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

Donald Trump Presidency discussion Thread VI

Options
1…6566687071…328

Comments

  • Options
    #2012
    hotmail.com
    Registered Users Posts: 13,068 ✭✭✭✭hotmail.com


    The irrelevance of Mueller to most people is beyond belief.


  • Options
    #2013
    MrFresh
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,420 ✭✭✭MrFresh


    BonnieSituation wrote: »
    Watch as police officer commits some sort of crime in retribution for his sacking.


    And everyone blames the left.


  • Options
    #2014
    duploelabs
    Registered Users Posts: 11,156 ✭✭✭✭duploelabs


    hotmail.com wrote: »
    The irrelevance of Mueller to most people is beyond belief.
    "If we had confidence that the president clearly did not commit a crime, we would have said that"
    How is it irrelevant?


  • Options
    #2015
    TomOnBoard
    Registered Users Posts: 5,109 ✭✭✭TomOnBoard


    It's going to be a very difficult couple of months for Ireland, now that it is sandwiched between Trump and Johnson on the East-West axis of crazy politics. As Johnson now ramps up his Brexit rhetoric, expect like-minded incendiary support from the White House, all aimed at ridiculing the Irish position on the Border Backstop. When two conmen run those great countries into self- destruction, I fear for the amount of collateral damage that we will suffer here.


  • Options
    #2016
    StringerBell
    Registered Users Posts: 14,035 ✭✭✭✭StringerBell


    hotmail.com wrote: »
    The irrelevance of Mueller to most people is beyond belief.

    But like a lot of other things "most people" would find beyond belief you have no problem believing it, right?

    "People say ‘go with the flow’ but do you know what goes with the flow? Dead fish."



  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #2017
    StringerBell
    Registered Users Posts: 14,035 ✭✭✭✭StringerBell


    TomOnBoard wrote: »
    It's going to be a very difficult couple of months for Ireland, now that it is sandwiched between Trump and Johnson on the East-West axis of crazy politics. As Johnson now ramps up his Brexit rhetoric, expect like-minded incendiary support from the White House, all aimed at ridiculing the Irish position on the Border Backstop. When two conmen run those great countries into self- destruction, I fear for the amount of collateral damage that we will suffer here.


    Clowns to the left if me joker's to the right is certainly appropriate but I wouldn't worry too much.

    Boris will bend or break, that was going to be the way regardless of who got in, the reality of the situation will sink in with him and he will either be the shortest serving PM or he will be one of the shortest servings PMs in British history.

    Trump has zero credibility, him having a moan about you is actually a positive for you on the world stage, particularly in the EU.

    "People say ‘go with the flow’ but do you know what goes with the flow? Dead fish."



  • Options
    #2018
    Stop moaning ffs
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 4,850 ✭✭✭Stop moaning ffs


    TomOnBoard wrote: »
    It's going to be a very difficult couple of months for Ireland, now that it is sandwiched between Trump and Johnson on the East-West axis of crazy politics. As Johnson now ramps up his Brexit rhetoric, expect like-minded incendiary support from the White House, all aimed at ridiculing the Irish position on the Border Backstop. When two conmen run those great countries into self- destruction, I fear for the amount of collateral damage that we will suffer here.

    Trump or Johnson can’t ‘do’ anything to Ireland. Either alone or as part of the EU.
    We’ve also had the news yesterday the EU has a multi billion damage fund for Ireland ready in case of no deal.

    I don’t like the optics of that but all this from the Eu sends two messages to any countries like Poland and Italy thinking of leaving the Eu. And to smaller countries like us.

    1.Look how fvkin hard this all is if you even think about leaving

    2. We have your back and will support you in case of a stupid neighbour deciding to leave and wrecking your economy in the process.


  • Options
    #2019
    hotmail.com
    Registered Users Posts: 13,068 ✭✭✭✭hotmail.com


    StringerBell wrote:
    But like a lot of other things "most people" would find beyond belief you have no problem believing it, right?


    Specifically Mueller. The media bubble vastly over estimates the interest into this story. One wonders what issues are being left behind due to the Trump celebrity appeal he gives to the media.


  • Options
    #2020
    peddlelies
    Closed Accounts Posts: 840 ✭✭✭peddlelies


    hotmail.com wrote: »
    The irrelevance of Mueller to most people is beyond belief.

    I'm looking forward to hearing why he omitted key campaign email sentences which changed the context entirely of his court filings.

    It will be an entertaining mess tomorrow.


