The 2018 Trump Presidency thread

[JessFR]

Yeah no I'm done. I'm not repeating myself a third time. One benefit of the doubt was enough.

 

[JGrimez]

No, I'm serious. Weinstein's accusers were very quick to emerge.
There are many many more people that detest Trump.
Am I being unreasonable when I say that I'd expect legitimate accusers to come forward if he was a rapist?
They would receive millions of $ and be heralded a hero around the world.
All these other politicians, producers, actors are losing their jobs and having their reputations destroyed due to credible allegations of sexual impropriety, ranging from unwanted advances to violent rape and pedophilia.

And Trump's court case is where? His list of accusers is where? If you're going to say the accusers that we already know about - where are the court cases, the convictions, the settlements?

Does this fact register with the people that think he's a rapist?

 

[JessFR]

You seem to pay no real attention to my arguments, instead sort of half hearing them then bringing up something vaguely related. Why should I continue arguing about this if you're gonna do that?

 

[JGrimez]

Whatever. I'm trying to get to the core of the issue.
Those questions were directed at everyone btw.

What's your opinion on the North Korea article?

The recovery got started on Election Day 2016. It took Trump's Tax Cuts and Regulation Cuts to get the economy booming. Before that it was the worst and slowest economic recovery since the Great Depression. It took just 6 months for Trump to get to 3%, even though they said it was impossible - and then already it's over 4%, and I expect it's going to grow faster and faster. We're just getting started here."

The Dems say Trump is destroying our country... yet Obama is taking credit for our booming economy. Which one is it?

 

[spacejunk]

this is quite an interesting interview with rick wilson, a republican strategist who opposes trump from the right.

he discusses the fact that trump is not a conservative - and the fact that his policies will inevitably hurt the people who support him - amongst various other things.
it's a couple of weeks old, but still very much relevant.

 

[zephyr]

I remember laughing at the thought of Trump being president as there was no way he would actually be voted in due to not being experienced at all as well as his general public persona.

I dont remember at all any sexual assault allegations directed at him or any sexual harassment allegations, just his various marriages etc etc. Tall poppy syndrome exists here in Australia, allegations are allegations and I dont really but into any of it unless theres actual charges or confessions, the pressure of public opinion relies on reaction from the public as a mass, it doesnt look like theres a significant proportion of the public that think hes a rapist either. Crude and obnoxious? Yes. Predator? No.

Sexual harassment and assault cases happen all the time, most are people not in the public eye but it is pretty alarming that a noticeably growing number of celebrities and pollies are in the headlines for this.

Some like Cosby and Rolf Harris are predators, their victims went without justice because the perps were protected and too powerful. Theres others who have been named and are fighting back suing for libel like Geoffrey Rush, so the court of public opinion just assumes guilty until proven innocent.

If Trump did rape anyone, he isn't a celebrity anymore and I guess he will be very well protected from any chance of being charged because of the loss of face to the nation, not because he is anything special himself. The head of state seems to be an important position in theory enough to be protected at all costs, even the cost of many other public servants reputations and huge expenses kn protecting his family, but not respected enough to have a respectable person take office.

North Korean leader Kim Jong Un says his June summit with U.S. President Donald Trump has stabilized the regional security situation.

South Korean media pool reports say Kim made the comment during a meeting with South Korean President Moon Jae-in.

The reports say Kim thanked Moon for brokering his summit with Trump in Singapore.

The leaders of the two Koreas had their first in-depth talks in Pyongyang on Tuesday. The talks are to continue Wednesday and Moon is expected to return to Seoul on Thursday

The whole Nuke dicksizing and rhetoric Kim and Trump engaged on was pretty fucking stupid, clearly both were just facing off like losers fighting over a girl.

Trump did do one thing though that has not been done in too long and that was to cut the crap and have a face to face meeting.

The Moon-Kim meeting was exactly what's needed, the Trump-Kim was what the region and world needed, it's not as if refusing to engage has actually achieved anything and just made tension worse.

It's taken a lifetime to get to that position, expecting everything to come up rainbows immediately is unrealistic, I dont see how total nuclear capability disarmament is in NKs best interest since gaining that got them to be taken somewhat seriously in the first place. They could be run over by usual warfare or nukes easily with hardly any losses before they had hikes and a little harder to invade no loss of life after.

So why should they disarm with no complete drop of sanctions from the US?

 

[Cream Gravy?]

