RIGOLO wrote: » Only an anti-TRumper would seriously IGNORE Obamas debt and level the blame for US debt problem at the foot of TRump. The U.S. debt increased $9 trillion during the 8 years Obama was in office. Perhaps you were paying attention to the moves in the US bond market this week. The 30 year Treasury bond yield hit a record low, which indicates investors have never had as much confidence in the US economy, and the US had never auctioned such debt so cheaply.https://www.marketwatch.com/story/30-year-treasury-bond-yield-breaks-to-all-time-low-as-coronavirus-fears-lift-havens-2020-02-21 So again, your just expressing an opinion. The market and bond yields are expressing the reality of booming US economy, booming international confidence in the US ecnonomy and uber-cheap debt.
Cody montana wrote: » He was also bankrupt SIX times. The current deficit in the US in ONE trillion.
RIGOLO wrote: » Seems to be a lot of bluster and opinion recently about TRump being some kind of Russian or Putin stooge.
Outlaw Pete wrote: » Aye, never stops, but as you suggest, it's all just nonsense. No matter how many times the left faceplant on trying to paint Trump as a Russian asset, they nevertheless just keep attempting to do so as if nothing has happened. They cry Russia Russia Russia almost as much as they cry Racist Racist Racist these days (which is saying something given their love of the latter). Truth is any democrat currently running would be a welcome relief for Putin over Trump who has done more to displease the Kremlin than the last administration by a country mile. Giving lethal aid to Ukraine alone had Putin nostalgic about the Obama years.https://www.brookings.edu/blog/order-from-chaos/2018/09/25/on-the-record-the-u-s-administrations-actions-on-russia/ The truth rarely penetrates leftist bubbles though. Here's just one example of Maddow on ONE show recently doing her damndest to try and tie the two in the minds of the US electorate: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UPpyn3QwSj0 Strange how there's been no outrage from leftist MSM about how a dossier which had sevenRussian sources was used by the DNC try and sway the electorate into voting for their candidate and of course also as a basis for the FBI obtaining surveillance warrants. Nah, they'd rather look the other way when it comes to where the real Russia collusion took place with regards to the 2016 election. Gonna be real hard to do that when the John Durham investigation findings drop though.
sid waddell wrote: » Maddow is excellent. She seems to really trigger a lot of Trump supporters for reasons far beyond her excellent journalism - primarily among them the fact that she's an extremely smart, strong woman and a lesbian. The exact sort of combination that Trump supporters cannot handle. And they're never able to challenge the content of her programme, instead dealing merely in angry, cliched generalities - there's a good example of this a couple of posts above.
serfboard wrote: » Not really a fan of Maddow myself. She takes a five-minute story, and stretches it out for almost half an hour. I gave up watching her videos on YouTube, because I found myself roaring at her: “Get to the effing point”, before I stopped watching the video.
pixelburp wrote: » He also started from the top, inheriting his father's substantial real estate portfolio. Trump is not a self-made man, and nowhere near the mythological concept of the "American dream" that one might admire; heck if anything, Ocasio-Cortez fulfils that more deftly (though we know how hysterical & hypocritical some get around her). He is the quintessential example of dynastic wealth writ large, and despite the monumental advantages he had growing into adulthood, still managed to make a series of terrible business decisions (Trump Steaks, Magazine, University, etc. etc.), while as you said, bankrupting himself numerous times. He is "the swamp" incarnate, and like Bush Jr. or Reagan, a good example how empty vessels can be useful tools in political strategies. "Drain the Swamp" indeed. Donald Trump's one success is that he cultivated an image & myth of his wealth and success, mostly by presenting himself in the most ostentatious appearances of "cliche billionaire". He presents, in many ways, as the poor man's idea of the rich man; gold plating, limousines and large private jets. Living beyond his means to maintain a facade. I've estimated before that he's the last remaining tycoon of the classic mould: showy wealth as an intimidation tactic. All he needs are the cigars and top hats. The man's a spoofer, and an idiot. A dangerous combination, albeit harmless enough in the pubs around the country where we've met that exact form of person. There's enough evidence on public record to prove his lack of intelligence, while anyone who started where he did - yet still struggle to maintain wealth - doesn't get to be called a Success Story.