  • Options
    #2021
    Stop moaning ffs
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 4,850 ✭✭✭Stop moaning ffs


    Trump at a rally today talking about Johnson and Farage.

    You really have to look at it and think it truly is a confederacy of dunces


    But dangerous evil dunces


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #2022
    Igotadose
    Registered Users Posts: 13,020 ✭✭✭✭Igotadose


    POTUS had a great week! Signed a budget-busting bill to the chagrin of his fellow Republicans in order to compromise with Speaker Pelosi and the house Democratic caucus. Another $320bn added to the deficit.

    In addition, he apparently lied about a conversation with the Indian PM Narenda Moti, saying he'd 'mediate' between India and Pakistan over Kashmir. When asked whether the POTUS simply makes things up, his economic advisor Larry "The Wrong Man" Kudlow said, "The President doesn't make things up. That's a rude question. And one better directed to someone that knows something."

    Plus, it's only Tuesday. Mueller's testimony, which no doubt completely exonerates POTUS45 from absolutely everything, will be coming on Wednesday.

    ---
    There. I've prepped for incoming Wiggolo post. Just a few days yet till we hear how great the POTUS is doing.


  • Options
    #2023
    pixelburp
    Moderators, Category Moderators, Entertainment Moderators Posts: 35,941 CMod ✭✭✭✭pixelburp


    Trump again invokes "article 2" during a speech at Turning Point rally, once more namedropping it as an excuse to do "whatever he wants". Man's obsessed with this, coupled with his incorrect belief it's a carte blanche, it really should be shocking that the sitting President is so ignorant of the laws he's meant to be upholding.

    https://www.twitter.com/atrupar/status/1153708318101299200


  • Options
    #2024
    Stop moaning ffs
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 4,850 ✭✭✭Stop moaning ffs


    Igotadose wrote: »
    POTUS had a great week! Signed a budget-busting bill to the chagrin of his fellow Republicans in order to compromise with Speaker Pelosi and the house Democratic caucus. Another $320bn added to the deficit.

    In addition, he apparently lied about a conversation with the Indian PM Narenda Moti, saying he'd 'mediate' between India and Pakistan over Kashmir. When asked whether the POTUS simply makes things up, his economic advisor Larry "The Wrong Man" Kudlow said, "The President doesn't make things up. That's a rude question. And one better directed to someone that knows something."

    Plus, it's only Tuesday. Mueller's testimony, which no doubt completely exonerates POTUS45 from absolutely everything, will be coming on Wednesday.

    ---
    There. I've prepped for incoming Wiggolo post. Just a few days yet till we hear how great the POTUS is doing.

    Seems to have been replaced by an account using the name of a redundant email service but let’s see. Least the new one DOESNT USE ALL CAPS TO MAKE YOU BELIEVE THE LIE IS ACTUALLY REAL


  • Options
    #2025
    Quin_Dub
    Moderators, Politics Moderators, Social & Fun Moderators Posts: 15,049 Mod ✭✭✭✭Quin_Dub


    Igotadose wrote: »
    POTUS had a great week! Signed a budget-busting bill to the chagrin of his fellow Republicans in order to compromise with Speaker Pelosi and the house Democratic caucus. Another $320bn added to the deficit.

    In addition, he apparently lied about a conversation with the Indian PM Narenda Moti, saying he'd 'mediate' between India and Pakistan over Kashmir. When asked whether the POTUS simply makes things up, his economic advisor Larry "The Wrong Man" Kudlow said, "The President doesn't make things up. That's a rude question. And one better directed to someone that knows something."

    Plus, it's only Tuesday. Mueller's testimony, which no doubt completely exonerates POTUS45 from absolutely everything, will be coming on Wednesday.

    ---
    There. I've prepped for incoming Wiggolo post. Just a few days yet till we hear how great the POTUS is doing.
    Stop moaning ffs wrote: »
    Seems to have been replaced by an account using the name of a redundant email service but let’s see. Least the new one DOESNT USE ALL CAPS TO MAKE YOU BELIEVE THE LIE IS ACTUALLY REAL

    ##Mod Note##

    Cut it out.


  • Options
    #2026
    Itssoeasy
    Registered Users Posts: 39,511 ✭✭✭✭Itssoeasy


    It's interesting that Fox News are apparently not covering the mueller testimony live tomorrow. Maybe they know the power of hearing the report and what's actually in it as opposed to the high likelyhood that most of its viewers won't ever read it.


