• Current Events & Politics
    Welcome Guest
    Please read before posting:
    Forum Guidelines Bluelight Rules
  • Current Events & Politics Moderators: deficiT | tryptakid | Foreigner

US Politics the 2025 trump presidency thread

It’s worse….he doesn’t even know…or it’s even worse than that, he’s lying and saying that he doesn’t know.

This was 2.5 hours after the news broke. He doesn’t even know what happened after the whole world did


NOW THEN

This is where it gets interesting. IF Donald Trump DID know and Russia and/or China intercepted the SMS or whatever, are they in a position to blackmail Donald Trump?

I know the FSB favours blackmail over bribary as it's inflation-proof and I estimate the Chinese security services concur.

But these are only the examples that have come to light - how many have there really been?

I note the Oath of Allegiance is to the constitution, not the president. So if the CIA (or whomever) considers Donald Trump to be materially damaging the constitution, what can they legally do? I ask because I honestly don't know.
 
This is where it gets interesting. IF Donald Trump DID know and Russia and/or China intercepted the SMS or whatever, are they in a position to blackmail Donald Trump?

Of course that is what is happening. Story below shows one of the chat attendees was in Moscow at the time of the chat. And America and the news will pretend it’s all normal and forget about it by next week when Trump issues an executive order to burn orphaned kittens

 
Trump is taking the gloves off in an effort to end this.

indeed. presidents gotta do what presidents gotta do.

my problem, as you note, is in the statements and not necessarily the acts.

the narrative is that democrats are a bunch of war-hungry monsters and trump - and his supporters - counter that by painting him as the president of peace. not a problem except he spends his campaign lying to supporters that he'll never take the gloves off only to get into office then take the gloves off 2 months in.

the republican establishment may spin his hyperbole as 'just a starting point for negotiation' but republican voters take these statements literally too.

people voted for him because he said he'd build a wall and mexico would pay for it. never happened. what did those people vote for?

people voted for him because he said he'd repeal obamacare and replace it with something much better. never happened. what did those people vote for?

people voted for him because he said he'd never start a new conflict. he's bombing yemen. what did those people vote for?

people voted for him because he said he'd lower prices on day 1. never happened. what did those people vote for?

these aren't lame throwaway promises that all politicians (but trump is not a politician!) make. the first two were the central pillars of his entire campaign.

good to see you back and posting at length amigo :)

alasdair
 
. what did those people vote for?

If you talk to any of these people long enough…they hate blacks a Mexicans and trump says bad stuff about blacks and Mexicans and promises to hurt them.


My family is full of magats like this and the thing that angers them most in life is black people receiving welfare. This has been their #1 issue for 30 years that I’ve known them
 
Last edited:
hy·per·bo·le
/hīˈpərbəlē/
exaggerated statements or claims not meant to be taken literally.

Trump got elected (by 1.3%) because people took many of these statements literally. Maybe his dedicated base just accepts the fact that his shit ain't true, but that's not what the people that swung the election his way think. This is particularly true of grocery prices. And there, at the very least, his promises were immediately abandoned and not used as a starting point.
 

hy·per·bo·le
/hīˈpərbəlē/
exaggerated statements or claims not meant to be taken literally.

Trump got elected (by 1.3%) because people took many of these statements literally. Maybe his dedicated base just accepts the fact that his shit ain't true, but that's not what the people that swung the election his way think. This is particularly true of grocery prices. And there, at the very least, his promises were immediately abandoned and not used as a starting point.

I suggest his detractors alco accept that what he says isn't true - we ALL expect him to lie.

It's accepting that it's fine for the POTUS to be a congential liar and fantasist that divides suppoters/detractors.
 
I don't want to see any of our users disappeared to a south American prison, so be sure to only post positive commentary related to President Trump
 
. This is particularly true of grocery prices. And there, at the very least, his promises were immediately abandoned and not used as a starting point.
i haven’t heard a single mention of grocery prices from the administration other than them telling us to stop complaining about it.

I haven’t heard a single Trump supporter complain about grocery or health care costs.

It was never about those issues, it’s about hatred of blacks and gays and Mexicans. Everyone keeps dancing around this but it’s the only constant message that republicans have had for decades. Everything else changes and comes and goes.
 
I don't want to see any of our users disappeared to a south American prison, so be sure to only post positive commentary related to President Trump
You aren’t fucking kidding.

