Donald Trump Presidency discussion thread III

everlast75

Rigalo - you are full blown delusional if you think for one moment there is a jot of pressure on Mueller or Rod. For Don to go after them now would be political suicide. That avenue is well and truly closed.

He has no legal recourse.

He has no political moves left.

All he can hope for, is to repeat buzz words to his base and hope that when impeachment comes (and it will - just ask Rudy)he will be able to stave it off.

And if you think I'm being hysterical, book mark this post. It'll make it easier for you to come back later and quote it while apologising

RIGOLO

Hurrache wrote: »

pixelburp wrote: »

Again I ask: why do you focus on 'the Left', when Republicans and even Fox News have condemned Trumps behaviour? Is that not a clear indicator that all is not right - not this time.

Do you accept that Trumps assessment of the US's intelligence agency is superior?

Others have asked this RIGOLO, I think people would appreciate if you engaged in discussion rather than cherry-pick tacit putdowns towards others trying to make sense of this political contradiction.

Just in case RIGOLO missed your post, as he/she often does when it comes to questions they've no answer for, I'll quote your question as I believe they've no reason not to see any of my posts.

Russia did what Russia has been doing for 200 years, interefering in US issues. Ive a wall full of books that discuss this. Equally theres another set that discusses US interference in Russian affairs. 
Russia just did what it always did, started in 2015 kicking the tyres on the election  see what they could come up with, had a look at the new social media platforms and found it could step it up a notch. 
Russia just wanted to disrupt, with no leaning to Trump as he wasnt a serious candidate. They wanted to disrupt both GOP and DNC and especially Hilary, to favour bernie, then Trump campaign took off and they leant towards him. 
Plus the HRC and DNC gave them the keys to the vault, so why wouldnt a Rusisian spy take advantage of this, if they gave them a key.  
But the Russian efforts were small scale compared to the Trump campaign itself which got every vote for every dollar from social media they could, and all with the direct help of FB and others. rough figures, if Trumps win was 60% due to a phenomenal socuial media campaign, then the Trump Campaign played 95% role in that with the Rusisians accounting for 5% of that 60%. (guesstimate numbers) 

And yes the American intellegince agency have alot of egg on their face, they were let down by their senior mgmt, they became politicised, a few bots and 200k in FB adds defeated the might of Langley and the Pentagon (how embarrassing is that) . The intellegienc agencys need a root and branch reform, sure Trumps words were not well spoken but ignore the body language and the Oxford english dictionary analysis and look at the actions and those speak to being tough on Russia. 
So yeah its just the same story, a 200 year old story,  played out over a new media. I dont get the fuss, the left are acting like they just been woke! 
Like I previously said, people are asking the wrong question, not that Russia interefered , or collusion (thats never going to be proven) , they should be asking when/why did we lose control of our society(democracy and other things)  to social engineering internet giants in silicon valley ? Thats the real issue here, its a fight both left and right should be fighting together, but theres no chance of that, the left threw all the toys out of the pram along time ago, heck they even burned the pram once Trump got elected. 
This is a world of the lefts making. Better get used to it.

Leroy42

So its not the left or MSM but social engineering internet giants in silicon valley?

Yet Trump is starting trade wars and looking to increase NATO spending? Seems he doesn't agree with you on this.

Hurrache

RIGOLO wrote: »

look at the actions and those speak to being tough on Russia. 

How are those new sanctions that Nikki Haley announced going?

weisses

RIGOLO wrote: »

And here is where the left gets all tangled up in its own web of inept analysis. So last week the left are moaning Trump is pushing the pace of NATO expansion  and now this week the left are moaning Putin has no deterrent. 
Talk about going round in circles, no wonder a first time political novice came from left field and swept the WH from under their self-annointed queen. 

Trump has pushed NATO to increase defense spending as a whole , with over 40billion extra already spent in NATO European operations this year alone since Trump started his drive to get NATO to expand. All of which goes against Putins public statements looking for a decrease in NATO eastern european expansion. 
Trump wont criticise , wont take action .phooey ... $40 billion EXTRA and a US Armoured division, is plenty action . 
This will blow over by the time most US voters come back from vacation, a vacation Im sure they are enjoying what with the extra dollas in their 401Ks and their booming economy. 
Putin has put a spotlight back on Mueller to 'piss or get off the pot' , with his invite of the Mueller team to Russia to interview the indicted 12 .  I expect before we see the final Mueller report their will be at least 5 more occassion for the left to call for impeachment, high treason and to bring out the stripper and her lawyer again. 
None of which are going to deliver them the WH in 2020 or even the mid-terms in Nov. 
Meanwhile the American voters continue to enjoy their booming economy.