  • Options
    #2027
    StringerBell
    Registered Users Posts: 14,035 ✭✭✭✭StringerBell


    hotmail.com wrote: »
    StringerBell wrote:
    But like a lot of other things "most people" would find beyond belief you have no problem believing it, right?


    Specifically Mueller. The media bubble vastly over estimates the interest into this story. One wonders what issues are being left behind due to the Trump celebrity appeal he gives to the media.


    Define interest? Even fox have no option but to cover it.

    It's simple enough, the media wouldn't cover it if the public weren't interested. It's telling how scared Trump and his supporters are by his appearance naturally, but I wouldn't expect Mueller himself to go beyond what he has already laid out. The simple fact that Americans won't read the book but will watch the movie is what the Democrats are counting on. They hope the public will make their decision for them and demand impeachment hearings after the testimony. Maybe they will maybe they won't, personally I'd be inclined to open the hearings but the time for genuine impeachment is gone.

    Just beat him at the ballot box, now hearings would serve to help with that imo. Trump wouldn't be able to control the narrative which is his only discernable strength.

    Mueller reading his report chapter and verse to millions of Americans will certainly serve a purpose though. Huge interest in the testimony, I think you may be referring to the outcome rather than the interest when you belittle it.

    "People say ‘go with the flow’ but do you know what goes with the flow? Dead fish."



  • Options
    #2028
    StringerBell
    Registered Users Posts: 14,035 ✭✭✭✭StringerBell


    Itssoeasy wrote: »
    It's interesting that Fox News are apparently not covering the mueller testimony live tomorrow. Maybe they know the power of hearing the report and what's actually in it as opposed to the high likelyhood that most of its viewers won't ever read it.

    Nah this was flagged I know for sure by me but probably others too I'm certain. There is no way they will not put their slant on whatever goes out to the audience. Let the facts speak for themselves? Not a hope. Too many vested interests

    "People say ‘go with the flow’ but do you know what goes with the flow? Dead fish."



  • Options
    #2029
    peddlelies
    Closed Accounts Posts: 840 ✭✭✭peddlelies


    Fake news eh.

    https://www.foxnews.com/media/msnbc-false-claim-spreads

    "A prominent MSNBC contributor’s false claim that Fox News would not air ex-Special Counsel Robert Mueller’s upcoming congressional testimony has morphed into a full-blown conspiracy theory -- and anti-Trump liberals don’t seem to care.

    Fox News will cover the highly anticipated hearing in its entirety and has heavily promoted the event, but that didn’t stop everyone -- from an MSNBC anchor to a famed novelist -- from misinforming their fans."


  • Options
    #2030
    Professor Moriarty
    Registered Users Posts: 14,359 ✭✭✭✭Professor Moriarty


    peddlelies wrote: »
    Fake news eh.

    https://www.foxnews.com/media/msnbc-false-claim-spreads

    "A prominent MSNBC contributor’s false claim that Fox News would not air ex-Special Counsel Robert Mueller’s upcoming congressional testimony has morphed into a full-blown conspiracy theory -- and anti-Trump liberals don’t seem to care.

    Fox News will cover the highly anticipated hearing in its entirety and has heavily promoted the event, but that didn’t stop everyone -- from an MSNBC anchor to a famed novelist -- from misinforming their fans."

    Good. Hoisted by their own petard.


  • Options
    #2031
    mcmoustache
    Registered Users Posts: 7,237 ✭✭✭mcmoustache


    peddlelies wrote: »
    Fake news eh.

    https://www.foxnews.com/media/msnbc-false-claim-spreads

    "A prominent MSNBC contributor’s false claim that Fox News would not air ex-Special Counsel Robert Mueller’s upcoming congressional testimony has morphed into a full-blown conspiracy theory -- and anti-Trump liberals don’t seem to care.

    Fox News will cover the highly anticipated hearing in its entirety and has heavily promoted the event, but that didn’t stop everyone -- from an MSNBC anchor to a famed novelist -- from misinforming their fans."


    Corrected within minutes. A panelist said it and corrected it.



    There's a big difference between a human getting something and then correcting it and, say, Hannity pushing the Seth Rich conspiracy when he knew that it was false and not issuing a correction.

    If I'm not mistaken, you were the one who introduced the Seth Rich conspiracy to us 4 accounts ago with the qualifier that you weren't sure if it could be believed. At least you knew that it was bullsh!t and hopefully you used that information to filter out media that spread that conspiracy theory.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #2032
    peddlelies
    Closed Accounts Posts: 840 ✭✭✭peddlelies


    mcmoustache wrote: »
    Corrected within minutes. A panelist said it and corrected it.

