Hail To The Chief (Read Mod Warning In OP)

Arne_Saknussem

jobbridge4life wrote: »

This response echoes the kind of juvenile, (and what comes next is fodder to the Trumpistas but it is true) stunted masculinity, that is the heart of Trumpolini's support and the USA's stubborn unwillingness to acknowledge the fact that they make themselves less safe.

'Me and my shotgun, getting all ready, getting all ready for war'

Shotguns under the bed, guns in every fridge, every shelf, every class room, every campus, every street, EVERYWHERE, kill more Americans than they save.

I'd lol at the idea that they were going to guarantee American freedom in the face of a regime hostile to the very core principals of America... if it wasn't so real a threat.

Ah get a ****ing sense of humour.

jobbridge4life

Arne_Saknussem wrote: »

Ah get a ****ing sense of humour.

Listen Hon, I've all the humour in the world. The most humour ever. Everyone agrees. The best humour. Sad!

BUT I interpreted you post on face value, and on the basis that one of Trumps most ardent true believers in this thread liked it. If I was wrong then I apologise for that, but I won't apologise to being wary about the abundance of Trumpolini apologists here or elsewhere.

Hank Scorpio

jobbridge4life wrote: »

Listen Hon, I've all the humour in the world. The most humour ever. Everyone agrees. The best humour. Sad!

BUT I interpreted you post on face value, and on the basis that one of Trumps most ardent true believers in this thread liked it.

I liked it because I thought it was funny.

Arne_Saknussem

jobbridge4life wrote: »

Listen Hon, I've all the humour in the world. The most humour ever. Everyone agrees. The best humour. Sad!

BUT I interpreted you post on face value, and on the basis that one of Trumps most ardent true believers in this thread liked it. If I was wrong then I apologise for that, but I won't apologise to being wary about the abundance of Trumpolini apologists here or elsewhere.

Face value, it was a joke. I don't really have or want a shotgun hidden above my bed.

I don't like Trump, i didn't like Hillary. I did think that it was funny the way you used it to compare yourself favourably to the imaginary Trump supporters in your head though.

BabyCheeses

Arne_Saknussem wrote: »

Ah get a ****ing sense of humour.

The problem is for many in America that is a perfectly normal idea :pac:

jobbridge4life

Arne_Saknussem wrote: »

Face value, it was a joke. I don't really have or want a shotgun hidden above my bed.

I don't like Trump, i didn't like Hillary. I did think that it was funny the way you used it to compare yourself favourably to the imaginary Trump supporters in your head though.

I didn't compare myself to anyone.

MightyMandarin

BabyCheeses wrote: »

The problem is for many in America that is a perfectly normal idea :pac:

It actually is.

http://www.gunbed.net/

Even their website says they're currently sold out lol. Only in America.

super_furry

Trump said that he could shoot someone in cold blood and not lose his support. Sadly people here are proving that to be true, there doesn't seem to be any depths he can plumb that would have those behind him examine their conscience.

super_furry

super_furry wrote: »

Trump said that he could shoot someone in cold blood and not lose his support. Sadly people here are proving that to be true, there doesn't seem to be any depths he can plumb that would have those behind him examine their conscience.

Hardly surprising. When they're being attacked daily and being told they're stupid and should feel bad, but rightly don't, then when something they should actually feel bad about pops up, they disregard it as the same as everything else.

It happens with politicians all the time. Most Clinton supporters literally vocalised this phenomenon by saying "It's BS. She's been attacked for 30 years and none of it stuck."

The difference is that it's Trump AND his supporters that are under constant attack so the effect will just be greater.

I'm sorry for mentioning her. Don't attack me for it yet again.

Billy86

Telling your supporters you could shoot someone in the street and they'd still vote for you is about as openly calling them stupid as can be. Yet ridiculously, though not surprisingly, many of them masturbated furiously to being verbally humiliated by The Leader.

Manic Moran

dav3 wrote: »

Manic Moran wrote: »

A friend of mine is a senior Field Grade in the Pentagon. He posted the following on his FB feed:

The only difference is that when the Principals Committee meets on any issue outside of direct national security interests, such as an economic, cultural or social issue (and that is generally rare), the DNI and CJCS are not invited to those meetings.

