The 2019 Trump Presidency Thread

[Ganjcat]

President Trump is not that bad.
I understand that many of you lefties are butt-hurt, but Trump is actually doing ok. He has achieved some good things, for which Americans should feel proud.
Over here, in Australia, we look on longingly, wishing...if only we had a Donald Trump to save us from politicians who have sold us down the river, leaving us drowning in debt that can never be repaid.
De-industrialized, our youth with few options for employment. Apprenticeships have all but vanished, importing cheaply made chinese junk and no longer manufacturing anything ourselves. We don't even have a steel mill in this hopeless country anymore. Our Politicians are so irrelevant, it really doesn't matter who they are or what they say. Parasites with their snouts in the trough. Our media, like yours is a laughing stock. Australia has no leadership, no vision,no hope. Oh how we wished we had your President Trump, someone to put his country first.
You may not like him. He's probably not very likable. But that's ok. He might does some stupid shit...sure. But he is not THAT bad. Some of the things he is doing are good. He does care about America, and the well-being of Americans. If only we someone like that.
I feel proud of America. You did so well for not electing just another worthless sell-out politician. Thank God for President Trump.
Well done America. Top class.

I agree I always liked him since I first seen him I took a liking to him just so real and full of energy and passion emotionak content kinda like Farage but American and clued up more than he lets on imo anyway plus very good sense of humour which is a good character personality sign for me the media absolutely hate him I hope Trumps doing alright

 

[Ganjcat]

its upsettint isn't it Derschieber even if the guy is that bad as you say he is why keep expressing all that hate towares him doesn't that make you as bad as him? People just listen to the bias American media is way to much not that our media is any better over the pond

 

[JessFR]

its upsettint isn't it Derschieber even if the guy is that bad as you say he is why keep expressing all that hate towares him doesn't that make you as bad as him?

Uhh, no? This isn't some childrens morality tale. You're allowed to hate your political leaders without automatically being wrong to do so. That's kinda the point of free society.

 

[Ganjcat]

No not at all Jess, but it just really annoys me how one sided this thread is when I first came on it I thought yay see what shenanigans trump is up to etc you can see its just mindless insult after insult even the media have certain standards of writing and tone but it really does feel like dark hate most of these posts I bet Bush and Blair didn't get this much hate yet they were responsible for countless deaths in the middle east as well as arguably the unstable immagrint situation caused by Isis caused by those twits

 

[ac360]

snip

You have no right to be a complete asshole about this when you don't even live in the US. and almost every single point you've brought up supporting Trump is complete bullshit.

 

[Ganjcat]

You have no right to be a complete asshole about this when you don't even live in the US. and almost every single point you've brought up supporting Trump is complete bullshit.

Why does living in the US make you more knowledgeable than them I suppose you arnt swayed by the media or another mindless trump hating drone

 

[ac360]

Why does living in the US make you more knowledgeable than them I suppose you arnt swayed by the media or another mindless trump hating drone

I actually see the effects of what he's done to me and people in my life. And if you think all the media has a severe anti-Trump bias, they don't. He's just a pathological liar who denies clear facts.

 

[Ganjcat]

I actually see the effects of what he's done to me and people in my life. And if you think all the media has a severe anti-Trump bias, they don't. He's just a pathological liar who denies clear facts.

so what effects are these then? Come on lets hear it what have you acutally seen with your own two eyes do the poptarts cost an extra dollar or something lol?

 

[JessFR]

No not at all Jess, but it just really annoys me how one sided this thread is when I first came on it I thought yay see what shenanigans trump is up to etc you can see its just mindless insult after insult even the media have certain standards of writing and tone but it really does feel like dark hate most of these posts I bet Bush and Blair didn't get this much hate yet they were responsible for countless deaths in the middle east as well as arguably the unstable immagrint situation caused by Isis caused by those twits

We aren't the media. We don't have to hold ourselves to a standard of political neutrality. And well yeah probably a disproportionate number of bluelighters are left wing, and so fairly anti trump. Likely a reflection of a left wing bias in drug users more broadly.

