Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

Hail To The Chief (Read Mod Warning In OP)

1148149151153154193

Comments

  • Closed Accounts Posts: 11,631 ✭✭✭✭Hank Scorpio


    Jan 20th - Trump's Inauguration. National Park Service shows aerial images of Trump's crowd vs Obama's crowd eight years earlier. National Park Service halted from tweeting (may have been internal concern about a hack, may have been that they were told not to tweet embarrassing photos).

    I'm sure every President wants embarrassing photos tweeted out from their agencies.
    Jan 21st- White House Press Sec gives first press briefing by lying spectacularly and provably on the unbelievably petty point of how large Trump's crowds were. Scolds press for reporting on the topic
    Jan 22nd - "Alternative Facts" are invented by Kellyanne Conway to excuse Spicer (i.e. downright lies).

    I agree it was petty to get involved in a debate about physical attendance when it's clear it wasn't anywhere near Obama's numbers in 08. Spicer doubled down on the TV + Internet viewers as did Conway which was again foolish because there's no data backing it up.


    Jan 23rd - First day, cancels TPP, invokes the Mexico City Proposal, banning American foreign aid going to anyone involved in abortion. First steps against ACA. Also upsets China, albeit deservedly, by saying that the USA will protect its interests in not allowing nations to claim and fortify islands in international waters. On the other hand, makes China very happy by pulling out of the TPP, leaving China the main power in Pacific trade

    Trump has campaigned on canceling the TPP - You don't know what's going to happen so it's all speculation on your part.
    Jan 24th - Second day; freezes the EPA's funding and disallows any further grants. USDA [Department of Agriculture] and the EPA [Environmental Protection Agency] are no longer to release "public facing documents", including sharing research (USDA's research arm specifically is targeted. The EPA in general is targeted), releasing fact sheets, papers, communicating on or off the record with journalists or saying anything related to the grants freezes on social media.

    "Putting a temporary freeze on grants and contracts is not entirely unusual for a new president. Of course, it depends how long the freeze lasts. In Trump’s case, it seems that the freeze was imposed because the new administration didn’t conduct its assessment of the EPA’s work before taking office. When the Obama administration stepped in, no such freeze was necessary, according to Scott Fulton, EPA general counsel under Obama. "The assessment was done before the inauguration as opposed to after," he told E&E News.

    http://www.theverge.com/2017/1/25/14388928/environmental-protection-agency-grant-freeze-temporary-donald-trump
    If the review is done by Friday, all should go back to normal by next week."
    Allows frozen Dakota Pipeline to go forward, over the objections of the Native American people living there. They don't want it there for fear of it ruining their water source. It's claimed to be perfectly safe. When asked why it therefore isn't being put through the city in a more direct line, the answer is for fear of oil spills. Oh, and Trump has finances tied up in the Pipeline because of course he does.

    Trump disagrees with Obama, shock horror.
    Starts process of moving American embassy from Tel Aviv to the "undivided capital of Israel", Jerusalem. This flies against the international order regarding Israel/Palestine as, after Israel annexed the rest of Jerusalem in 1980, other nations refused to recognise it as being wholly Israel's without a negotiation and deal with Palestine. This includes refusing to move embassies from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem. This is not going to go down well with Palestinians. I personally have never been particularly knowledgeable about Israel/Palastine and don't really have a "side", but even I see that that is foolishly heavy-handed.

    So the Trump administration wants to get along with Israel. Not news, campaigned on it. Obama was pro Palestine.
    -Spicer answers that he's "Not sure" what will happen to LGBT non-discrimination law for federal workers because "I don't think we're that far through the list of executive actions yet".

    Do you really think Trump is going to attack LGBT groups?
    Jan 25th - Revokes visas from seven countries. Out of said seven countries and out of all the terrorist attacks on US soil only one have come from any of those countries and he was a naturalised US citizen by the age of two. Oddly enough, Saudi Arabia and Afghanistan are not on the lists. Presumably because SA owns quite a lot of US debt.

