nav[aria-label="Primary Navigation"] { padding: 0; & ul { list-style: none; width: 100%; display: flex; flex-direction: row; justify-content: start; align-items: start; gap: 30px; padding: 0; & li { margin: 0; } & ul li { list-style: none; } } }

Child Item

Donald Trump Presidency discussion thread III

Quin_Dub

This thread is for the continuing discussion of Donald Trumps's presidency in the US and any related matters.

Please ensure that you are familiar with the charter before posting.

Thanks.

Find more posts tagged with

Quick Links

Comments

aloyisious

Doltanian wrote: »

Nothing takes away from internal corruption like beating the Drums of War and nationalism.

That referring to his quote at the news conference that the raid on Cohen was an act against the country? I thought it was intended in a "wrap the flag around me, boys" way, but that's probably just my cynicism.

Professor Moriarty

First The Donald tweets this:

Russia vows to shoot down any and all missiles fired at Syria. Get ready Russia, because they will be coming, nice and new and “smart!” You shouldn’t be partners with a Gas Killing Animal who kills his people and enjoys it!

Then 40 minutes later he tweets this:

Our relationship with Russia is worse now than it has ever been, and that includes the Cold War. There is no reason for this. Russia needs us to help with their economy, something that would be very easy to do, and we need all nations to work together. Stop the arms race?

He's flip-flopping all over the place like a dying mackerel.

aloyisious

Um, one of Russia's ambassadors has issued a warning that Russia will target the missile launch sites. That's upping the ante from shooting down incoming missiles. If they are sub-launched explosive missiles, then targetting subs which will probably have missiles of alternative munition-content is asking for serious world trouble.

Edit: if it's correct, as assumed, that Vlad is the boss in Russia, I assume that that Russian ambassador spoke with Vlad pulling the strings, then it's a message from Vlad to Don and his senior Admin staff to avoid Russian injuries. That might explain Don's volte-face.

Fann Linn

Professor Moriarty wrote: »

First The Donald tweets this:

Russia vows to shoot down any and all missiles fired at Syria. Get ready Russia, because they will be coming, nice and new and “smart!” You shouldn’t be partners with a Gas Killing Animal who kills his people and enjoys it!

Then 40 minutes later he tweets this:

Our relationship with Russia is worse now than it has ever been, and that includes the Cold War. There is no reason for this. Russia needs us to help with their economy, something that would be very easy to do, and we need all nations to work together. Stop the arms race?

He's flip-flopping all over the place like a dying mackerel.

The Don has bottled it.

everlast75

jooksavage wrote: »

Why is "smart" in quotes. Are the missiles actually stupid? The use of title case for Gas Killing Animal makes Assad sound like a deathcore band.

When he says "gas killing animal", is he referring to Assad... or given what happened in the UK.. Putin?

aloyisious

Fann Linn wrote: »

The Don has bottled it.

If true, and he doesn't have another spasm later, TG. Waving one's willy around in public is laughable and inexcusable at his level.

Pelvis

Agent Don informing his superiors of an incoming attack.

Hurrache

Ahem, from 2013

https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/372943068267573249

https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/373743492151136256

wes

There is no need to attack Syria, just cut Putin and his cronies from there ill gotten gains, and don't let them have any of it back until they stop supplying chemical weapons to Assad. This idea that more violence will solve the problem is utterly insane, and sadly it seems that "liberals" are chomping at the bit for another disastrous bout of Middle East violence as well this time.

FFS, I am not fan or Assad or Putin, but there are better way to hurt them, that don't involving killing anyone. Violence should always be a last resort.

Mumha

Manic Moran wrote: »

“ Nut job?” I have seen that used thrice now in the last few posts.

Look, I grant that you don’t agree with their judicial outlook or their guiding philosophies, but that is far from saying that they are nutjobs. They are/were both highly qualified and intelligent judges. As welded to their philosophies as folks like Ginsburg or Breyer to theirs. Neither position is wrong, they are just different. I do not believe he ever should have been nominated, but that’s because I disagree with the Senate blocking Garland’s nomination, not his qualities. In the year he’s been on, I also don’t recall any particular outliers or controversial rulings from him.