Already agreed in 2014 ... was explained to you a couple of times already


Deflect .... but the left ....Hysteria .... whataboutery about boomin economy .... but russia is doing it for 200 years .... bla bla bla ... facebook .... hillary .... CiA bad ...FBI bad .......

But not one instance of critical thinking regarding the POTUS ....

It was hilarious for a while ... But these posts are starting to be an embarrassment for anyone looking for a serious discussion

Blowfish

pixelburp wrote: »

In all seriousness though - what HAS happened with ISIS and Trumps' boasting that he'd sort them out?

So much water has passed under the bridge, and they've only come up during the aftermaths of that spate of terrorist attacks in the EU. Has the back of their attempted caliphate been broken? Has Trump actually signed off on any executive action or policy?

ISIS has been losing territory pretty much since the Siege of Kobani in late 2014/early 2015. By the time Trump came to Office, they had lost most of Northern Syria, with the battle for both Mosul and Raqqa (ISIS' capital) underway. For all intents and purposes, the back of ISIS had already been broken and it was more a matter of finishing them off than anything.

Of course Trump being Trump, he'll attempt to take full credit for defeating ISIS.

pixelburp

RIGOLO wrote: »

Russia did what Russia has been doing for 200 years, interefering in US issues. Ive a wall full of books that discuss this. Equally theres another set that discusses US interference in Russian affairs. 
Russia just did what it always did, started in 2015 kicking the tyres on the election  see what they could come up with, had a look at the new social media platforms and found it could step it up a notch. 

None of this is what I asked, you still couldn't resist going off on a wild historical tangent like it's the only Source of Truth - and still make a jib at 'the left' for causing a fuss, ignoring the very context in which I asked the question, so fine. You don't actually want to engage in discussion.

You clearly just wish to ignore the reality that Republicans are also aghast at Trumps behaviour, and it's only partisanship that is arguably preventing further action.

Ignore it if you will, but don't expect people to treat you seriously if you don't show same.

Trump is a precedent, and more fool anyone who tries to lean on history to divine the actions of this administration.

Professor Moriarty

RIGOLO wrote: »

And here is where the left gets all tangled up in its own web of inept analysis. So last week the left are moaning Trump is pushing the pace of NATO expansion and now this week the left are moaning Putin has no deterrent.
Talk about going round in circles, no wonder a first time political novice came from left field and swept the WH from under their self-annointed queen.

Trump has pushed NATO to increase defense spending as a whole , with over 40billion extra already spent in NATO European operations this year alone since Trump started his drive to get NATO to expand. All of which goes against Putins public statements looking for a decrease in NATO eastern european expansion.
Trump wont criticise , wont take action .phooey ... $40 billion EXTRA and a US Armoured division, is plenty action .
This will blow over by the time most US voters come back from vacation, a vacation Im sure they are enjoying what with the extra dollas in their 401Ks and their booming economy.
Putin has put a spotlight back on Mueller to 'piss or get off the pot' , with his invite of the Mueller team to Russia to interview the indicted 12 . I expect before we see the final Mueller report their will be at least 5 more occassion for the left to call for impeachment, high treason and to bring out the stripper and her lawyer again.
None of which are going to deliver them the WH in 2020 or even the mid-terms in Nov.
Meanwhile the American voters continue to enjoy their booming economy.

Hi. You probably missed these questions I asked you in the context of The Donald's tax cuts for the rich and increased spending. I'll ask again:

What is your opinion on the US deficit?
What is your definition of "the left"?

Rjd2

Christy42 wrote: »

I would say chucking little kids into cages also counts as worse than that conference. Given the sheer amount of dumb **** Trump has done I feel like it is worth a little anger that he has been called on precisely none of it by his supporters and very little by congress.

And yeah the conference was pretty bad. It was a message saying the US president will not do anything if Russia keeps messing with US elections (and they will). All Putin will have to do is simply assure his friend he didn't do it. Not like Trump will believe anyone else.