    Temporary bans until vetting procedures are in place. Campaigned on it ( again )
    ○ Drafts executive order allowing for the reopening of CIA "black sites" - foreign soil prisons for terrorist suspects to be detained and interrogated without pesky American anti-torture laws getting in the way.
    ○ Executive order for the monument to vanity , sorry, Great Wall.
    ○ Introduces measure for massive investigation into "voter fraud" (still saying that he really won the popular vote, and the just under 3 million extra votes were obviously illegals). Ironically, Steve Bannon is registered to vote in two states. Bless.

    Campaigned on the wall. Are you against border security stopping the influx of drugs into the US? 50m people die every year from drug overdoses.

    If there's no voter fraud what's the problem? If he's wrong after the investigation ends he should apologize.

    http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2017/jan/26/hillary-clinton-received-800000-votes-from-nonciti/

    Article isn't something I'd put a tonne of faith in but still.
    Jan 26th - Doubles down on torture working. Moderately entertainingly, indications are that Trump's people are using a private server and Trump's still tweeting from an account with a gmail backup and an unsecured Android. World waits cynically for announcement that this is perfectly legal and okay. Announces funding cuts to Sanctuary Cities (although fortunately can't hit them for that much). At this stage, something like fourteen government bodies, mostly to do with the environment, have gone rogue in communications.

    They're using a state issued domain, not a private server. Hillary Clinton's server was family run.

    He campaigned on cutting funding to Sanctuary Cities. You know illegals cost the US $133 Billion a year right?

    The twitter accounts do signify a problem if they're made by employees, is there any proof they are?


    Jan 26 cont. Trump supporters, including Mr. Bannon, argue that the media should stop reporting on Donald Trump and go sit on the naughty chair because, apparently, we won lol.

    What Bannon said was they should listen and learn because they don't understand America. After spouting non stop that Hillary was 90% to win the election all year perhaps, somewhere in there, he has a point?
    In the words of my people, gwan ta fcuk with your pussying excuses about "oh, but give him a CHANCE!" and "What has he actually DONE that's bad?" and "At least he's gotten more done in a week than Obummer did in eight years*!!". Yeah, that's because it's always been easier to destroy than build.

    Most of what you're complaining about is changes in policies and him delivering what his supporters wanted, clearly things you disagree with. The fighting over the inauguration size was stupid, aswell as the lack of transparency over environmental stuff, trying to silence anyone is wrong, we'll know more by tonight. If he does go down that road I'll call him out on it. Media stuff is meh, after being told over and over again you can't win then to portray nobody attended his inauguration is very insulting. He was wrong but I can understand where he's coming from.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 9,839 ✭✭✭Jelle1880


    Ok so first I don't see intervention by anyone there. And why have you an issue with him standing up to a totalitarian regime trying to steel natural resources from poorer countries illegally? Oh yeah because it's trump so no logic needed.
    Second, the liberal interventionism I'm talking about is going into Iraq, Libya etc and trying to force western values and governments on people through bombing them to crap. It's been a disaster for everyone and has destabilised the whole planet. Now it's going to stop. Good.

    Nobody said there is an intervention going on in the South China Sea, the initial post you replied to said that there might be one if China keeps at it.
    His administration has said they'll intervene in the South China Sea

    This was the actual quote. And it's backed up by what Tillerson

    Do you genuinely think the US might intervene out of the goodness of their heart ?

    The irony in that you think they will stop the 'liberal interventionism' while the article I quoted literally talks about how they will block access to the South China Sea is delicious.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,164 ✭✭✭Butters1979


    Jelle1880 wrote: »
    Nobody said there is an intervention going on in the South China Sea, the initial post you replied to said that there might be one if China keeps at it.

    Ok so I said
    What intervention is happening in the south China see?

    And got a reply with a quote from me with What intervention is happening in the south China see? highlighted in bold , with those two links.
    So the answer is none right?