The other night I just spammed social media with pro Trump slogans. I’m quite sure it will come down to arresting private citizens for political opinions. Some well known people are already being threatened with arrest for expressing anti trump opinions.
 
The marching orders are issued. Biden had a bad afghan withdrawal so trumps highest military official discussion future military operations on a messaging app, while in Russia, is fine and ok.

This along the line of if i was being charged with murder and said “well other people have murdered so what I did is fine”. That’s their defense (that’s the maga talking point).

People testifying before the Senate right now like tulsi and the CIA head, “they don’t recall” anything that happened a few weeks ago. They must all have Alzheimer’s
 
The other night I just spammed social media with pro Trump slogans. I’m quite sure it will come down to arresting private citizens for political opinions. Some well known people are already being threatened with arrest for expressing anti trump opinions.

Everyone is bemoaning the fact that the US is descending into a dictatorship.

I asked but nobody responded when I noted that the Pledge of Allegience is to the constitution and the nation, not to the government. The CIA oath is the same. So am I correcting in thinking ALL US security services use a simila formula?

So IF the US security services see a given POTUS attempting to circumvent the constitution - isn't it the role of the CIA to defend the nation against that action?

So how would they respond? Donald Trump's worst enemy is his own mouth (well, second worst - I'm his worst) and I find it hard to believe that his every communication isn't recorded BY those security services. So does there come a point at which they SHOULD act? Because whatever else people may think of the US secueity services, I think we can agree that they have shown themselves quite prepared to do almost anything to stop someone judged to place the US or citizens of the US at risk.

I sincerely doubt they would induge in 'wet work' in such a case, but they could very easily leak damaging communications. If they could simply release damaging information for just a few weeks, it's quite possible that they could push for impeachment. Impeachment is the method I would use. It would be a good 'arms length' way to do things. The press would be the conduit and between them and 'The Company' another cut-out or even two.
 
Everyone is bemoaning the fact that the US is descending into a dictatorship.

I asked but nobody responded when I noted that the Pledge of Allegience is to the constitution and the nation, not to the government. The CIA oath is the same. So am I correcting in thinking ALL US security services use a simila formula?

So IF the US security services see a given POTUS attempting to circumvent the constitution - isn't it the role of the CIA to defend the nation against that action?

So how would they respond? Donald Trump's worst enemy is his own mouth (well, second worst - I'm his worst) and I find it hard to believe that his every communication isn't recorded BY those security services. So does there come a point at which they SHOULD act? Because whatever else people may think of the US secueity services, I think we can agree that they have shown themselves quite prepared to do almost anything to stop someone judged to place the US or citizens of the US at risk.

I sincerely doubt they would induge in 'wet work' in such a case, but they could very easily leak damaging communications. If they could simply release damaging information for just a few weeks, it's quite possible that they could push for impeachment. Impeachment is the method I would use. It would be a good 'arms length' way to do things. The press would be the conduit and between them and 'The Company' another cut-out or even two.
First of all. Let me say praise god king Trump. Long live emperor Barron.

Trump gutted the CIA and all the apparatuses that could remove him by force. The fact that the president is allowed to or was let do this means Americas government was shit to begin with and could never withstand a hostile take over
 
"My communications, to be clear, in a Signal message group were entirely permissible and lawful and did not include classified information," testified CIA Director John Ratcliffe in front of Congress.

Dod memo, 2023

"10. Unmanaged 'messaging apps,' including any app with a chat feature, regardless of the primary function, are NOT authorized to access, transmit, process non-public DoD information. This includes but is not limited to messaging, gaming, and social media apps. (i.e., iMessage, WhatsApps, Signal). "

And that's not to mention the crazy claim that the info was "non-classified". If they consider dates, times, targets, weaponry non-classified, that's a problem on it's own.

Regardless. The rule was "non-public DoD information".

They are like Trump, lying liars who lie.

 
Everyone is bemoaning the fact that the US is descending into a dictatorship.

I asked but nobody responded when I noted that the Pledge of Allegience is to the constitution and the nation, not to the government. The CIA oath is the same. So am I correcting in thinking ALL US security services use a simila formula?

So IF the US security services see a given POTUS attempting to circumvent the constitution - isn't it the role of the CIA to defend the nation against that action?

So how would they respond? Donald Trump's worst enemy is his own mouth (well, second worst - I'm his worst) and I find it hard to believe that his every communication isn't recorded BY those security services. So does there come a point at which they SHOULD act? Because whatever else people may think of the US secueity services, I think we can agree that they have shown themselves quite prepared to do almost anything to stop someone judged to place the US or citizens of the US at risk.

