Hail To The Chief (Read Mod Warning In OP)

BorneTobyWilde · 22-01-2017 03:49PM

He needs babysitting. He tweets his view, and then someone has him backtrack and praise the rights of the protesters..

recipio · 22-01-2017 03:51PM

A 'USA Today' report last June claims he has been sued 4095 times in the past three decades mainly for non payment of fees for services. (Fintan O' Toole in yesterday's IT ) If true, it says it all about his personal integrity and his attitude towards his fellow Americans. Have they put a tight ars#d sociopath in the White House !?

BorneTobyWilde · 22-01-2017 03:53PM

_Whimsical_ · 22-01-2017 03:58PM

MightyMandarin wrote: »

https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/823150055418920960

:pac:

Oh dear, he's at it again

Rather shocked to find myself agreeing with him but I kind of think there's some truth in that to be honest. The discourse around him now has hit a fever pitch that would suggest he was not elected democratically at all and only got into office by nefarious means.

Also having a very dull life I watched the inauguration and several hours of the coverage afterwards.

I do think he was right that the unrest during and after the inauguration was overstated too. I watched via a few news channels, Sky News and flicking between some American channels.
The reporters were trying their hardest to make it sound dramatic but the scenes pictured really did not tally with their account.

For much of one hour they concentrated on an area where maybe young 5 men had dragged some newspaper dispensers to the middle of the road and tried setting them alight. Not in excited, "height of passion" way, instead very practical and deliberate, low key. Around 100 journalists gathered round. A very tiny fire took light eventually. 15 mins later they cut back to this "riotous scene". Same small fire still lit, same 5 men quietly discussing how they might increase the fire, they decided to start adding a few newspapers to it, thought one sheet at a time might be wisest as full papers might quench the little fire. One or two posed for selfies in front of it, it was so small they sat on the edge of the newspaper dispensers. A few others lit cigarettes from the tiny fire and waited patiently. Another 20 mins and a proper bit of smoke had started and 2 black men stepped forward, like a circus act finally starting up, and were told to stand behind the smoke for pictures which they did thus looking more dramatic. They did a bit of acting/shouting while at least a hundred journo's flashed pics and live reporters warned of things "getting out of control" and "really hotting up here".
It really was not a riot at all. Instead it was like a very orchestrated, quiet set up of a small play. The fact that SO many journalists were gathered round made me think that was their best chance of decent dramatic content there.
Later those same two black men set a car on fire.

Other people involved in unrest were interviewed.These looked like hipsters. They were proudly telling how they had broken windows in Bank of America and McDonalds. I think those protestors are par for the course everywhere there's a big political event, they turn up at gf7 meetings, they are or used to be anti-globalisation. They didn't mention Trump by name oddly. I don't know what breaking McDonalds windows would have to do with anti Trump specifically though.

Leroy42 · 22-01-2017 03:59PM

Sorry, but can somebody please help to understand what the point of lying about the inauguration numbers is.

I mean, for one, all the actual evidence is against them, but even it they see it as a wrong, whats the point?

US lied about WMD to gain a legitimacy for invading Iraq, and that caused them years of people not believing anything they say, hell even Trump uses this as a reason to negate what the CIA have to say. But at least there was an end game to it.

What can Spicer hope to achieve. Lets say the press go "hey, you know you're right, it was much bigger", so what?

On the other hand, by promoting, and making such a hard line about it, Spicer has blown away any creditibility he could have hoped for on any issue.

In my view, the press would be far better to just turn off. Forget the press conferences, forget the interviews etc. Ket they get on with whatever they have planned (they are not going to stop anyway) and come back to them in 100 days.

Trump lives by oxygen of the press. Simply ignore it until there is actually something to talk about

My name is URL · 22-01-2017 04:02PM

Leroy42 wrote: »

Sorry, but can somebody please help to understand what the point of lying about the inauguration numbers is.

Trump is mentally ill and cannot tolerate having his ego smashed by facts

Hope that clears it up :P

I mean look at this

“It was almost raining — the rain should have scared them away — but God looked down and he said ‘we are not going to let it rain on your speech’…and then it poured right after I left,” Trump said.