    It was a response to my post on the end of liberal interventionism. Stopping China from a resource grab is not liberal interventionism. It's an very different thing.

    Everyone in here giving out about Trump and calling him a fascist seems to have a problem with him standing up to a fascist state.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 9,839 ✭✭✭Jelle1880


    Ok so I said



    And got a reply with a quote from me with What intervention is happening in the south China see? highlighted in bold , with those two links.
    So the answer is none right?


    It was a response to my post on the end of liberal interventionism. Stopping China from a resource grab is not liberal interventionism. It's an very different thing.

    Everyone in here giving out about Trump and calling him a fascist seems to have a problem with him standing up to a fascist state.

    Because nobody said there is an intervention going on, only that there might be one if we can believe Tillerson, why is that so hard to understand for you ?

    And you're right, intervening because you want the resources for yourself is clearly not 'liberal interventionism', it's far worse.

    Do explain please, how exactly is China 'a fascist state' ?


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 4,950 ✭✭✭B0jangles


    Remember when Trump talked about bringing back jobs, GOOD jobs to America?

    Strange then that his administration is looking to cut 10,000 good jobs already, not important ones though, just EPA ones, you know the people whose job it is to keep lead out of the drinking water, to see that companies don't dump toxic waste wherever they want
    The leader of President Trump's U.S. EPA transition team wants to see the agency's 15,000-person staff axed to about 5,000 employees.

    "I think getting down to 5,000 in the first term is a goal," said Myron Ebell of the Competitive Enterprise Institute, who headed the Trump team preparing for the administration changeover at EPA.

    With his transition tenure over, Ebell cautioned that he was speaking for himself, but he pointed to Trump's comments as a presidential candidate that he wanted to eliminate EPA. Trump has since said that he wants to "refocus the EPA on its core mission."

    "President Trump during the campaign identified the EPA as a major obstacle to economic recovery and growth and he said that he wanted to either abolish it or leave a little bit," Ebell said today in an interview. "He's not going to abolish it in a year; he's going to take a while or leave a little bit. The first thing that's going to need to be done is to start downsizing the agency."
    ...

    Ebell's goal would cut EPA's staff to about a third of its current size. "I think it's a very steep goal," he said. "If you're going to get anywhere, you've got to have high aspirations."

    Ebell, a vocal critic of the EPA's policies under President Obama, said he sees some obvious places for cuts.

    Much of EPA's budget passes through the agency toward clean water and clean air programs that are run by the states. "That raises the question," Ebell said. "What are all these people in the EPA air and safe drinking water offices doing?"

    And he said the Obama administration's move to put air staff into a climate program was an indication that they weren't needed in the air office. "It seems to me that there are real opportunities for cuts there," he said.

    http://www.eenews.net/stories/1060049052


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,164 ✭✭✭Butters1979


    Jelle1880 wrote: »
    Because nobody said there is an intervention going on, only that there might be one if we can believe Tillerson, why is that so hard to understand for you ?

    And you're right, intervening because you want the resources for yourself is clearly not 'liberal interventionism', it's far worse.

    Do explain please, how exactly is China 'a fascist state' ?

    It's a one party totalitarian regime. That's how. Try living there and criticising the government for a while, you'd soon realise what political oppression really looks like. And the resources don't belong to China, they're in international waters.

    It's funny how all these liberals are jumping to China's right to aggression when it's Trump
    Embarrassing.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,116 ✭✭✭Trent Houseboat


    wrote:
    The Guardian•Over my dead body: Tribe aims to block Trump's border wall on Arizona land
    •Who’s taking the fight to Trump? It’s Dictionary Guy
    •Here are the potential sinister motives behind Donald Trump's voter fraud lie
    •Cate Blanchett: Actor trash talks Trump to Jimmy Fallon

    The New York Times•President Trump’s War on Women Begins
    •Trump Strategist Stephen Bannon Says Media Should ‘Keep Its Mouth Shut
    •Donald Trump’s Mexico Tantrum
    •An Extremist Holding the Purse Strings
    •A Lie by Any Other Name

    CNN•Fortune teller: Trump will falter, Putin will rise
    •Apocalypse now-ish: World edges closer to doom

    The Atlantic•Are Trump's tweets Presidential?
    •The End of the American Century: The country’s role as a global model and guarantor of freedom and rule of law is being brought to an end by Trump.
    •On Pitying Melania

    Did you look at any of those stories before you copied and pasted them from whatever pro Donald website you got them from?