And you're right, I certainly never bashed George Bush like I do Trump. But thing is, I don't tend to judge people for their actions, but their motives and intentions. And on that level I find Bush much less bad than Trump. Besides, it's a lot easier to see Bush as a pawn, strongly influenced by those advising him.

Trump is a lot of things, but I don't think of him as a pawn.

 

[ac360]

so what effects are these then? Come on lets hear it what have you acutally seen with your own two eyes do the poptarts cost an extra dollar or something lol?

No, it's been the fear of him trying to repeal DACA because one of my friends was brought here from Macedonia at age 2 and that Obama policy allowed her to live here legally and not be deported to a place she's never known. His calling sexual assault survivors liars which has caused people I know who are survivors to go into breakdowns. and the list goes on

 

[Xorkoth]

This is a bit off topic but if the dems want trumps tax returns made public so Badly then I want to see every single congress members tax returns including republicans .

Yeah I'd love for that to be the case too. I just think it's massively hypocritical since Trump harrassed Obama for his birth certificate for years.

I just don’t understand why god knows how much of tax payers money has gone towards trumps witch-hunt which so far has returned nothing .

Again I challenge you to read it. I mean, you should care to learn from the best source we have. It has turned up all sorts of stuff. It does not paint a flattering picture. It's page after page of lying and obstruction and many times where it states that nTrump didn't break the law only because his people were refusing to do the things he asked them to do, to prevent him from breaking the law. It's all right there.

But yeah, it's nice to be able to debate this stuff. A lot of the people we've had here on the right side have unwilling to actually debate so it puts people on the defensive.

 

[Ganjcat]

Is trump still coming to the uk again

 

[cduggles]

Trump, his children, and his businesses sue Deutsche Bank, Capital One in bid to thwart House subpoenas

Nicholas Kamm/AFP/Getty Images

Lawyers representing President Trump, his three grown children, and seven Trump Organization companies filed suit late Monday in a bid to prevent Deutsche Bank and Capital One from complying with congressional subpoenas. Two weeks ago, the House Financial Services Committee and House Intelligence Committee subpoenaed the two banks, requesting information reportedly includingpotential evidence of money laundering by people in Russia and Eastern Europe.

The lawsuit, filed in federal court in Manhattan, is the latest bid by Trump to shield his personal and business financial records from House Democrats and the public. He has already asked the Treasury Department not to hand over his tax returns and sued his accounting firm and House Oversight Committee Chair Elijah Cummings (D-Md.) to thwart another subpoena.

Monday's lawsuit argues that the House subpoenas "have no legitimate or lawful purpose" and instead are meant to "harass" Trump and "cause him political damage." In a statement, Trump's lawyers Marc Mukasey and Patrick Strawbridge called the subpoenas a "sweeping, lawless, invasion of privacy."

Claiming the House subpoenas are illegitimate or politically motivated is a "frivolous argument, even if it's true," Sanford Law professor David Alan Sklansky tells The Washington Post. "That is not a basis for quashing a subpoena," and in fact, "that's how subpoena power works — it's about getting information that people would like to be kept private." Still, while "this isn't a close legal question," he added, it could delay the House investigation.

The heads of the House committees, Reps. Maxine Waters (D-Calif.) and Adam Schiff (D-Calif.), called the lawsuit "meritless" and "only designed to put off meaningful accountability as long as possible." A Deutsche Bank spokeswoman said the German bank, Trump's largest known lender, remains "committed to providing appropriate information to all authorized investigations and will abide by a court order regarding such investigations."

 

[JGrimez]

It's interesting after I've been away for a while to see some Trump supporters in this thread saying similar things to what I did originally. This is a Trump-bashing thread, and pro-Trump or anti-Leftist opinions are demonized and not given a fair treatment. Individuals are then attacked personally and accused of being disingenous, not thinking straight or just spoken to in a demeaning, condescending manner - all for showing support for Trump as President.

totach - while I don't agree with some of your stances I do hope that you'll stay and post here.