I sincerely doubt they would induge in 'wet work' in such a case, but they could very easily leak damaging communications. If they could simply release damaging information for just a few weeks, it's quite possible that they could push for impeachment. Impeachment is the method I would use. It would be a good 'arms length' way to do things. The press would be the conduit and between them and 'The Company' another cut-out or even two.

You bring up a good point that the pledge is to the constitution, not the government. I think the problem with impeachment is they know they wouldn't get the votes.

The Republicans in the house and senate are cowards. I think they are afraid they may not get re-elected if they oppose him. I have so much respect for Adam Kinzinger because he put country before politics. Unfortunately he had to step down when he refused to bow to DT because this is where the republican party is right now. But this could change if people start to wake up.
 
They are like Trump, lying liars who lie.

One could argue that by it's mission statement, the CIA is in a position where lies may serve a purpose.

I don't know much about the US security services and only slightly more about the UK security services, but fiar to say, misdirection is all part and parcel of their work. Now it's arguable who a lie serves, but people have suggested that the entire 'Zircon affair' was in fact a disinformation campaign. I won't bore you with details but the way OSINT could prove the official mission statement as a lie (satellites need ground stations and none were built) as well as getting the most famous investigational journalist in the UK (Duncan Campbell) to 'reveal' the whole affair on the BBC seems like misdirection.

In the above case, I suspect Margret Thatcher wanted to buy the more able US-designed satellite from day 1 but for political reasons could not. So having a fake programme that was 'uncovered' was a way to make it politically digestable. Just a theory - but the way JUST enough breadcrumbs were left seems odd. GCHQ is generally pretty good at hiding stuff. From the murder of it's own staff to the whole 'Temprora' and 'Mastering The Internet', they are good at hiding stuff.

BTW I say I know SLIGHTLY more only because I went to school with someone who ended up working for GCHQ. No idea what he does, will never ask.
 
But if Donald Trump begins to clearly annoint one of his sons as the chosen one, try to act surprised.

Well, things are lined up for Vance to step into that spot in '28. But stranger things continue to happen and spill out from Trump's mouth. It woldn't surprise me, but would disappoint me. Also, it is my belief that even the right, by the end of his term, will want someone besides Trump v2. Vance is supportive of Trump, as a VP should be, but he is own man as well. Trump's sons....yeah, I'll pass, thanks.

Gun lobby who absolutely defent the right to bear arms to PREVENT an authortarian government are in truth just another big business and Donald Trump has ensured that big business will be taken care of.

In fact, it's the frankly ridiculous trade war that is most likely to be his downfall. I think it safe to say that NO big business wanted that so they may yet decide he's more of a liability than a benfit. But don't bank on it.


A few questions on this.

Gun lobby is another big business? Compared to what....Google/Meta/etc that were co-opted by the govt and worked hand in hand with them to damage the American public? Compared to big Pharma - also working hand-in-glove to reap bilions and continue to keep America sick for more medications? Compared to what, in your view? As for being a 'large entity' what damage have they done to the US? What have they implied they'd do? Their mission, and constant drumbeat, is to keep the citizens armed against tyranical gov't = not co-opted by the gov't against the citizens.

For the 'big business will be taken care of'....how are you viewing that? For one, I can see his tarriffs and incentives to re-shore manufacturing as a fit for your description, but it isn't about making those businesses rich (they would do so wherever they are based) but more about bringing the money and work back to American citizens:


From article -
  • Higher prices warned by Best Buy, Target << Known pain that will come wth tarriffs
  • Sourcing back to US suppliers by Target, Kroger, Costco, Alcoa, HP, and others << will generate more domestic GDP and keep that spending in US.
  • Shifting production << Hyundai ($21b investment), Honda, Pfizer all relocating to US facitlities. Pfizer will keep us more independent on meds should another global (Covid) crisis occur.
  • New investments << Apple ($500b), Eli Lilly ($27b), J&J ($55b),


Hundreds of billions. Coming to the US. Good thing, or bad thing?
 

Note that many of those deported aren't gang members and in fact don't even have criminal records.

I won't knock your source, thanks for sharing one. I will encourage all posters to know their source. Ad Fontes Media has a great tool for this. More neutral in it's assement than most 'bias rating' sites.