    One of the ones you quoted was "Trump Strategist Stephen Bannon Says Media Should ‘Keep Its Mouth Shut", one already discussed here and a direct quote. What was wrong with that story. Did Bannon not say that?

    Most of them are opinion pieces. I don't expect a hardcore Trump fan(or someone who doesn't in any support Trump but constantly tries to defend him) to know the difference between opinion and news, because they seek out "news" that supports their opinions as opposed to forming their opinions based on news, but the rest of us do.

    Tell me what's inaccurate about the first story about the tribe protesting the wall?
    Was Merriam Webster wrong in their definition of fact?
    Was Cate Blanchette actually complimentary about Trump, but the Crooked Guardian edited the video to make it look like she wasn't? Or do you just think that she shouldn't be allowed to have an opinion?
    Given that list of yours, you appear to have a problem with a lot of people having an opinion.

    You don't like them because they make Trump look bad. That doesn't mean they're not true, no matter how hard you wail about media bias or "wah wah poor us", whichever way sounds best to you.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 9,839 ✭✭✭Jelle1880


    It's a one party totalitarian regime. That's how. Try living there and criticising the government for a while, you'd soon realise what political oppression really looks like. And the resources don't belong to China, they're in international waters.

    It's funny how all these liberals are jumping to China's right to aggression when it's Trump
    Embarrassing.

    Do you live in China ?
    Just because they have one political party doesn't mean they are fascist. I think you genuinely don't know what fascism entails.

    http://thediplomat.com/2015/03/no-china-isnt-fascist/

    Have a read through that.

    And nobody is saying China is doing the right thing, you seriously need to stop making up narratives to suit your own idea. That is the only embarrassing thing here.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,116 ✭✭✭Trent Houseboat


    I'm still working my way through the list, which I'm guessing is more than you did, but one of them is from a Hong Kong fortune teller.
    Oh what a conspiracy the media have concocted, even the oracles are against you.

    Edit
    They even put this in at the end to stop gobsh*te s from thinking it was actual news. Looks like they underestimated the extent to which some people will go just to be offended.
    Editor's Note: The views expressed in this piece are solely those of fortune teller Pristina Lam


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,164 ✭✭✭Butters1979


    Jelle1880 wrote: »
    Do you live in China ?
    Just because they have one political party doesn't mean they are fascist. I think you genuinely don't know what fascism entails.

    And nobody is saying China is doing the right thing, you seriously need to stop making up narratives to suit your own idea. That is the only embarrassing thing here.

    So now I can only talk about the country I live in? You seem to know everything about what's going on in America. Where do you live? I know enough about what's going on in China.

    Your mental gymnastics to argue anything trump related seems obsessive at his stage. I'm gonna leave you to it. There's no point with you.


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,116 ✭✭✭Trent Houseboat


    Lam's prediction: A person born in the Year of the Rooster will face competition from the incoming Year of the Rooster -- essentially it's a cockfight.

    President Duterte's war on drugs may not be popular among all, but it'll make his country richer and healthier. Duterte needs to turn down his fire and take a step by step approach to dealing with the drugs problem, so he can win everyone's support.

    That means the Philippines President is going to face a lot of opposition to his policies. The fire of this year could burn up the wood from Duterte's year of birth.

    Luckily the astrological sign from Duterte's birthday is also fire -- so it can also be interpreted that the wood from his birth year will support the fire from his birthday.