Besides, remember when Gorsuch was nominated alternatives being thrown up were folks like Pryor. If you want to call Gorsuch a nutjob, which epithet would you use had Pryor been selected? There was no way Trump/Republicans were going to propose a new Breyer. The reality of it was that the replacement would lean conservative, and Gorsuch was hardly the most so on offer. Can we avoid the hyperbole?

Am I wrong in saying that the two most liberal judges currently on the Supreme bench are Clinton appointees from that era?

If you want to ban the word being used, that's your prerogative as a mod, however as "constitutionalist" as Scalia was, he was still open to be convinced by other arguments (in fact Scalia believed that assault rifles/weapons of war were not protected by the 2nd Amendment). Gorsuch shows no such openness or collegiality.

As a newbie, Gorsuch has already written a scathing dissent from California about the right to bear arms outside the home. He wrote more seperate opinions in his first year than Kagan did in her first two years, including dissenting against an Arkansas law that the SC struck down banning same sex couples from listing both parents names on the child's birth cert.

He has been, and will continue to be an horrific choice, chosen by McConnell throwing out the norms of the Senate to get him voted in.

Christy42

Pelvis wrote: »

Agent Don informing his superiors of an incoming attack.

In fairness there is normally good reason for informing them of attacks. Imagine if Russia thought a missile was headed for Russia itself? Or you start catching Russian/US men in attacks a few times.

Admittedly there are more traditional channels for this sort of thing than a twitter rant.

Mumha

NBC putting more bones on the long term rumours about Ryan's future. "Close confidants" are saying that Paul Ryan is not going to run in November.

Mr.Micro

Pelvis wrote: »

Agent Don informing his superiors of an incoming attack.

Lol. What a fool. ..hide and seek...I am coming to get you....my friend, er Russia my enemy.

[Deleted User]

Professor Moriarty wrote: »

First The Donald tweets this:

Russia vows to shoot down any and all missiles fired at Syria. Get ready Russia, because they will be coming, nice and new and “smart!” You shouldn’t be partners with a Gas Killing Animal who kills his people and enjoys it!

Then 40 minutes later he tweets this:

Our relationship with Russia is worse now than it has ever been, and that includes the Cold War. There is no reason for this. Russia needs us to help with their economy, something that would be very easy to do, and we need all nations to work together. Stop the arms race?

He's flip-flopping all over the place like a dying mackerel.

First tweet is after speaking to Bolton. Second one is after Kelly had a word with him. Guarantee it.

Quin_Dub

Mumha wrote: »

NBC putting more bones on the long term rumours about Ryan's future. "Close confidants" are saying that Paul Ryan is not going to run in November.

A Tactical withdrawal by Ryan - Don't run and then can't "lose" the leadership of the House if the Democrats take it (as a lot of the current indicators suggest they might).

He can then take some time out and reappear as a potential "consensus" candidate in 2020 after a potential Trump impeachment/implosion before then..

mcmoustache

Mumha wrote: »

NBC putting more bones on the long term rumours about Ryan's future. "Close confidants" are saying that Paul Ryan is not going to run in November.

Seems all but confirmed.

I'd imagine he sees the writing on the wall.

If I'm not mistaken, this would mean that his seat is up for grabs and the main contenders are the moustache guy (Bryce) and the alt-right guy (Nehlen).

mcmoustache

circadian wrote: »

First tweet is after speaking to Bolton. Second one is after Kelly had a word with him. Guarantee it.

Or someone wrestled the phone off him. That's how I prefer to think of these walk-backs anyway.

[Deleted User]

Professor Moriarty wrote: »

First The Donald tweets this:

Russia vows to shoot down any and all missiles fired at Syria. Get ready Russia, because they will be coming, nice and new and “smart!” You shouldn’t be partners with a Gas Killing Animal who kills his people and enjoys it!