That's wonderful that you have friend on facebook posting such an objective and detailed explanation.

Was he wrong?
Because looking at the text of the order and the legislation, he doesn't seem to be, and there seem to be a number of folks who are, given the posts I've seen about CJCS and DNI no longer attending NSC meetings.

BuilderPlumber

Is America now controlled by the political wing of a racist, fanatic Christian terrorist group. The mirror image of ISIS/Al Qaeda?

BuilderPlumber

BuilderPlumber wrote: »

Is America now controlled by the political wing of a racist, fanatic Christian terrorist group. The mirror image of ISIS/Al Qaeda?

Yes. You should be absolutely terrified. We're all going to die.

RobertKK

I got a CNN alert on my phone earlier.

The Trump administration is at a preliminary state of discussing the possibility of asking foreign visitors to disclose all websites and social media sites they visit, and disclose all the contacts on their mobile phone.

CNN go onto say that if a person refuses it could lead to the foreign visitor being declined entry to the US.
This is due to the San Bernardino terrorists using social media under a pseudonym to call for Jihad and the account had strict privacy settings, and the Trump administration are looking to see how a policy to overcome this can be implemented.

At the moment, all this is at a very preliminary stage.

Strange. One of the last things Obama did was allow the NSA to share data with all the other agencies. They should have the info already.

jobbridge4life

Deleted User wrote: »

Strange. One of the last things Obama did was allow the NSA to share data with all the other agencies. They should have the info already.

but Obama.

Arne_Saknussem

"In a major breaking with precedent, it was discovered that President Trump has already filed for re-election in 2020 with the FEC, and did so just hours after becoming president on January 20, 2017.

Comparably, President Barack Obama did not file for his 2012 relection until 2011. In fact, it is unheard of for a sitting president to file for re-election before the midterms, at the very earliest.

This is notable because having filed officially as a candidate in a race – even one so far away – changes rules for those who would oppose him. Now, anyone who wants to criticize Trump the President must do so without politically engaging Trump the candidate, two separate entities with two separate sets of rules.

Now, if a non-profit like, say, Planned Parenthood wants to speak out against President Trump, they must do so in a way that avoids seeming as if they are campaigining against him as a 2020 candidate."



https://trofire.com/2017/01/29/donald-trump-filed-re-election-5-hours-sworn-office/

Akrasia

RobertKK wrote: »

I got a CNN alert on my phone earlier.

The Trump administration is at a preliminary state of discussing the possibility of asking foreign visitors to disclose all websites and social media sites they visit, and disclose all the contacts on their mobile phone.

CNN go onto say that if a person refuses it could lead to the foreign visitor being declined entry to the US.
This is due to the San Bernardino terrorists using social media under a pseudonym to call for Jihad and the account had strict privacy settings, and the Trump administration are looking to see how a policy to overcome this can be implemented.

At the moment, all this is at a very preliminary stage.

On that basis I could be refused entry to the US if an immigration officer saw that I have posted negative comments about Trump on Boards.ie and might deem me to be hostile to America.

Professor Moriarty

BuilderPlumber wrote:

Is America now controlled by the political wing of a racist, fanatic Christian terrorist group. The mirror image of ISIS/Al Qaeda?

No. Trump is the most unchristian president ever.

PopePalpatine

Arne_Saknussem wrote: »

"In a major breaking with precedent, it was discovered that President Trump has already filed for re-election in 2020 with the FEC, and did so just hours after becoming president on January 20, 2017.

Comparably, President Barack Obama did not file for his 2012 relection until 2011. In fact, it is unheard of for a sitting president to file for re-election before the midterms, at the very earliest.

This is notable because having filed officially as a candidate in a race – even one so far away – changes rules for those who would oppose him. Now, anyone who wants to criticize Trump the President must do so without politically engaging Trump the candidate, two separate entities with two separate sets of rules.

Now, if a non-profit like, say, Planned Parenthood wants to speak out against President Trump, they must do so in a way that avoids seeming as if they are campaigining against him as a 2020 candidate."



https://trofire.com/2017/01/29/donald-trump-filed-re-election-5-hours-sworn-office/

So much for free speech.