    I'm sick of the mainstream media's pro Rodrigo Duterte, bias. It's shameless.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 9,839 ✭✭✭Jelle1880


    So now I can only talk about the country I live in? You seem to know everything about what's going on in America. Where do you live? I know enough about what's going on in China.

    Your mental gymnastics to argue anything trump related seems obsessive at his stage. I'm gonna leave you to it. There's no point with you.

    Lol, you literally said 'try living there' as an argument and now it doesn't matter if you live there :pac:

    Just calling something 'fascist' doesn't make it so. Anyway, toodles ;)


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 910 ✭✭✭BlinkingLights


    Jelle1880 wrote: »
    Do you live in China ?
    Just because they have one political party doesn't mean they are fascist. I think you genuinely don't know what fascism entails.

    http://thediplomat.com/2015/03/no-china-isnt-fascist/

    Have a read through that.

    And nobody is saying China is doing the right thing, you seriously need to stop making up narratives to suit your own idea. That is the only embarrassing thing here.

    It's more just authoritarian. China has elements of being liberal and normal until you do something like criticise the Government or protest about something. Then you'll rapidly find out just where the illusion of liberty ends.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 9,900 ✭✭✭InTheTrees


    The state of Texas is pushing back against the 20% tax on Mexican imports. Texas does almost 40% of its trade with Mexico and has a trade deficit with them so a 20% tax will hurt Texas far more than it hurts Mexico.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,723 ✭✭✭MightyMandarin


    InTheTrees wrote: »
    The state of Texas is pushing back against the 20% tax on Mexican imports. Texas does almost 40% of its trade with Mexico and has a trade deficit with them so a 20% tax will hurt Texas far more than it hurts Mexico.

    Just remember though, Mexico is gonna pay for this wall guys. Just remember that.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 11,631 ✭✭✭✭Hank Scorpio


    If Trump did freeze Obama's 221m parting gift to Palestine, perhaps he can use some of it to fix Flints water problem.

    http://www.cnbc.com/2016/04/22/flints-crisis-can-be-fixed-with-55m-in-new-pipes-lansing-mayor.html

    It's hard to believe that has been going on for so long.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 11,631 ✭✭✭✭Hank Scorpio


    Just remember though, Mexico is gonna pay for this wall guys. Just remember that.

    Well at least we've gotten past the stage of "Do you really believe he's going to build a wall?"

    Progress, and all that.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 14,394 ✭✭✭✭Professor Moriarty


    InTheTrees wrote: »
    The state of Texas is pushing back against the 20% tax on Mexican imports. Texas does almost 40% of its trade with Mexico and has a trade deficit with them so a 20% tax will hurt Texas far more than it hurts Mexico.

    It's always a good move to impoverish a nation to whom you export $260,000,000,000 worth of goods. Tariffs, taxing money being sent home, building a wall (though there has been net emigration back to Mexico by Mexicans in the past six years) will all ensure that America exports less to Texas.

    Of course the unseen damage is goodwill. Alienating your customers is just stupid.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 11,348 ✭✭✭✭ricero


    Gotta say i admire the donalds stance on isis and agree they are dirty sneaky rats. I have confidence that he can use his power to destroy isis or do significant damage to them. Heres hoping the donald, putin and assad can pull together and defeat this cancer on the world


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 10,375 ✭✭✭✭kunst nugget


    ricero wrote: »
    Gotta say i admire the donalds stance on isis and agree they are dirty sneaky rats. I have confidence that he can use his power to destroy isis or do significant damage to them. Heres hoping the donald, putin and assad can pull together and defeat this cancer on the world

    Like Britain destroyed the IRA? All Trump is going to do is create more terrorists…


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 16,686 ✭✭✭✭Zubeneschamali


    If Trump did freeze Obama's 221m parting gift to Palestine, perhaps he can use some of it to fix Flints water problem.