To the rest of it... you should read the Mueller report... it does not paint a good picture of Trump at all. It makes Watergate look minor in terms of all the corruption.

This is objectively false. Watergate began with an observable crime, and then obstruction ensued to the point that the House recommended charges of impeachment, forcing a President to resign. In what world of ignoring the law does that compare? With Trump/Russia we don't even have an observable crime, let alone any evidence that the President did anything criminal.

(I will say that FISAgate does dwarf Watergate though - wait until that little story is forced into the MSM..)

and no, i really didn't hope he was a russian whatever. the idea of the president as a russian puppet/agent/colluder is awful to me as a u.s. citizen. you're assuming and you're wrong, G.

Yes this is an assumption and I don't care if you say that it's wrong but I can confidently state that you did hope that Trump was a Russian puppet.

but i can't look at his words and actions and the mueller report and not reasonably conclude that he's very sympathetic to russian interests, that he's easily manipulated by russia, that he has business interests in russia (and about which he has frequently lied that he has "nothing to do with Russia") which make him susceptible to leverage and more.

First of all, why do you dislike Russia so much? And second, going by that logic then Obama/Hillary/Mueller + many more attacking Trump are MUCH more "susceptible to leverage" from Russians, which I have outlined and explained ad nauseum. You're kinda stuck here, because you can either agree with me or just look like you're selectively using information to specifically attack Trump.

Remember this?
I'm not even upset about this, but holy moly imagine if Trump was caught on a hot mic saying this. "Proof evidence of collusion! Conspiracy! Impeach now!"

Likely a reflection of a left wing bias in drug users more broadly.

kinda off-topic, but why is this? Because if it's only about drug laws, that's a silly reason to completely align with an ideology. Not all conservatives are rabidly anti-drug, and they (generally) seemt to want to leave people to their own devices. I thought drug users would understand not pushing their ideologies onto others and respecting personal sovereignty. But the Left these days just want to be all up in people's business.

But thing is, I don't tend to judge people for their actions, but their motives and intentions.

IMO this is completely wrong. Because motives and intentions are just things that you are speculating on, these presumptions are based on your beliefs and emotions and you can't really prove them. While actions are observable pieces of data that we can objectively analyze and identify. For eg the way to recognize a psychopath is to ignore their words and only view their actions. Because they are adept at charming others, appearing as if they had positive motives and intentions while really they have no conscience and will be silently screwing you over.

George W. Bush slapped sanctions on Iraq which killed 500,000 women and children, he illegally invaded Iraq and Afghanistan plunging theor countries into sectarian chaos which killed countless civilians and thousands of Americans. But Dubya Bush appears kinda positive because he is charming and has an innocent country boy feel about him. His intentions were good. Meanwhile Trump has not started any new wars, in fact he de-escalated Syria and North Korea, but his intentions and motives are bad - so he's worse than George W. Bush? This makes zero sense to me.

Even if we just outright say there was never any conspiracy/collusion, trump trying to obstruct the investigation is totally corrupt, and the report documents many many instances of corrupt obstruction.

You're not framing this fairly. How would you not expect someone to fight an unfair or bogus investigation against them? Let's say that a corrupt cop has decided to target you personally because you got into a heated political debate. They started an official investigation based on lies that they've told about you committing criminal acts, and now they're surveilling you at all times just waiting for you to do something illegal so that they can arrest you for it. So the corrupt cop now starts talking to all of your friends and you tell your friends not to talk to him because he's abusing his power to try and take you down. He then arrests you for obstruction of justice. Do you see how unfair that would be? This is basically what you're cheering for.

If they voted trump because they legit supported him,then they can't use the argument that Clinton would have been worse to ignore and distract from the problems with trump.