Caquas wrote: » I don’t apologise for linking this case to Irish politics. We are on an Irish website. Blagojevich was convicted of seeking campaign contributions after he had succeeded in making a tax change which benefitted paediatricians who had lobbied unsuccessfully for years. He was upset that they wouldn’t contribute to his re-election campaign (which is legally ring fenced and not available to the candidate personally). My point is that Irish politicians are relieved of this inconvenience because Irish taxpayers are obliged to contribute to incumbents regardless of our political views. It’s time you apologised for calling me a liar now that I’ve improved your legal education. At the very least you should acknowledge that after eight years, Blagojevich has served his time and Trump was right to commute his sentence. No one in Ireland has spent 8 years in jail except for murder but you wanted Blagojevich to serve 14 years for attempting to get campaign funding from a medical lobby. The Irish love to pillory corrupt politicians until they need to bend the rules to get planning, or a medical card or a pension or ...... . Here’s another layman’s guide to the Blagojevich case for your continuing education (that two second wiki search seems a long time ago Jack!)https://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2017/11/02/rod-blagojevich-mercy-corruption-chicago-illinois-governor-215781"]https://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2017/11/02/rod-blagojevich-mercy-corruption-chicago-illinois-governor-215781[/URL]
Outlaw Pete wrote: » Strange how there's been no outrage from leftist MSM about how a dossier which had sevenRussian sources was used by the DNC try and sway the electorate into voting for their candidate and of course also as a basis for the FBI obtaining surveillance warrants. Nah, they'd rather look the other way when it comes to where the real Russia collusion took place with regards to the 2016 election. Gonna be real hard to do that when the John Durham investigation findings drop though.
StringerBell wrote: » What does something that happens in an Irish political context have to do with a convicted criminal in the U.S? I'm missing the relevance.
Caquas wrote: » Don’t strain your brain. Posters here are outraged about what (they mistakenly think) Blagojevich did with Obama’s Senate seat. I try to educate them and I also point to what the caretaker Taoiseach did with a Senate vacancy here. But hey, nothing to see here, move along now.
sid waddell wrote: » Why don't you answer the poster's question instead of engaging in insults and bizarre and irrelevant attempts at whataboutery?
Caquas wrote: » I could hardly be clearer and this is absolutely not “whataboutery” . We are on an Irish website discussing the jailing of the Governor of Illinois who posters here thought (wrongly) was convicted of corruptly filling Obama’s Senate seat. In addition to answering the various falsehoods and setting out the facts (which the Irish media won’t report), I pointed to the recent filling of a seat in Seanad Éireann by the Taoiseach. The relevance should be obvious but if you still can’t see it, just relax.
everlast75 wrote: » Its very clear what the Russian tactic is here. Push Trump because he is their stooge and push the most divisive candidate on the left. 3 things - 1) In Bernie's defence, he renounced Russia's interference (Trump welcomed it and refuses to acknowledge it) 2) Bernie sometimes is his own worst enemy when people accuse him of being divisive. Here is an example now why Russia want him to do well - it'll split the Dem vote - which benefits Trumphttps://twitter.com/BernieSanders/status/1231021453270769664?s=19 3) Russia bet Bernie is the best person for trump to run against. The message is simple - Capitalism Vs Socialism. (Mind you - every poll I've seen says Bernie beats Trump)
Leroy42 wrote: » Trump is ripping the US democracy apart. He is ripping apart the FBI,CIA, the judicial system. He has completely (or better said greatly enhanced) the partisan nature of House and Senate. He has weakened Nato and alliances.
Call Me Jimmy wrote: » I think Nato being less reliant on one country for funding strengthens it, what are you referring to? There is no doubt some bitterness growing between some countries and the US I agree. I think saying he is ripping the FBI CIA and judicial system apart is incredible. What are you referring to there specifically? His commenting on judges /cases in public is the worst but I think the american system was designed to withstand that and will, don't you think?
duploelabs wrote: » OK, as a microcosm on just the Stone case, do you think those prosecutors walked out for sh!ts and giggles?
Call Me Jimmy wrote: » I can't see how anyone thinks Putin would want Trump more than Sanders. Edit: However I can see how Russia would calculate that Bernie Sanders will stay in line with the establishment on a lot of things.
Call Me Jimmy wrote: » Eviscerating the military budget and the US counter-intelligence capabilities and military presence overseas is outweighed by Bernie being socially liberal? Bernie election ends the populist nationalist movement worldwide? What the hell EDIT: Although it does make sense if you put the geopolitical shift down to people essentially being 'trendy'
Call Me Jimmy wrote: » They decided to walk out, how is that destroying the justice system? I've said Trump shouldn't have commented I don't think it was unreasonable for Barr to say the sentence was too much, my understanding is the DOJ has every right to do what it did. I'm no legal expert but the judge seemed to implicitly agree by giving a much shorter sentence than what was recommended (like 1/3 I think). I don't see where the problem is other than Trump speaking about it.
duploelabs wrote: » So are you ok with the president influencing the judiciary? Unfortunately you're in the minority (within over 1,100 members of the latter)https://www.nytimes.com/2020/02/16/us/politics/barr-trump-justice-department.html
Call Me Jimmy wrote: » The post you quoted is one where I said it's not ok. It's not defensible and it's probably the dumbest and most damaging thing Donald Trump does. I don't think it constitutes a crisis and I don't think even public criticism between branches threatens the integrity of the system no matter how egregious and irresponsible it feels for the president to act like this. I have only seen signs of how little effect it has on the judiciary, I don't think they have been compromised in any way. Don't mistake me for someone who thinks it's sunshine and rainbows, just offering some counter points as I see them, which seems to be few and far between in these Trump threads. Like when people say he's destroying the institutions, I'm pushing back on that because I don't think it's the case.