    The Republicans have discovered that Flint doesn't have a problem, it was all the EPAs fault:

    http://www.salon.com/2016/12/19/house-republicans-shut-down-investigation-into-flint-water-crisis-blame-epa-instead/


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,723 ✭✭✭MightyMandarin


    Did you look at any of those stories before you copied and pasted them from whatever pro Donald website you got them from?

    One of the ones you quoted was "Trump Strategist Stephen Bannon Says Media Should ‘Keep Its Mouth Shut", one already discussed here and a direct quote. What was wrong with that story. Did Bannon not say that?

    Most of them are opinion pieces. I don't expect a hardcore Trump fan(or someone who doesn't in any support Trump but constantly tries to defend him) to know the difference between opinion and news, because they seek out "news" that supports their opinions as opposed to forming their opinions based on news, but the rest of us do.

    Tell me what's inaccurate about the first story about the tribe protesting the wall?
    Was Merriam Webster wrong in their definition of fact?
    Was Cate Blanchette actually complimentary about Trump, but the Crooked Guardian edited the video to make it look like she wasn't? Or do you just think that she shouldn't be allowed to have an opinion?
    Given that list of yours, you appear to have a problem with a lot of people having an opinion.

    You don't like them because they make Trump look bad. That doesn't mean they're not true, no matter how hard you wail about media bias or "wah wah poor us", whichever way sounds best to you.


    This is what annoys me about the whole "Fake News" bollocks. Unfortunately online-media is determined by ad revenue and clickbait is the easiest way to do that. But sometimes the story just can't attract headlines, so it's twisted, and sometimes it's entirely made up.

    Case and point is Breitbart. A scumbag website employing scumbags so they can attract scumbags to read their lies. Breitbart made up an entirely fake story about "Muslims setting fire to Germany's oldest church in Dortmund on NYE". Not only did it not happen, Germany's oldest church isn't in Dortmund; in fact Dortmund would be the last place you'd expect the oldest church to be located, if they even knew anything about Germany. Breitbart made the whole damn thing up and of course their idiot audience ate it up.

    Unfortunately because of the Internet, for the average reader, a link to the Guardian is worth the same as a link to Breitbart or InfoWars.

    The problem with branding stuff as "Fake News" is that Donald and his amazing team of propagandists and "alternative factists" is they stole the term and use it for EVERYTHING that makes them look bad.

    For example: Donald could punch Theresa May in the face next week in front of cameras, and then call the stories about it "Fake News". Kelly-Anne would say it was just "locker room games" and that he just brushed her face. His supporters would claim that May is a pussy and faked the whole thing, and that this is just a whole conspiracy by the mainstream media.

    I'm not saying he's gonna do that next week, but look at the things he's doing in plain sight at the moment, and with a wave of his finger it's all "Fake News" and he gets away with it.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 23,296 ✭✭✭✭Akrasia


    Well at least we've gotten past the stage of "Do you really believe he's going to build a wall?"

    Progress, and all that.

    There's no way he's gonna actually build the wall.

    He's a buffoon

    He might start building a wall, but it will be plagued by cost over runs and legal disputes

    He might put up a fence and call it a wall, or he might have drone stations every few miles and call it a 'virtual wall' or some other way of claiming victory in the face of obvious defeat

    Chomsky(2017) on the Republican party

    "Has there ever been an organisation in human history that is dedicated, with such commitment, to the destruction of organised human life on Earth?"



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 23,296 ✭✭✭✭Akrasia


    ricero wrote: »
    Gotta say i admire the donalds stance on isis and agree they are dirty sneaky rats. I have confidence that he can use his power to destroy isis or do significant damage to them. Heres hoping the donald, putin and assad can pull together and defeat this cancer on the world

    ISIS are already in decline. they're falling apart. If Trump starts bombing the families of suspected terrorists and openly brags about it, he'll be a propaganda goldmine for ISIS recruiters.

    We can criticise Obama's drone program and there have been a lot of unacceptable civilian casualties, but it is a completely different thing to have a clandestine bombing operation, to Trump gleefully bragging about every attack and declaring his intention to terrorise the terrorists.