There is many things to criticise Trump for indeed. However Yesterday the hysteria was utterly over the top, America have been meeting with less than perfect nations for a long time. A Politico article said it was the worst thing since Pearl Harbour. Its the absolute melodrama of the reaction to Yesterdays meeting which is galling. It doesn't absolve Trump of his previous sins whatsoever and never did I suggest that.

mcmoustache

everlast75 wrote: »

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/05/10/us/politics/trump-russia-meeting-american-reporters-blocked.html#click=https://t.co/XCu2vN9Pbj

Pics provided by the Russians btw. American press not allowed..

Recognise the lady on the far right?

https://twitter.com/off_public/status/1019197600686362630?s=19

It looks similar but I'll wait for confirmation first.

everlast75

mcmoustache wrote: »

It looks similar but I'll wait for confirmation first.

I've taken down the post. There appears to be uncertainty.

See Trumpists? Its okay to correct a stance if there is a question over it.

You should try it

molloyjh

Rjd2 wrote: »

There is many things to criticise Trump for indeed. However Yesterday the hysteria was utterly over the top, America have been meeting with less than perfect nations for a long time. A Politico article said it was the worst thing since Pearl Harbour. Its the absolute melodrama of the reaction to Yesterdays meeting which is galling. It doesn't absolve Trump of his previous sins whatsoever and never did I suggest that.

It was massive in terms of just how stupid and badly judged it was, especially in the context of recent events at home. From that perspective it was pretty huge. I wouldn't be calling him a traitor over it if I were American. I'd just be calling him an idiot who can't be trusted to do his job even close to competently. But then, this is just the latest in a string of incidents that would have me saying that...

Professor Moriarty

Rjd2 wrote: »

There is many things to criticise Trump for indeed. However Yesterday the hysteria was utterly over the top, America have been meeting with less than perfect nations for a long time. A Politico article said it was the worst thing since Pearl Harbour. Its the absolute melodrama of the reaction to Yesterdays meeting which is galling. It doesn't absolve Trump of his previous sins whatsoever and never did I suggest that.

There is a lot of hyperbole. However, the fact remains that POTUS yesterday sided with Russia in saying that US security services were wrong when they categorically stated that Russia interfered in a US presidential election. That fact is breathtaking in itself.

Gbear

Rjd2 wrote: »

There is many things to criticise Trump for indeed. However Yesterday the hysteria was utterly over the top, America have been meeting with less than perfect nations for a long time. A Politico article said it was the worst thing since Pearl Harbour. Its the absolute melodrama of the reaction to Yesterdays meeting which is galling. It doesn't absolve Trump of his previous sins whatsoever and never did I suggest that.

It isn't just meeting with him and you must surely be aware of that.

It's meeting with him privately, at a time when his campaign has clear and obvious links with Russia, including his son.

It's meeting with him and failing to address current issues of attacks on what ought to be Western Allies, including the murder of two dissidents in the UK and one of their own citizens.

It's throwing his own intelligence services under the bus for the sake of backing up a regime that kills and imprisons political dissidents, has invaded more than one sovereign nation, and who are the subject of the allegations he's dismissing.

And all of that is in sharp contrast with hugely belligerent rhetoric against proven US allies.

How can this be taken any other way than suggesting he is compromised?
Even if everything he was talking about was true and everything was totally innocent, how could he, at a minimum, be so politically illiterate as to not understand what appalling optics all this would be?


Can you name another example of anything like this in US Presidential history - that they would not just kowtow to a hostile power, but do it explicitly at the expense of their own intelligence services?

mcmoustache

everlast75 wrote: »

I've taken down the post. There appears to be uncertainty.

See Trumpists? Its okay to correct a stance if there is a question over it.

You should try it

The most recent example of this was a poster mindlessly repeating the DNC server nonsense about it not being handed over. If they want to believe it, it must be true.

Rjd2

molloyjh wrote: »

It was massive in terms of just how stupid and badly judged it was, especially in the context of recent events at home. From that perspective it was pretty huge. I wouldn't be calling him a traitor over it if I were American. I'd just be calling him an idiot who can't be trusted to do his job even close to competently. But then, this is just the latest in a string of incidents that would have me saying that...

He's politically naive to say the least, but its the takes and mother of God they have been bad, people saying its the worst day in American political history and a war monger like John Mc Cain getting lionised who probably dreams of going back to the cold war days.