Thanks for the links, I will do some reading and try to see what's going on there.
Without knowing too much about Devos I do think she was placed into her position because she can be trusted, not necessarily because she's the best person for the job. Unfortunately that's what it has come to at this point with so many DC snakes in the grass all trying to take down a democratically-elected president in what basically amounts to a coup. I do agree that the US education system shat itself a long time ago so I'm not blaming Trump for the current state of affairs like many others are wont to do - but education is definitely an important issue.

She may be 'trustworthy' in that she is exactly what she says she is, but I don't believe she has the interests of the greater population at heart with her policy trends, and I honestly believe that she desires to rob the not-so-well-off of their rights to an education.

As someone who has held jobs in the local school district (a very wealthy one, near best in our state even) I must say that even the well off schools aren't getting it right. They simply use their extra tax dollars to buy more electronics which only serve to muddy the ability of teachers to teach. Also, either kids are getting much stupider, or I was segregated by my intellect in grade school (I do recall always taking college prep courses). But even as a senior when I became disenfranchised with AP classes and switched to the easy classes, my peers weren't dumb. Not as dumb as the kids there now...

I guess my point is, the education system has been going downhill across the country for decades, but Devos just wants to accelerate that trend from what I can tell.

 

[Captain.Heroin]

this is quite an interesting interview with rick wilson, a republican strategist who opposes trump from the right.

he discusses the fact that trump is not a conservative - and the fact that his policies will inevitably hurt the people who support him - amongst various other things.
it's a couple of weeks old, but still very much relevant.

Thank you for the link. I know there's many on the right (whether it be closer to republicans or libertarians) who are just abhorred by what Trump is doing.

 

[alasdairm]

Because the entire legacy media was lying...yes they made a mistake with the numbers...

were the media lying or did they make a mistake? they can't both be true.

If it was an honest mistake, do you honestly have a problem with it? Or are you convinced that it was a conscious lie (the purpose of which makes no sense because they were going to eventually get fact-checked).

i am convinced it was a conscious lie driven by trump's narcissism and insecurity.

I don't believe this, sorry. Source?

Trump inauguration crowd photos were edited after he intervened

The photographer cropped out empty space “where the crowd ended” for a new set of pictures requested by Trump on the first morning of his presidency, after he was angered by images showing his audience was smaller than Barack Obama’s in 2009.

The detail was revealed in investigative reports released to the Guardian under the Freedom of Information Act by the inspector general of the US interior department. They shed new light on the first self-inflicted crisis of Trump’s presidency, when his White House falsely claimed he had attracted the biggest ever inauguration audience.

The records detail a scramble within the National Park Service (NPS) on 21 January 2017 after an early-morning phone call between Trump and the acting NPS director, Michael Reynolds. They also state that Sean Spicer, then White House press secretary, called NPS officials repeatedly that day in pursuit of the more flattering photographs.

(my emphasis)

...but are you going to deny that the MSM circulated that half-full crowd under false pretenses?

what false pretenses. they were circulating a factual photograph. not fake lies. an actual image of the crowd size(s).

this would have been a complete non-issue if sean spicer had not stood up in his conference immediately after the ceremony and stated: "This was the largest audience to ever witness an inauguration, period". he has since said he regrets what he said and admits it was a mistake. curious that he does yet you don't.

Why didn't you call him out for insulting me in the previous post?

but what about? but what about? but what about?

i didn't call him out because i saw your insult, not his.

Did I instigate the insult or did I merely call him what he called me?

"but he started it!" really. that's where we are now? ok.

I will refrain from insulting anyone as requested under the rules - but if someone does that to me then I'll respond in kind. Fair?

absolutely. because two wrongs always make a right

Also what you're ignoring here is the difference between hiring for business and politics.

oh the fucking irony. but, again, let's ask this guy trump who you seem to admire quite a lot: Donald Trump Says He'll Run America Like His Business

Thanks for the link, if this is all true I'd have an issue with it, unless some of it was done for temporary protective or security purposes (withholding White House visitor logs for example).

well, the net effect is that the public is now barred from knowing which activists, lobbyists, political donors and others are accessing the president and his staff on a daily basis. they cite "national security". what do you think?

as part of obama's commitment to transparency, the obama administration provided online records of visitors on an ongoing basis. the data is publicly available in the obama white house archive: [White House Visitor Records

alasdair

 

[spacejunk]

Thank you for the link. I know there's many on the right (whether it be closer to republicans or libertarians) who are just abhorred by what Trump is doing.

No worries - it's from australian tv obviously.

I think a lot of genuine conservatives are horrified at what trump's done to their party, but it seems like there are complex reasons as to why some still choose to support him.