    Obama claimed he wanted to make the world safer. Trump only says he wants to make America safer, and the rest of the world can go screw themselves. Trump is ISIS's wet dream.

    Chomsky(2017) on the Republican party

    "Has there ever been an organisation in human history that is dedicated, with such commitment, to the destruction of organised human life on Earth?"



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 16,686 ✭✭✭✭Zubeneschamali


    he gets away with it.

    It is way too early to conclude that "he gets away with it".

    No-one (including Trump) has stopped talking about his inauguration crowd. Until Trump stops or recants, nobody else is going to. They will keep reporting that he is lying.

    He will still be lying about it in 4 years, and people will still be pointing and laughing. He will probably be making grandiose plans to pay a record number of people to come to his next inauguration.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 9,839 ✭✭✭Jelle1880


    It's more just authoritarian. China has elements of being liberal and normal until you do something like criticise the Government or protest about something. Then you'll rapidly find out just where the illusion of liberty ends.

    That I agree with, but calling them a fascist state is just dumb.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,116 ✭✭✭Trent Houseboat


    wrote:
    This is what annoys me about the whole "Fake News" bollocks. Unfortunately online-media is determined by ad revenue and clickbait is the easiest way to do that. But sometimes the story just can't attract headlines, so it's twisted, and sometimes it's entirely made up.

    Case and point is Breitbart. A scumbag website employing scumbags so they can attract scumbags to read their lies. Breitbart made uo an entirely fake story about "Muslims setting fire to Germany's oldest church in Dortmund on NYE". Not only did it not happen, Germany's oldest church isn't in Dortmund; in fact Dortmund would be the last place you'd expect the oldest church to be located, if they even knew anything about Germany. Breitbart made the whole damn thing up and of course their idiot audience ate it up.

    Unfortunately because of the Internet, for the average reader, a link to the Guardian is worth the same as a link to Breitbart or InfoWars.

    The problem with branding stuff as "Fake News" is that Donald and his amazing team of propagandists and "alternative factists" is they stole the term and use it for EVERYTHING that makes them look bad.

    For example: Donald could punch Theresa May in the face next week in front of cameras, and then call the stories about it "Fake News". Kelly-Anne would say it was just "locker room games" and that he just brushed her face. His supporters would claim that May is a pussy and faked the whole thing, and that this is just a whole conspiracy by the mainstream media.

    I'm not saying he's gonna do that next week, but look at the things he's doing in plain sight at the moment, and with a wave of his finger it's all "Fake News" and he gets away with it.

    It's the same thinking that tries to normalise Trump.
    Breitbart lies were shared more times as actual news on NYT, therefore Breitbart is truthier.
    Donald Trump won the presidency therefore all his lies are now truths.
    The Republicans have discovered that Flint doesn't have a problem, it was all the EPAs fault:
    I'm surprised they didn't blame CNN.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 23,495 ✭✭✭✭Billy86


    There's been much discussion on both sides.. not sure what you're looking for.

    Trump made his position clear with regards to Mexico before the election and it seems he is at least going to try and stick to what he said. Maybe he will, maybe he won't, guess we'll see.

    Did you think those who were opposed to Obama 2.0 taking office believed that it would be smooth sailing or something? Eh, no, they didn't and so might be best if you gave the 'Ohhh, look what's happening now' stuff a rest or you will be exhausted come the Summer as lots of similar happenings are bound to occur between now and then and I highly doubt any of it will mean what you will hope it will.. i.e: that America would have been better off with Hillary Clinton as president.

    As for those resigning, it's not unusual for that to happen during presidential transitions and more resignations are expected apparently.

    Have to say though I find your implied insistence that people focus only on the political matters of the day a tad ironic given how much discussion the other side of this debate here was more than happy to engage in regarding light hearted conversations that Trump had on a bus well over a decade ago.
    Seriously gas stuff there buddy - "stop pointing out all the horrible sh*t Trump is doing because he's going to do more horrible sh*t that I'll be asking you to pretend isn't happening too in a few months time".

