it's not that much money and the reality is to secure the land and build a wall will take longer than 2 years so I think the Dems will agree in the end knowing in truth it won't happen this term)
3. He's basically starting his 2020 campaign... You voted for a wall and the Dems stopped it... They don't care about crime etc... Not saying I buy into it but you can see it being the basis of his message

I'm not sure I buy into the distraction line... It for sure won't distract Meuller and if any charges eventually land there will be no keeping them off the news cycle
 
Com
sun_tzu said:
I think there are a number of reasons
1. Politicise the environment so much that any move by the Dems for increased oversight etc is spun as politically motivated
2. It's a fight he probably can win (it's not that much money and the reality is to secure the land and build a wall will take longer than 2 years so I think the Dems will agree in the end knowing in truth it won't happen this term)
3. He's basically starting his 2020 campaign... You voted for a wall and the Dems stopped it... They don't care about crime etc... Not saying I buy into it but you can see it being the basis of his message

I'm not sure I buy into the distraction line... It for sure won't distract Meuller and if any charges eventually land there will be no keeping them off the news cycle
Click to expand...

There's distraction alright, but it's the long game here. He and Rudy will try to spin the Mueller Probe into 47 angry democrats trying everything to stop The Wall™.
 
Grinner said:
That's a ridiculous response. Tell me in your own words why I'm wrong.
Click to expand...
He’s contesting that Watergate was “worse” than Iran-Contra because of the context surrounding Iran-Contra.

Watergate became a bigger scandal and was more immediately politically consequential as it led to Nixon’s resignation, but Iran-Contra involved negotiating with terrorists, sending weapons to people who would eventually shoot them back at us, meddling in the affairs of Central American countries, funding and (at best) inadvertently assisting the smuggling of cocaine cartels, and supplying a military force that Congress expressly forbid the president from supplying.
 
Carolina Red said:
He’s contesting that Watergate was “worse” than Iran-Contra because of the context surrounding Iran-Contra.

Watergate became a bigger scandal and was more immediately politically consequential as it led to Nixon’s resignation, but Iran-Contra involved negotiating with terrorists, sending weapons to people who would eventually shoot them back at us, meddling in the affairs of Central American countries, funding and (at best) inadvertently assisting the smuggling of cocaine cartels, and supplying a military force that Congress expressly forbid the president from supplying.
Click to expand...
never seen it laid out, one after the other, like that. Wow :lol:
 
Carolina Red said:
He’s contesting that Watergate was “worse” than Iran-Contra because of the context surrounding Iran-Contra.

Watergate became a bigger scandal and was more immediately politically consequential as it led to Nixon’s resignation, but Iran-Contra involved negotiating with terrorists, sending weapons to people who would eventually shoot them back at us, meddling in the affairs of Central American countries, funding and (at best) inadvertently assisting the smuggling of cocaine cartels, and supplying a military force that Congress expressly forbid the president from supplying.
Click to expand...


Let him post his own words. I'm sure he doesn't need your help.
 
Carolina Red said:
He’s contesting that Watergate was “worse” than Iran-Contra because of the context surrounding Iran-Contra.

Watergate became a bigger scandal and was more immediately politically consequential as it led to Nixon’s resignation, but Iran-Contra involved privately negotiating with terrorists, sending weapons to people who would eventually shoot them back at us, meddling in the affairs of Central American countries, funding and (at best) inadvertently assisting the smuggling of cocaine cartels, and supplying a military force that Congress expressly forbid the president from supplying.
Click to expand...

Small addition.

You can argue that Watergate was worse because it was the first time the American public has a breach of trust from the highest level played out in front of the whole world, but the nature of the action was much more benign than that of Iran Contra.
 
InfiniteBoredom said:
Small addition.

You can argue that Watergate was worse because it was the first time the American public has a breach of trust from the highest level played out in front of the whole world, but the nature of the action was much more benign than that of Iran Contra.
Click to expand...
I wouldn’t and you’re quite right.
 
http://www.bravotv.com/personal-space/wait-melania-trump-may-not-even-live-in-the-white-house

I’d heard about the separate bedrooms, but the separate house is news to me. And talking to someone in the DC federal world just now and they confirmed that she lives in Potomac, MD, near where the kid goes to school. She doesn’t live in the White House.
Looks like she’s found a way to make that marriage work for her, by not being around the fat orange fcuk.
 
Grinner said:
That's a ridiculous response. Tell me in your own words why I'm wrong.
Click to expand...

No need. You never even adequately explained in your words or sourced others why you feel you are right in the first place so my source and long post suffice. The ball is still on your side of the court although the bolded pretty much describes every single post of yours on this topic - lacking any valid logic, lacking any sourced facts, just strong opinions with nothing backing them up.

Edit: looks like Carolina already did you the favor and tried to explain it in other terms. Feel free to present your case (or source someone elses).
 
Last edited:
The last tweet there I fully expect to be absolute bollocks. I expect Xi will come out and say they didn’t even speak and are not even discussing a deal.
 
He's in the White House waiting for Dems, then 11 minutes later he's just finished a "long" call with Xi?
 
'Just had a long call with President Look Over There of the People's Republic of Distraction. He said something, I said whatever; now, how about those Yankees?'
 
He's giving the impression that he's been waiting at the Resolute desk since Christmas Eve, just like Al Bundy when he set up a shoe advice hotline.

hqdefault.jpg
 
Have the MAGA people and bots stopped defending Trump on twitter now? A year ago you would always see quite a few replies in support of whatever garbage he was spouting but nowadays 98% of the replies are just people mocking him.
 
Rado_N said:
I mean, based off the history of the timings of his connected tweets it could easily have taken him 10.5 minutes to type the last one out.
Click to expand...
Very true.

Somebody posted in the comments to that tweet that it was announced on tv 5 mins before he tweeted that China had basically imported 0 US soybeans and had found new suppliers.
 
Zlaatan said:
Have the MAGA people and bots stopped defending Trump on twitter now? A year ago you would always see quite a few replies in support of whatever garbage he was spouting but nowadays 98% of the replies are just people mocking him.
Click to expand...


He's still got a few, and there's loads and loads of bots posting in reply to his account. Twitter purged loads of fake accounts last year and Trump bitched that he lost 4 million followers or something like that. He went down to 45 million or so, now he's up to nearly 57 million so the bots are back in force.
 
SteveJ said:
He's giving the impression that he's been waiting at the Resolute desk since Christmas Eve, just like Al Bundy when he set up a shoe advice hotline.

hqdefault.jpg
Click to expand...
I had one of my former teachers who I’ve still kept up with post on Facebook that “like him or not, you can’t deny he’s hard working”

I said, “yeah, he works his ass off on his golf handicap”
 
Rado_N said:
He's in the White House waiting for Dems, then 11 minutes later he's just finished a "long" call with Xi?
Click to expand...
Trump: "President Xi? I'd like to make a deal"
Domino's Pizza: "Wrong number, Sir"
Trump: "Money. Economy. Yuge."
Domino's Pizza: "Misplaced your pills again, have you Sir?"
Trump: "I can't spend all day talking to you, I have a tweet to send!"
 
Status
Not open for further replies.