It's interesting that trump has the support of evangelicals, who used to make a big fuss about politicians' moral indiscretions.
I suppose some people are more selective about how they apply their principles than others.

 

[alasdairm]

^ i guess family values evangelicals are now fine with having 5 children by 3 different marriages and having an affair with a porn star then paying her off to keep her quiet.

very selective and extremely hypocritical.

alasdair

 

[alasdairm]

I'm not saying everything they publish is fake news, but everything (all media sources) require some pretty stringent fact-checking these days (and I am NOT talking about Snopes or Politifact).

i asked you about this a couple of times last year but you did not answer.

if you read their process (Our process: The Principles of the Truth-O-Meter: PolitiFact’s methodology for independent fact-checking) it would certainly seem to indicate that they care about veracity and non-partisanship. if you think they're not objective, maybe you could pick out a couple of items they have rated and demonstrate why you feel their rating is incorrect?

which fact-checking sources would you consider reliable?

alasdair

 

[treezy z]

Thank you for the link. I know there's many on the right (whether it be closer to republicans or libertarians) who are just abhorred by what Trump is doing.

That is because it was a uniparty before Trump, they all agreed on the major issues and differed on things like abortion and other semi-important shit.

The only important difference between the parties in the last couple decades was gun control.

Bush and Obama ran the same basic anti-American economic policy (import cheap labor, encourage offshoring, allow Wall Street unfettered influence on the economy) destabilized the middle east, reduced civil liberties, and were bought and paid for before even being elected (by roughly the same people.)

The "conservatives" represented by the likes of Rick Wilson put up token resistance to leftist policy and fold like a cheap table a short time later. Every time for the past 50 years.

 

[treezy z]

And yeah most of these "conservatives" are pissed America is no longer being run like an asset of a hedge fund, stripping it of all it's value before closing the company.

 

[JessFR]

^ i guess family values evangelicals are now fine with having 5 children by 3 different marriages and having an affair with a porn star then paying her off to keep her quiet.

very selective and extremely hypocritical.

alasdair

They're apparently fine with an atheist president too. It's just bizarre. Unless you think trumps a Christian in which case all I can do is laugh.

It's like the evangelicals don't actually believe in Christianity, but rather some arbitrary right wing ideology that's simply justified using Christianity.

 

[Escher's Waterfall]

Sessions looks unlikely to survive long past November, it seems.

 

[JGrimez]

If Trump did rape anyone, he isn't a celebrity anymore and I guess he will be very well protected from any chance of being charged because of the loss of face to the nation, not because he is anything special himself. The head of state seems to be an important position in theory enough to be protected at all costs, even the cost of many other public servants reputations and huge expenses kn protecting his family, but not respected enough to have a respectable person take office.

Bill Clinton? He was impeached for a BJ in the oval office.
Imagine what they could do to Trump if a credible accusation of rape surfaces?
Trump has far more enemies and opposition in the government than Slick Willy had.

were the media lying or did they make a mistake? they can't both be true.

What I meant was the media lied and the Trump admin made a mistake when they reflexively went on the defensive to disprove the media's lies.
You're not admitting that the fake and misleading halfsize-crowd photo was disseminated by the MSM first. At least be honest about that.

i am convinced it was a conscious lie driven by trump's narcissism and insecurity.

Again I'm imploring you to be fair and honest about this issue. Do you admit the media spread fake images to try and deligitimize the Trump inauguration?
Should the WH have responded to address the lies?
Do you only demonize lying if it's one specific side that does it? (similar to users here leveling personal insult?)

what false pretenses. they were circulating a factual photograph. not fake lies. an actual image of the crowd size(s).

Unbelievable. You're actually denying it. Ever hear of lying by omission?

ABC issued an apology for deceptively editing former White House Press Secretary Ari Fleischer's comments about Trump's first few days in office after they cut him off mid-sentence in order to cast him in a false light. In a segment where ABC was complaining about the newly inaugurated president, Ari was shown saying, "It looks to me if the ball was dropped on Saturday," talking about the way Sean Spicer handled criticism about the size of the crowd at Trump's inauguration. The newscast continued to nitpick Trump's first week as president but after the segment aired, Fleischer tweeted, "Nightline proves Spicer right about MSM's dedication to negativity," adding, "if this is how the press reports, Trump is right to go after them." He concluded, "When the press distorts someone's quote and twists their words, we all have a problem."