    If it's not unusual, then please point me to the last time the entire senior management of the state department all resigned a week into a President's first term.

    You're also mistaken, this isn't a thread about the political matters of the day - it's actually thread about Donald Trump, despite your best efforts to try and make it a "lol librulz!" memefest. :)


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 23,495 ✭✭✭✭Billy86


    Ah sure if you can't have a bit of a laugh along the way what's the point in anything?

    In the state department is it not uncommon when a new administration takes over for there to be overhauls - From what I've read it's required they submit letter of resignations? I read here reports of resigning but no reports of Trump's team telling people they were no longer required.

    "Two senior administration officials said Thursday that the Trump administration told four top State Department management officials that their services were no longer needed as part of an effort to "clean house" at Foggy Bottom."

    Greg Starr, director of diplomatic security, also followed through on his planned resignation. He had come back from retirement after the 2012 attack on the US consulate in Benghazi and promised to stay through the end of the Obama administration.
    "This had been on course for over a year," another official said. "He came out of retirement and promised to stay out (of) the administration. If Hillary Clinton or Bernie Sanders were elected, he would still be retiring."

    http://edition.cnn.com/2017/01/26/politics/top-state-department-officials-asked-to-leave-by-trump-administration/index.html?sr=twpol012617top-state-department-officials-asked-to-leave-by-trump-administration0652PMVODtopLink&linkId=33814657

    Here's a link to what the State press department said about people leaving.

    https://pbs.twimg.com/media/C3HXu_nWYAUfGM_.jpg

    Out with the old, in with the new?
    Michelle Bond had been in her post since 2015, with her predecessor having stayed in the role through the majority of the Obama administration despite being a Bush appointment. Joyce Anne Barr had been in the role since 2011, with her predecessor also having been in the role for several years of the Obama presidency despite being a Bush appointment. This amount of top management resigning all together early in a presidency seems unprecedented:
    Eliot Cohen, a top official in George W. Bush's State Department and a professor at Johns Hopkins University, told Business Insider that he had "never heard of anything like this before."

    "Competent deputies probably exist, but you don’t lose this much experience and get over it quickly," Cohen said in an email. "This is not like business, where you can just bring in new people and shake things up. It's a blow."

    For all your efforts trying to write off CNN as fake news, you can't turn around now and try to use it quoting an unnamed to back up your side of the story - whether it is true or false. :p

    This is very much not good, for all involved.


  • Advertisement
  • Closed Accounts Posts: 23,495 ✭✭✭✭Billy86


    And I think Billy should remember that the people here who "defend Trump", ie. bring balance, are massively outnumbered and out of those, a good half like myself don't even like him, we're just sick of the whining and the overblown drama associated with absolutely everything Trump does.

    Anyways, here is the exact conversation anyone here can expect if talking about the resignations. Theres no point in even trying.

    "OH MY GOD THE WORLD IS ENDING BECAUSE PEOPLE RESIGNED TRUMP IS HITLER"
    "It's not that big of a deal."
    "It is. It's the most important thing in my life right now."
    "Why?"
    "It's Trump! Why won't you talk about it??"
    "Resignations?"
    "Yes! The resignations! Trump invented resignations!"
    "Ok. Do you think you're going a bit mental just because it's Trump?"
    "No. Nobody has ever resigned at the start of a new Presidency. All of this is new, terrible and because of TRUMP."
    "Ok.."
    "Talk about it!!"
    "What do you want me to say? This happens with every Presidency."
    "STOP DEFLECTING. YOU'RE NOT ALLOWED TO COMPARE OR TALK ABOUT ANYONE WHO IS NOT TRUMP OR SOMEONE I HATE."

    Fuk that noise Billy.
    Straw men: for when sh*t really gets so desperate that you have to make up completely fictitious "exact conversations" you had in your head to avoid addressing the problems posed. :)


This discussion has been closed.
Advertisement