In fact, a light rain fell through the first few minutes of Trump’s speech, and no downpour followed its conclusion.

Trump Says Media Will ‘Pay a Big Price’ For Reporting That His Inauguration Crowd Was Small

BorneTobyWilde · 22-01-2017 04:02PM

What the press should do is refuse to give him any mention or air time whatsoever.
That is only way they could win. Let fox be only ones to show up at White House.

MightyMandarin · 22-01-2017 04:10PM

BorneTobyWilde wrote: »

What the press should do is refuse to give him any mention or air time whatsoever.
That is only way they could win. Let fox be only ones to show up at White House.

CNN refused to show his speech live yesterday. That killed him inside and they know it.

Stop giving him attention, let him write **** on twitter as he gets agitated, and keep reporting on how most americans don't like him. Headlines are also a massive point, since most people don't read articles. The one with 'Trump criticizes CNN's factual reporting of attendance' for example is how they win.

He'll have an epic meltdown, and it'll all be down to factual reporting.

Galwayguy35 · 22-01-2017 04:12PM

fryup wrote: »

and she talked about blowing up the white house....ya real smart talk that is

....stick to the singing Madge

FA Hayek wrote: »

Didn't she also talk about blowing up the white house?

Yep just heard that now.

No surprise really, these rich Hollywood types are the kind of people the left look up to.

Grayson · 22-01-2017 04:14PM

Leroy42 wrote: »

Sorry, but can somebody please help to understand what the point of lying about the inauguration numbers is.

I mean, for one, all the actual evidence is against them, but even it they see it as a wrong, whats the point?

US lied about WMD to gain a legitimacy for invading Iraq, and that caused them years of people not believing anything they say, hell even Trump uses this as a reason to negate what the CIA have to say. But at least there was an end game to it.

What can Spicer hope to achieve. Lets say the press go "hey, you know you're right, it was much bigger", so what?

On the other hand, by promoting, and making such a hard line about it, Spicer has blown away any creditibility he could have hoped for on any issue.

In my view, the press would be far better to just turn off. Forget the press conferences, forget the interviews etc. Ket they get on with whatever they have planned (they are not going to stop anyway) and come back to them in 100 days.

Trump lives by oxygen of the press. Simply ignore it until there is actually something to talk about

He could have talked about the issues. He could have briefed the press on what's going to happen. Instead it was 15 minutes about how great Trump is, how everyone loves him and how anyone who says anything else is a liar.

foxtrot101 · 22-01-2017 04:25PM

Leroy42 wrote: »

Sorry, but can somebody please help to understand what the point of lying about the inauguration numbers is.

He's playing to his supporter base, who will see this as sticking it to the media that they hate. The fact that it's complete bull**** doesn't matter, like all his lies that were fact checked and shown to be lies during his election campaign didn't matter - they still voted for him. His presidency will be all about keeping that base happy.

Hande hoche! · 22-01-2017 04:25PM

BorneTobyWilde wrote: »

What the press should do is refuse to give him any mention or air time whatsoever.
That is only way they could win. Let fox be only ones to show up at White House.

Trump seems to equal views. There were similar suggestions during the primaries and the election. You also had the Huffington Post sticking Trump articles in the entertainment section for a period.

Grayson · 22-01-2017 04:31PM

Here's a Vanity Fair article covering 7 of the lies that Spicer said yesterday. I've copied a couple of the lies and answers below. It's nuts how he managed to lie outright.

http://www.vanityfair.com/news/2017/01/sean-spicer-inauguration-statement-lies?mbid=social_twitter

“This was the first time in our nation’s history that floor coverings had been used to protect the grass on the mall. That had the effect of highlighting any areas in which people were not standing.”

https://twitter.com/AndrewTappan/status/823015070137466881

“This is also the first time that fencing and magnetometers went as far back on the Mall, preventing hundreds of thousands of people from being able to access the Mall as quickly as they had in inaugurations past.”