I thought with all the hysteria below article was balanced and less hysteria orientated
https://www.bloomberg.com/view/articles/2018-07-16/helsinki-summit-putin-and-trump-couldn-t-make-relationship-work

But Trump didn’t recognize the Russian annexation of Crimea, announce a troop pullout from Syria, promise to disband NATO, withdraw U.S. troops from Germany or stop the deployment of U.S. anti-missile defenses in Eastern Europe. He didn’t give up his opposition to Russia’s Nord Stream 2 pipeline into Germany or express regret about his decision to supply lethal weapons to Ukraine. In fact, he did nothing that could be construed as undermining U.S. interests as traditionally understood. His comments revealed no freebies to Putin or even any sign that the two leaders had attempted to negotiate compromises on the many substantive issues that divide their two countries.

Leroy42

Rjd2, I think the article you quoted sums it up perfectly.

Trump got nothing out of the summit, yet for some reason decided to choose the word of a man that he has all the issues with over the security services in his own country, and to berate the opposition parties in his own country and state that the investigation should be stopped.

He continued to call into question the integrity of a number of US citizens yet never questioned Putin? The question must surely be asked, to what end? It flies totally in the face of all other summits and meetings and indeed the interactions he has had with any allies.

The clear message from Trump, from both this summit and the NK one, is that the more you attack and threaten the US the nicer Trump will be to you. If you try to work with him he will see this as a weakness and try to bully you.

Why did Trump back down on his rhetoric about Mexico paying for the wall? Because Mexico told him to feck off? This isn't MAGA, it is opening America up to attack.

robinph

molloyjh wrote: »

It was massive in terms of just how stupid and badly judged it was, especially in the context of recent events at home. From that perspective it was pretty huge. I wouldn't be calling him a traitor over it if I were American. I'd just be calling him an idiot who can't be trusted to do his job even close to competently. But then, this is just the latest in a string of incidents that would have me saying that...

Not sure about that.

A private citizen can have a complain about their countries intelligence services etc.
A politician can have a moan about them in their parliament or whatever and say that things need to be fixed about such and such.

But for the head of state to be in a foreign land and criticising their own services like that on the same podium as another hostile head of state and taking the word of that opponent over their own services certainly seems pretty damned close to treason. Not sure how it could be interpreted as anything but treason.

Professor Moriarty

Rjd2 wrote: »

He's politically naive to say the least, but its the takes and mother of God they have been bad, people saying its the worst day in American political history and a war monger like John Mc Cain getting lionised who probably dreams of going back to the cold war days.

I thought with all the hysteria below article was balanced and less hysteria orientated
https://www.bloomberg.com/view/articles/2018-07-16/helsinki-summit-putin-and-trump-couldn-t-make-relationship-work

Let's put this in context. Can you imagine Putin stating that, despite categorical statements from all of his security services, he believes Trump when Trump said that they don't have spies in the US Moscow Embassy?

James Brown

Rjd2 wrote: »

There is many things to criticise Trump for indeed. However Yesterday the hysteria was utterly over the top, America have been meeting with less than perfect nations for a long time. A Politico article said it was the worst thing since Pearl Harbour. Its the absolute melodrama of the reaction to Yesterdays meeting which is galling. It doesn't absolve Trump of his previous sins whatsoever and never did I suggest that.

The President of the United States said he was told there was Russian interference in the election. Putin said there wasn't and Trump sided with Putin over his own intelligence agencies based on one conversation held in private, with no notes taken.
That's enormous. An American President taking the word of the Russian President over the U.S. intelligence services, despite election tampering been proven.
It cannot be downplayed. It was broadcast for all to see and hear.
A sitting American President taking the word of a Russian President over the U.S. intelligence agencies.

Trump looked like an apologetic schoolboy embarrassed and sorry for his own agencies inferring, (it's proven) such a thing.

molloyjh

Matt Barrett wrote: »

The President of the United States said he was told there was Russian interference in the election. Putin said there wasn't and Trump sided with Putin over his own intelligence agencies based on one conversation held in private, with no notes taken.
That's enormous. An American President taking the word of the Russian President over the U.S. intelligence services, despite election tampering been proven.
It cannot be downplayed. It was broadcast for all to see and hear.
A sitting American President taking the word of a Russian President over the U.S. intelligence agencies.

Trump looked like an apologetic schoolboy embarrassed and sorry for his own agencies inferring, (it's proven) such a thing.

Trump said he believed Putin. That doesn't mean he did. He'll happily flip flop on this stuff all day long. He says what is convenient at that particular moment in time for him. That could change at any time. This isn't a policy position that we're talking about here. It isn't a decision on a course of action. It's a few words uttered by a man who doesn't understand the importance of those words. And doesn't care. It might reflect what he decides to do, it might not.