Trump declared the gangs as terrorist organizations. This was done to open up the toolbox to more things that can be done against them, including use of the Alien Enemies Act. Maybe it is stretching the legal definition/use of the act but Biden opened that door with his DOJ stretching laws for their attacks on Trump the last few years = precedent set, and if it escalates to SCOTUS, fine let's see what they say. I'm not sure of the jurisdiction of the Federal District judge in this matter - I fully expect it to escalate quickly above him. However, application and enforcement of the law on the books falls to the DOJ under the executive branch, again Biden DOJ set the precedent.

As for criminal records, from your article
of the 261 people on the three flights, saying 137 were deported under the Alien Enemies Act, 101 were Venezuelans deported under regular immigration proceedings, and 23 were members of the MS-13 gang.


The TdA and MS13 gang members have earned jailtime by being gang members. US Gov't hasn't provided proof of this publicly, but I'm, willing to bet gang association is a major factor in finding and apprehending them. I don't need the proof, they can sit in jail until their hearings. The others 137 under Alien Enemies Act can also sit in jail until a hearing. We know where they are, they aren't able to cause more trouble, and they can get their hearings in due time. However, it needs to be pointed out they are NOT American citizens and therefore they do not have the same rights citizens enjoy. Coming into the country illegally is breaking a law (ie, a criminal), and until Biden it was enforceable by immediate removal until his admin instituted catch-and-release and no-show court dates 4y out. All of their asylum claims can be heard eventually, but we don't have gang members roaming our countryside, breaking laws and being released to cause more mayhem by blue cities.

They're not deporting them, they're sending them to a hellhole El Salvadorian prison. (and we are paying El Salvador) Most chillingly, El Salvador has offered to take Americans. Marco Rubio says he's "profoundly grateful" for the offer.

My opinion, but I'm good with that. A foreign prison is much more of a deterrent to crime than an American prison, for Americans or aliens. Don't wanna go? Don't commit the crimes. Leveraging a foreign prison saves us money, and for the aliens we don't have to provide them citizen's rights as they would be afforded in American prisons. Our domestic prisons are overrun, I don't think anyone can deny it - democrat laws (state/local) and (lack of) enforcement have gotten more criminals out of jail, but they remain over crowded. What would be your solution? More domestic jails, at larger expense for people that shouldn't be here in the first place? I'd go twith Trump's current solution that is if you arrive for asylum, wait outside until your hearing; enter illegally and break our laws, wait in prison (anywhere, but cheaper is better). I cannot express how deeply idgaf on gang members in a foreign prison. I'll hold up Laken Reilly and the others anytime anyone wants to argue it, and if you're on the left I'll ask you 'if it saves one life'.

Now we are talking about sending US citizens there that vandalized teslas while actively pardoning people that attacked the capitol and its guards to try and kill the VP and installing fake electors.

Didn’t take long to start shipping undesirables off to camps.

Do you agree or not that those vandalizing Tesla's should be held accountable to our laws? We can have a separate discusssion on the merit and means of such a protest, but at this point they have committed crimes, endangerd the lives of innocent citizens (typically liberals who bought the cars before Elon switched sides, really doesn't make sense). But you think they should be allowed to continue these destructive actions?

The pardons, and J6ers....okay, big ole can'o'worms there. Let's take that to a separate thread. I assume there is one already.

PS - please send me a post card when you get sent to a camp. Didn't happen in his first term, won't happen now. Unless, of course, you decide to break the law and earn some prison time. Then, you get what you asked for. I hope you don't.
 
"My communications, to be clear, in a Signal message group were entirely permissible and lawful and did not include classified information," testified CIA Director John Ratcliffe in front of Congress.

indeed.

the information was not classified so the atlantic has released it.

Here Are the Attack Plans That Trump’s Advisers Shared on Signal

"So, about that Signal chat.

On Monday, shortly after we published a story about a massive Trump-administration security breach, a reporter asked the secretary of defense, Pete Hegseth, why he had shared plans about a forthcoming attack on Yemen on the Signal messaging app. He answered, “Nobody was texting war plans. And that’s all I have to say about that.”

At a Senate hearing yesterday, the director of national intelligence, Tulsi Gabbard, and the director of the Central Intelligence Agency, John Ratcliffe, were both asked about the Signal chat, to which Jeffrey Goldberg, the editor in chief of The Atlantic, was inadvertently invited by National Security Adviser Michael Waltz. “There was no classified material that was shared in that Signal group,” Gabbard told members of the Senate Intelligence Committee.
"

alasdair
 
Top