I actually agree with this point. And that's when I will ask - what evidence do you have of him committing crimes? What exactly do you want to happen to him? Do you want him charged and indicted? Because if you were being honest, then you would be attacking the entirety of Congress for the exact same things (and much worse!)

 

[JGrimez]

Again I challenge you to read it. I mean, you should care to learn from the best source we have. It has turned up all sorts of stuff. It does not paint a flattering picture.

I challenge you to investigate the FISA abuse, and the origins of this investigation. But you won't because it exposes the irrelevance of the Mueller report. You should though

 

[alasdairm]

Yes this is an assumption and I don't care if you say that it's wrong but I can confidently state that you did hope that Trump was a Russian puppet.

you believe that salmon live up trees and eat pencils and nothing you can say will convince me otherwise. i simply know what you think better than you do.



state it as confidently as you like - you're wrong.

alasdair

 

[alasdairm]

utterly corrupt...

How Taxpayers Covered a $1,000 Liquor Bill for Trump Staffers (and More) at Trump’s Club

A top-shelf, closed-door drinking session. $546-a-night hotel rooms. A special government credit card for Mar-a-Lago. Taxpayers foot the costs — and the president profits.

But then there are less formal events. At some point later that evening, a group repaired to Mar-a-Lago’s Library Bar, a wood-paneled study with a portrait of Trump in tennis whites (titled “The Visionary”) hanging nearby. The group asked the bartender to leave the room so it “could speak confidentially,” according to an email written by Mar-a-Lago’s catering director, Brooke Watson.

The Secret Service guarded the door, according to the email. The bartender wasn’t allowed to return. And members of the group began pouring themselves drinks. No one paid.

Six days later, on April 13, Mar-a-Lago created a bill for those drinks, tallying $838 worth of alcohol plus a 20% service charge. It covered 54 drinks (making for an average price of $18.62 each) of premium liquor: Chopin vodka, Patron and Don Julio Blanco tequilas and Woodford Reserve bourbon. Watson’s email did not specify how many people consumed the alcohol or who the participants were. (It stated that she was told the participants included then-strategist Steve Bannon and then-deputy chief of staff Joe Hagin. Bannon, who has said he stopped drinking years ago, said he didn’t drink at Mar-a-Lago and didn’t recall the episode. Hagin did not respond to requests for comment.)

The bill was sent to the State Department, which objected to covering it. It was then forwarded to the White House, which paid the tab.

(my emphasis)



alasdair

 

[Captain.Heroin]

MAR-A-LAGO'S LIBRARY BAR

You can find me there drinking whiskey and coke and reading Atlas Shrugged.

 

[TheLoveBandit]

Is it true, we hit a new record low unemployment rate?

The US unemployment rate fell to 3.6 percent in April 2019 from 3.8 percent in the previous month, below market expectations of 3.8 percent. It was the lowest jobless rate since December 1969, as the number of unemployed persons went down by 387 thousand to 5.8 million while employment declined by 103 thousand to 156.6 million. The participation rate dropped to 62.8 percent in April from 63 percent in March and lower than market consensus of 62.9 percent. Unemployment Rate in the United States averaged 5.75 percent from 1948 until 2019, reaching an all time high of 10.80 percent in November of 1982 and a record low of 2.50 percent in May of 1953

I looked for underemployment statistics, but struggled and would welcome anyone else willing to post them.

 

[alasdairm]

the unemployment rate in 1929 was 3.2%. in 1944 is was 1.22%. in 1952 it was 2.7%.

so it's not a record low but, of course, it's extremely low and the lowest in at least 50 years.

low unemployment is great and obviously it's an important economic indicator.

but as i've said before, looking at it in a vacuum - trumpeting benefits without considering the associated costs - deliberately or otherwise, fails to see the big picture.

...the U.S. is already running a deficit of $691 billion. That's already higher than all but five full-year deficits in U.S. history, according to an analysis by the Peter G. Peterson Foundation, a bipartisan nonprofit that focuses on the national debt.

(my emphasis)

alasdair