He said they twisted his words because they left out the rest of his sentence when he said, "Sean recovered it and ran for a 1st down on Monday." After being called out by Fleischer on the deception, ABC issued an on-air apology, saying, 'Nightline aired a segment Monday night about the first three days of the new administration including Sean Spicer's statement ot the press on Saturday. As part of the report, we interviewed former White House press secretary Ari Fleischer. In editing the piece for air, his quote was shortened and as a result his opinions mischaracterized. We are fixing the piece online to include his full quote and context. We apologize and regret the error"

The difference between you and I - I'm willing to state that the Trump admin may have flubbed numbers.
You refuse to admit any fault on behalf of the MSM, which have proven themselves to be vastly more dishonest than the Trump administration (and they're the media, not politicians).
If you actually cared about lying as much as you claim to - then you would agree with or join me in attacking the mainstream media.

i didn't call him out because i saw your insult, not his.

How convenient you only saw mine! Please read everyone's post with the same scrutiny that you read mine.

"but he started it!" really. that's where we are now? ok.

Mate, be mature about this. I'm not the one that has problems with insults here - it's everyone else who gets offended.
If it is the rules here - then the rules apply to everyone. If not then you're holding a political bias, and marginalizing me based on my political views.
This is the exact issue I had problems with before - people trying to bait me into breaking rules (by breaking rules themselves) but then using that to punish only myself.
After complaining in the past I was told to simply report the posts that contain insults - which I've done numerous times - and guess what, the posts don't get changed! (and I assume that person is not warned).

absolutely. because two wrongs always make a right

One wrong makes a wrong and that's regardless of where it emanates from.
This is also representative of the Trump/media dynamic.
Media attacks Trump, often dishonestly and unfairly = no problem.
Trump responds, defends himself, fights fire with fire = Trump is the problem for doing this...

oh the fucking irony. but, again, let's ask this guy trump who you seem to admire quite a lot: Donald Trump Says He'll Run America Like His Business

Maybe he was referring to the economy? (which is proving a success) Again, nuance.
Anyone who knows anything about politics knows that you cannot run the government like a business in all areas.
But you can take some of the same concepts and translate them as we're seeing.
Try not to take everything literally in order to try and trip someone up.

well, the net effect is that the public is now barred from knowing which activists, lobbyists, political donors and others are accessing the president and his staff on a daily basis. they cite "national security". what do you think?

As I stated I have a problem with it.
However there is currently a coup being attempted against the administration, so I can completely understand this information being temporarily secret indeed for reasons of national security.
If that continues after this mess is cleaned up (say by the end of the first term) then I will be the first to demand transparency.

as part of obama's commitment to transparency, the obama administration provided online records of visitors on an ongoing basis

Bad move on his part. Now people are asking questions like why was alleged pedo/child-trafficker James Alefantis meeting privately with Obama in the WH on numerous occasions?
They thought that they were above the law (and they were) so they were not worried about any criminality. But now that Trump's in charge they are fearful and scattering, and a lot of their past actions should come back to bite them in the ass.

 

[JGrimez]

Sessions looks unlikely to survive long past November, it seems.

Jeff Sessions AKA 'The Silent Executioner'

There are currently over 51,000 sealed indictments across all states.
A normal yearly amount is roughly 1,000.

Somebody's been working!
I'm curious to see who these indictments are for..

 

[Xorkoth]

It's like the evangelicals don't actually believe in Christianity, but rather some arbitrary right wing ideology that's simply justified using Christianity.

It's really weird. Somehow the establishment has utterly confused religion and politics for them and they're unable to tell them apart. My aunt and cousin have always been very Christian, they're sweet people who love others and are very moral, always have been. But for the last decade or so, they have utterly bought into the right-wing religious shit. They will ONLY vote Republican. They'll completely ignore any evidence that the candidates they're voting for go against their supposed values, values which they do still hold and practice in their own lives. They're big Trump supporters, citing that "finally we have a good Christian man in office again". The idea of voting Democrat makes them really uncomfortable and is tantamount to betraying their faith. It's the weirdest thing, and it creeps me out.

 

[iridescentblack]

It's really weird. Somehow the establishment has utterly confused religion and politics for them and they're unable to tell them apart. My aunt and cousin have always been very Christian, they're sweet people who love others and are very moral, always have been. But for the last decade or so, they have utterly bought into the right-wing religious shit. They will ONLY vote Republican. They'll completely ignore any evidence that the candidates they're voting for go against their supposed values, values which they do still hold and practice in their own lives. They're big Trump supporters, citing that "finally we have a good Christian man in office again". The idea of voting Democrat makes them really uncomfortable and is tantamount to betraying their faith. It's the weirdest thing, and it creeps me out.

Funny. You just described my aunt and uncle.