After Spicer’s comments, the United States Secret Service told reporters that no magnetometers were used on the National Mall during the proceedings.

“We know that 420,000 people used the D.C. public transit yesterday, which actually compares to 317,000 who used it for President Obama’s last inaugural.”

CNN and The Washington Post confirmed Metro ridership with the agency. The full day of Trump’s inauguration prompted 570,557 trips in the system. Obama’s first inauguration drew 1.1 million trips, and Obama’s second inauguration drew 782,000 trips.

Jimmy Garlic · 22-01-2017 04:31PM

MightyMandarin wrote: »

CNN refused to show his speech live yesterday. That killed him inside and they know it.

CNNs viewership is plummeting into the abyss, look at their ratings. Trump really couldn't care less what CNN does or does not show. Nobody is watching it anyway.

RobertKK · 22-01-2017 04:34PM

MightyMandarin wrote: »

Just a thought, considering a lot of people are pissed off with the electoral college system- especially considering Trump lost the election by 2m votes- how long do people think it'll be before parties will start moving people or making fake addresses or buying property in key states for the election?

Both seem to gerrymander the **** out of districts anyway- republicans moreso than Democrats- so it's possible they could try and swing the election this way.

The electoral college system will remain as long as the US is a federal nation, each state having their own laws and taxes on top of federal law and taxes.
The electoral college makes each state relevant.

RobertKK · 22-01-2017 04:35PM

gandalf wrote: »

I mean even a Texas NHL team was taking the piss out of Spicer yesterday

A TEXAS TEAM LOL!

http://www.thescore.com/nhl/news/1214347-stars-troll-trump-spicer-with-embellished-attendance-figure

The large urban areas in Texas are Democrat majority strongholds.

Hande hoche! · 22-01-2017 04:39PM

RobertKK wrote: »

The large urban areas in Texas are Democrat majority strongholds.

Austin springs to mind.

Trent Houseboat · 22-01-2017 04:39PM

Jimmy Garlic wrote: »

CNNs viewership is plummeting into the abyss, look at their ratings. Trump really couldn't care less what CNN does or does not show. Nobody is watching it anyway.

I think we all know Trump cares what CNN are saying. He wouldn't be lashing out at their accurate reporting otherwise.

SILVAMAN · 22-01-2017 04:40PM

US women throw down the gauntlet to Trump and the new administration. Fascinating speech given by Ashley Judd

Could such a speech ever be delivered outside Dail Eireann?

Grayson · 22-01-2017 04:44PM

KellyAnne Conway in an interview yesterday. She keeps being pressed on why Spicer chose to pick the inauguration numbers as the topic and why he lied outright to the press. Eventually she says he was presenting "Alternative facts".

Fleawuss · 22-01-2017 04:45PM

Priebus now attacks saying that the media are attempting to deligitimise Trump by talking about inauguration numbers. They're going to fight the media. I think the USA is beginning to reap the divisions sown for years by extremists. This is going to lead to unknown places: free speech will be threatened and the Union itself will be questioned.

I think I'll save the money I had for popcorn. The world is gone mad.

My name is URL · 22-01-2017 04:45PM

Alternative facts for alt-right idiots in their alternative reality

Sounds about right.

If this is how they react to something so trivial and unimportant, imagine how they'll react when faced with a real dilemma of national importance.

RobertKK · 22-01-2017 04:51PM

SILVAMAN wrote: »

US women throw down the gauntlet to Trump and the new administration. Fascinating speech given by Ashley Judd

Could such a speech ever be delivered outside Dail Eireann?

She goes on about being a 'nasty woman' but she should be saying an angry woman.
She talks about black people in prisons and puts it down to racism, when stats show for example around 75% of the 715 murders in Chicago last year were committed by African Americans on African Americans.

Fakediamond · 22-01-2017 05:05PM

BorneTobyWilde wrote: »

What the press should do is refuse to give him any mention or air time whatsoever.
That is only way they could win. Let fox be only ones to show up at White House.

You know I was thinking the same thing, but then I tthought that just gives him free rein to say what he likes, and go unchallenged. Probably even more dangerous that way.