Trump is that guy who walks into an interview for a technical job having not prepared in any way and attempts to bluff his way through it despite not having any real knowledge of the subject. Words fall from his mouth, but there's no real thought behind them. He probably barely remembers what he said minutes after he says it.

PropJoe10

Look, anyone trying to defend what went on yesterday with Trump is either agenda-driven or deluded. There's no two ways about that. Not sure how any right-minded individual could defend Trump or even try to condone that press conference. It'll be remembered for years to come.

everlast75

molloyjh wrote: »

Trump said he believed Putin. That doesn't mean he did. He'll happily flip flop on this stuff all day long. He says what is convenient at that particular moment in time for him. That could change at any time. This isn't a policy position that we're talking about here. It isn't a decision on a course of action. It's a few words uttered by a man who doesn't understand the importance of those words. And doesn't care. It might reflect what he decides to do, it might not.

Trump is that guy who walks into an interview for a technical job having not prepared in any way and attempts to bluff his way through it despite not having any real knowledge of the subject. Words fall from his mouth, but there's no real thought behind them. He probably barely remembers what he said minutes after he says it.

Well then. He's clearly not capable to be president. He must be removed immediately

everlast75

Check out the initial post and the replies below.

Our lady spy seems well in indeed with the reps and NRA....

https://twitter.com/shannonrwatts/status/1018989033534382086?s=19

molloyjh

everlast75 wrote: »

Sounds like an ideal President then so

As long as you're not looking for leadership, direction, consistency, continuity, reliability, transparency..............

Quin_Dub

All the back and forth about Trumps performance yesterday has been kinda wild..

Some of the reactions have been OOT and some pretty accurate.

Trump screwed up Royally . Yesterday will be seen as a watershed moment of his tenure regardless of what happens.

Fundamentally for me though his whole performance with Putin and indeed the wider Mueller investigation has less to do with his possible guilt in terms of collusion/corruption and more to do with his rampant Narcissism.

He simply cannot accept in any way shape or form that his Victory in the election was due to anything other than him and only him.

Any acceptance on his part that the Russians (or any body else) influenced the result is simply mentally impossible for him to process.

It is for this reason that he rails against any suggestion of Russian interference.

In his mind , if he was to publicly accept that the Russians tried to influence the result (regardless of whether they actually achieved anything) it would require him to accept that maybe he isn't the perfect titan that he believes he is in his head.

It's not because he's beholden to Putin it's because he's beholden to his ego.

everlast75

Quin_Dub wrote: »

All the back and forth about Trumps performance yesterday has been kinda wild..

Some of the reactions have been OOT and some pretty accurate.

Trump screwed up Royally . Yesterday will be seen as a watershed moment of his tenure regardless of what happens.

Fundamentally for me though his whole performance with Putin and indeed the wider Mueller investigation has less to do with his possible guilt in terms of collusion/corruption and more to do with his rampant Narcissism.

He simply cannot accept in any way shape or form that his Victory in the election was due to anything other than him and only him.

Any acceptance on his part that the Russians (or any body else) influenced the result is simply mentally impossible for him to process.

It is for this reason that he rails against any suggestion of Russian interference.

In his mind , if he was to publicly accept that the Russians tried to influence the result (regardless of whether they actually achieved anything) it would require him to accept that maybe he isn't the perfect titan that he believes he is in his head.

It's not because he's beholden to Putin it's because he's beholden to his ego.

That's the best possible scenario, and possibly true, but there are plenty of others

amandstu

I wonder if Putin might have said something to Trump in private that reinforced Trump's scepticism regarding his intelligence forces (and the FBI)

I can imagine him doing this in a very subtle way.

Professor Moriarty

amandstu wrote: »

I wonder if Putin might have said something to Trump in private that reinforced Trump's scepticism regarding his intelligence forces (and the FBI)

I can imagine him doing this in a very subtle way.

Yes. For instance, he might have said that The Donald shouldn't piss him off in anyway.

Captain Obvious

everlast75 wrote: »

Check out the initial post and the replies below.

Our lady spy seems well in indeed with the reps and NRA....

https://twitter.com/shannonrwatts/status/1018989033534382086?s=19

It's hard to put much weight in photos like that. You can pretty much get a picture with anyone if you attend an event with them.