Then 40 minutes later he tweets this:

Our relationship with Russia is worse now than it has ever been, and that includes the Cold War. There is no reason for this. Russia needs us to help with their economy, something that would be very easy to do, and we need all nations to work together. Stop the arms race?

He's flip-flopping all over the place like a dying mackerel.

Those posts go perfectly together..

"Russia, we're firing rockets. Do not intercept." "Things are bad between America and Russia now, and the world needs to work together."

Where's the flip-flopping? He's warning Russia to prevent something between superpowers.

Hande hoche!

Think he would just concentrate on the looming conflict. Still taking time to tweet about Rosenstein and Mueller. Madness.

Professor Moriarty

Deleted User wrote: »

Those posts go perfectly together..

"Russia, we're firing rockets. Do not intercept." "Things are bad between America and Russia now, and the world needs to work together."

Where's the flip-flopping? He's warning Russia to prevent something between superpowers.

I see them as conflicting messages. If you don't then no problem but I don't see any point in explaining why they are conflicting.

[Deleted User]

Professor Moriarty wrote: »

I see them as conflicting messages. If you don't then no problem but I don't see any point in explaining why they are conflicting.

Then delete the post where you wrote it, since your assertion clearly means nothing to you.

Professor Moriarty

Deleted User wrote: »

Then delete the post where you wrote it, since your assertion clearly means nothing to you.

No. I believe my point is self-evident.

Christy42

[Deleted User] wrote: »

Then delete the post where you wrote it, since your assertion clearly means nothing to you.

I read it as tweet 1: let's fight. You think you can take us cos there are missiles coming your way!

Tweet 2: let's be more peaceful. You need to focus on the economy so let's stop building up our military forces.

everlast75

Deleted User wrote: »

Then delete the post where you wrote it, since your assertion clearly means nothing to you.

Or you could just ignore his posts if you are offended by them.

Anyway - to answer your question, one tweet escalates matters by telling Russia rockets are coming, i.e. a military answer.

The second tweet is more conciliatory, and pleads for economic solutions.

One = threat of military course of action
Second = pleading for economic course of action

Do you see the conflict now?

Professor Moriarty

First he tweets Russia to get ready for bombs, then he tweets wants to stop an arms race and now he blames the Dems for "bad blood with Russia" in his latest tweet:

Much of the bad blood with Russia is caused by the Fake & Corrupt Russia Investigation, headed up by the all Democrat loyalists, or people that worked for Obama. Mueller is most conflicted of all (except Rosenstein who signed FISA & Comey letter). No Collusion, so they go crazy

All in a day's work for The Donald.

[Deleted User]

Russia vows to shoot down any and all missiles fired at Syria. Get ready Russia, because they will be coming, nice and new and “smart!” You shouldn’t be partners with a Gas Killing Animal who kills his people and enjoys it!

How is that a threat of military action?

He's taunting Russia saying "You guys said you were going to shoot down these missiles I'm about to send at Syria. They're about to come. Don't intercept them."

If you want to read it that he's threatening Russia themselves, then really you're just believing what you want to believe.

robinph

Deleted User wrote: »

How is that a threat of military action?

Yet one carriage return later...

Deleted User wrote: »

He's taunting Russia saying ...

You've done pretty well in not contradicting yourself within the same sentence or paragraph, but surely you can still see the difference between those two lines that you wrote moments apart?

ancapailldorcha

Deleted User wrote: »

Then delete the post where you wrote it, since your assertion clearly means nothing to you.

Use the report function if you have a problem with a post.

everlast75 wrote: »

WITCH HUNT!!!!!!!!!!!!

Don't post nonsense here please.

spacecoyote

http://thehill.com/homenews/house/382610-ryan-announces-he-wont-seek-reelection

So it's not rumour anymore, Ryan is definitely gone at the end of this term

everlast75

Thinking about it over lunch, I reckon Ryan is retiring because of a combination of
1) DJT getting into it with the Chinese and their reply was to target his state with tariffs affecting his constituents and therefore his chance of re-election
2) general frustration with Trump
3) the expected obliteration of Reps in the mid-terms under his leadership and that being his legacy