People want Trump supporters to feel bad and are confused when they don't.. While at the same time refusing to admit one bad thing about his predecessor or rival.

None of them care about the 400k+ people Obama deported every year or the six months ban in Iraqi refugees. But the right are supposed to feel disgusted about 100-200 affected in airports yesterday and green card holders having to be screened more before getting in again.

Some will. The ones who've been attacked won't.

Akrasia

Akrasia wrote: »

On that basis I could be refused entry to the US if an immigration officer saw that I have posted negative comments about Trump on Boards.ie and might deem me to be hostile to America.

Yes. That's exactly what will happen. Be terrified.

RobertKK

Akrasia wrote: »

On that basis I could be refused entry to the US if an immigration officer saw that I have posted negative comments about Trump on Boards.ie and might deem me to be hostile to America.

Well, if you did a Madonna and say you wanted to blow up the white House, I would expect trouble.

jobbridge4life

Deleted User wrote: »

People want Trump supporters to feel bad and are confused when they don't.. While at the same time refusing to admit one bad thing about his predecessor or rival.

None of them care about the 400k+ people Obama deported every year or the six months ban in Iraqi refugees. But the right are supposed to feel disgusted about 100-200 affected in airports yesterday and green card holders having to be screened more before getting in again.

Some will. The ones who've been attacked won't.

BUT OBAMA. OBAMA. OBAMAGHHRGHHHH.

Transparent. Joke.

pq0n1ct4ve8zf5

Deleted User wrote: »

People want Trump supporters to feel bad and are confused when they don't.. While at the same time refusing to admit one bad thing about his predecessor or rival.

None of them care about the 400k+ people Obama deported every year or the six months ban in Iraqi refugees. But the right are supposed to feel disgusted about 100-200 affected in airports yesterday and green card holders having to be screened more before getting in again.

Some will. The ones who've been attacked won't.

How long did it take you to meet them all and ask them?

The assumption that people who disagree with Trump just MUST support Obama and love Hilary is getting really old. Maybe you can only think of the world in those terms, some people have a bit more cop on.

Akrasia

Arne_Saknussem wrote: »

"In a major breaking with precedent, it was discovered that President Trump has already filed for re-election in 2020 with the FEC, and did so just hours after becoming president on January 20, 2017.

Comparably, President Barack Obama did not file for his 2012 relection until 2011. In fact, it is unheard of for a sitting president to file for re-election before the midterms, at the very earliest.

This is notable because having filed officially as a candidate in a race – even one so far away – changes rules for those who would oppose him. Now, anyone who wants to criticize Trump the President must do so without politically engaging Trump the candidate, two separate entities with two separate sets of rules.

Now, if a non-profit like, say, Planned Parenthood wants to speak out against President Trump, they must do so in a way that avoids seeming as if they are campaigining against him as a 2020 candidate."



https://trofire.com/2017/01/29/donald-trump-filed-re-election-5-hours-sworn-office/

Sorry but I can't find this anywhere except the ring of fire network which I've never heard of before. Their source appears to be some random guy on twitter. Do you have a better source for this?

Arne_Saknussem

RobertKK wrote: »

Well, if you did a Madonna and say you wanted to blow up the white House, I would expect trouble.

Madonna can't be trusted, completely reneged on her pledge to blow everyone who voted for Her.

PopePalpatine

I keep reading about this "6 month ban on Iraqi refugees" that's all Obama's fault which Trump fanboys love to bring up, it's bullshït.

Arne_Saknussem

Akrasia wrote: »

Sorry but I can't find this anywhere except the ring of fire network which I've never heard of before. Their source appears to be some random guy on twitter. Do you have a better source for this?

Not really Perhaps it's Fake News?

Although there are reports that he has applied for copyright on the phrase "Keep America Great"

Akrasia

Arne_Saknussem wrote: »

Not really Perhaps it's Fake News?

Although there are reports that he has applied for copyright on the phrase "Keep America Great"

It looks dodgy to be honest. I hate trump, but we gotta be just as rigorous with our sources as we expect from those we don't agree with