    It was repeated several times on air and wasn't immediately corrected either.

    Anyway, the point isn't that Fox or MSNBC are more righteous, people are so caught up in their bubbles they won't take the time out to check things. A quick google would suffice.

    https://www.mediaite.com/tv/msnbc-guests-keep-repeating-false-claim-that-fox-news-isnt-covering-the-mueller-hearings/


  • Options
    #2033
    mcmoustache
    Registered Users Posts: 7,237 ✭✭✭mcmoustache


    peddlelies wrote: »
    It was repeated several times on air and wasn't immediately corrected either.

    Anyway, the point isn't that Fox or MSNBC are more righteous, people are so caught up in their bubbles they won't take the time out to check things. A quick google would suffice.

    https://www.mediaite.com/tv/msnbc-guests-keep-repeating-false-claim-that-fox-news-isnt-covering-the-mueller-hearings/


    That's behind an adwall but I opened it in my raw-dog browser to check it out.


    Former Democratic Congresswoman Donna Edwards, appearing on MSNBC Tuesday morning, repeated the false claim that Fox News will not be airing Special Counsel Robert Mueller’shearing before Congress this week.

    “Fox News, for example, is not airing the Mueller testimony live,” Edwards said. To her credit, MSNBC’s Stephanie Ruhle interjected: “Actually, I don’t believe that’s true, I think they are going to air it.”


    Is that what you meant by msnbc repeating it? Because a guest saying something and then being corrected about a presenter doesn't really sound like...

    It was repeated several times on air and wasn't immediately corrected either.


    In fact, it sounds like the opposite of what you said. Just sayin'.


  • Options
    #2034
    peddlelies
    Closed Accounts Posts: 840 ✭✭✭peddlelies


    mcmoustache wrote: »
    Is that what you meant by msnbc repeating it? Because a guest saying something and then being corrected about a presenter doesn't really sound like...

    You're being disingenuous. This is what you wrote.
    Corrected within minutes. A panelist said it and corrected it.

    This is what the article says.
    Apparently the joke was lost on MSNBC guest Rick Wilson. He told anchor Nicole Wallace on MSNBC’s Deadline: White House Monday that Fox News will not be covering Wednesday’s hearings. While Wilson later corrected his comment on Twitter (215 retweets, as of writing), Wallace did not correct her guest in real time.

    His false statement apparently rankled higher ups at Fox. A Fox News source told Mediaite that they contacted MSNBC Monday night and requested the network make an on-air correction to Wilson’s claim. MSNBC refused, according to the source.


  • Options
    #2035
    mcmoustache
    Registered Users Posts: 7,237 ✭✭✭mcmoustache


    peddlelies wrote: »
    You're being disingenuous. This is what you wrote.

    This is what the article says.


    Thanks for that. Wallace can't be expected to correct every claim in real time unless she is actively aware that FOX were showing it. Wilson went and corrected it after he got off air, in a matter of minutes. It was retweeted 200 odd times which is is to be expected in such a short timespan for someone with half a million followers.



    https://twitter.com/TheRickWilson/status/1153404976800178176?s=20


    So after the initial mistake, did msnbc repeat the claim later?


  • Options
    #2036
    mcmoustache
    Registered Users Posts: 7,237 ✭✭✭mcmoustache


    Someone's a little upset.

    https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/1153810108654034950?s=20

    What's the age and class profile of someone who complains that things are unfair? It's certainly not that of a well adjusted adult.


  • Options
    #2037
    peddlelies
    Closed Accounts Posts: 840 ✭✭✭peddlelies


    It's amazing how partisan this thread is that I get attacked over semantics for pointing out misinformation that was repeated by several posters here.

    This is what I wrote
    It was repeated several times on air and wasn't immediately corrected either.

    The claim was repeated several times live on air by guests and it wasn't immediately corrected either initially. I don't care if Rick Wilson went on his twitter after the fact, barely anyone will see that compared to the million + watching live. MSNBC should have issued a correction in whatever programme he appeared on and not need to have Fox to contact them that night looking for a correction.

    Done bickering.


  • Options
    #2038
    mcmoustache
    Registered Users Posts: 7,237 ✭✭✭mcmoustache


    peddlelies wrote: »
    It's amazing how partisan this thread is that I get attacked over semantics for pointing out misinformation that was repeated by several posters here.