Grayson · 22-01-2017 05:06PM

RobertKK wrote: »

She goes on about being a 'nasty woman' but she should be saying an angry woman.
She talks about black people in prisons and puts it down to racism, when stats show for example around 75% of the 715 murders in Chicago last year were committed by African Americans on African Americans.

You're linking two separate facts that aren't related. The majority of african americans aren't in prison for murder. The majority are there for drug offences. Statistically if a white guy and black guy appear in court for the same drug offence the black guy is far more likely to go to prison for it. Black people are far more likely to be stopped by police. Black people are more likely to be shot by police when unarmed.

The fact is that the justice system in the US is skewed against black people. Trump called for some black kids to be executed for a rape. Even after DNA evidence acquitted them he didn't back down.

orubiru · 22-01-2017 05:07PM

RobertKK wrote: »

She goes on about being a 'nasty woman' but she should be saying an angry woman.
She talks about black people in prisons and puts it down to racism, when stats show for example around 75% of the 715 murders in Chicago last year were committed by African Americans on African Americans.

I think the point she is making is that it's mostly black women who are in American prisons "just for being black" and it's mostly women who are the victims of police shootings and police brutality... right?

No wait. It's men isn't it?

So the injustices men face in society are disproportionate rates of imprisonment and disproportionate rates of being beaten and/or killed by police?

And the injustices women face are being taxed for tampons and being on the wrong side of the thoroughly debunked "pay gap"?

Definitely sounds like we need a "Women's March" to address this.

orubiru · 22-01-2017 05:21PM

Grayson wrote: »

Black people are far more likely to be stopped by police. Black people are more likely to be shot by police when unarmed.

No. Black MEN are far more likely to be stopped by police. Black MEN are more likely to be shot by police when unarmed.

If we are going to play identity politics with things like "Women's March" then lets be honest here, it's men who face these threats at massively disproportionate rates.

Grayson wrote: »

The fact is that the justice system in the US is skewed against black people. Trump called for some black kids to be executed for a rape. Even after DNA evidence acquitted them he didn't back down.

Again you've said black people when it would be more appropriate to say black men. If you are going to focus on the race then why not also focus on gender?

Making a false rape allegation and then refusing to back down? Hm, Trump sounds like a Feminist.

orubiru · 22-01-2017 05:24PM

Grayson wrote: »

KellyAnne Conway in an interview yesterday. She keeps being pressed on why Spicer chose to pick the inauguration numbers as the topic and why he lied outright to the press. Eventually she says he was presenting "Alternative facts".

"Alternative Facts"

...

I don't even know what to think of this. I think it's all over folks.

Alternative. Facts. :eek:

_Whimsical_ · 22-01-2017 05:26PM

SILVAMAN wrote: »

US women throw down the gauntlet to Trump and the new administration. Fascinating speech given by Ashley Judd

Could such a speech ever be delivered outside Dail Eireann?

She's actually reciting a poem by 19 year old Natalie Donovan.
I think as a poem it makes sense, as a speech it's ridiculous. I agree with the points and the of expression of them is fair game in a poem, but I sincerely hope the legacy of Donald Trump won't be that we come to meet his insane rhetoric with equally hysterical and vulgar rhetoric of our own.

Trent Houseboat · 22-01-2017 05:28PM

orubiru wrote: »

No. Black MEN are far more likely to be stopped by police. Black MEN are more likely to be shot by police when unarmed.

If we are going to play identity politics with things like "Women's March" then lets be honest here, it's men who face these threats at massively disproportionate rates.

Again you've said black people when it would be more appropriate to say black men. If you are going to focus on the race then why not also focus on gender?

Making a false rape allegation and then refusing to back down? Hm, Trump sounds like a Feminist.

Women just can't win.

If they protest for women's rights they're maligned for selfishness. "Where was the feminist outrage when X?"
If they protest for social justice for others they're stealing someone's victimhood.

I don't even know what the false accusations of rape at the end refer to in this case. I'm surprised you didn't mention the family court.

Hail To The Chief (Read Mod Warning In OP)

Comments