    This is what I wrote



    The claim was repeated several times live on air by guests and it wasn't immediately corrected either initially. I don't care if Rick Wilson went on his twitter after the fact, barely anyone will see that compared to the million + watching live. MSNBC should have issued a correction in whatever programme he appeared on and not need to have Fox to contact them that night looking for a correction.

    To her credit, MSNBC’s Stephanie Ruhle interjected: “Actually, I don’t believe that’s true, I think they are going to air it.”


    It's not partisan. The media makes the odd mistake, particularly live tv media where guests say stuff that's incorrect. During a live show, sh!t happens and it takes time to receive information that can be used to correct sh!te that guests say. Hell, can you imagine how much of programs would be required to correct Trump surrogates on the mainstream media? They'd have no time for shows.



    You described a typical thing as fake news. If that was the baseline for you, how do you rate the media that you receive your Uranium One conspiracies from (that's three accounts ago, I think)?


  • Options
    #2039
    aloyisious
    Registered Users Posts: 11,552 ✭✭✭✭aloyisious


    peddlelies wrote: »
    Fake news eh.

    https://www.foxnews.com/media/msnbc-false-claim-spreads

    "A prominent MSNBC contributor’s false claim that Fox News would not air ex-Special Counsel Robert Mueller’s upcoming congressional testimony has morphed into a full-blown conspiracy theory -- and anti-Trump liberals don’t seem to care.

    Fox News will cover the highly anticipated hearing in its entirety and has heavily promoted the event, but that didn’t stop everyone -- from an MSNBC anchor to a famed novelist -- from misinforming their fans."

    Not being sarcastic to you, I'm glad that you included the word "misinform" in your post. That word is so contrary to the word regularly used in reference to Don Trump's statements. Given the way the TV presenter corrected the guest live on air [mentioned in the earlier posts] as to whether Fox was going cover the hearing, the incorrect claim has little chance of morphing into a conspiracy, unless one has the mindset of Don Trump [as displayed in his public statements about the Mueller investigation].

    As to the hearing later today, CNN has reported that Don has tweeted his dislike of Mueller having a Non-Trumper attorney at his side at the hearing. Taking his dislike of Muellers report at face value, it seems Don would prefer Mueller have one of Don's own attorneys at his side for advice during the hearing. I don't have a twitter account so can't confirm the CNN News report that Don used the words "non-trumper" in his tweet. If he did actually use those two words, it tends to indicate Don's mindset where it comes to Mueller testifying at the hearing.


  • Options
    #2040
    Outlaw Pete
    Registered Users Posts: 10,423 ✭✭✭✭Outlaw Pete


    mcmoustache wrote: »
    Someone's a little upset.

    What's the age and class profile of someone who complains that things are unfair? It's certainly not that of a well adjusted adult.

    Paththic post. The term unfair is used in law and hearings all the time, have you really never heard of an unfair hearing?


    Anyway, the following is quite interesting if true:
    Mifsud was a “longtime cooperator of western intel” who was asked specifically by his contacts at Link University in Rome and the London Center of International Law Practice (LCILP) — two academic groups with ties to Western diplomacy and intelligence — to meet with Papadopoulos at a dinner in Rome in mid-March 2016, Roh told me.

    A few days after the March dinner, Roh added, Mifsud received instructions from Link superiors to “put Papadopoulos in contact with Russians,” including a think tank figure named Ivan Timofeev and a woman he was instructed to identify to Papadopoulos as Vladimir Putin’s niece.

    ......the Mueller report portrays Papadopoulos as the instigator who initiated contact with Mifsud and his Russian contacts. “Campaign foreign policy adviser George Papadopoulos made early contact with Joseph Mifsud, a London-based professor who had connections to Russia and traveled to Moscow in April 2016,” the report said.

    In fact, the contemporaneous evidence shows Mifsud was directed to seek out Papadopoulos at the March 14, 2016, dinner arranged by the LCILP and Link. Papadopoulos didn’t know who Mifsud was when he arrived for the dinner.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #2041
    volchitsa
    Registered Users Posts: 7,019 ✭✭✭volchitsa


    Outlaw Pete wrote: »
    Anyway, the following is quite interesting if true:

    If being the operative word : it's an opinion piece by John Solomon, former editor of the Washington Times and known for biased reporting in favour of conservatives and of repeatedly manufacturing faux scandals. Not your average investigative reporter by any means. In fact, someone who is so unlikely to be reliable that quoting him like that with what is really only a pseudo caveat rather calls the poster's own objectivity into question IMO.


This discussion has been closed.
Advertisement