President 'The Donald' Trump and Surprising Consequences - Mod warning in OP

Itssoeasy

I see that Donald trumps pick for the Supreme Court has called his comments on judges " disheartening and demoralising" I wonder will trump criticise him for not being lock step with him ?

Hank Scorpio

listermint wrote: »

You trust trump one hundred percent.

You've yet to question a decision


Act as you say not as you do.

Garbage posts like this, that are nothing more than subtle bullying, are the reason discussion on this forum is dead and why politics.ie is thriving. It used to be the opposite.

Everyone and their dogs know only a fool would believe 100% people what a Politician says, yet your persist with this insulting narrative after he answered the original question to try and drive him into the ground to point score.

It's incredibly sad.

RasTa

Then go post over there and stop me reading your drivel in this thread.

foxtrot101

RobertKK wrote: »

I have no problem with that.
But as you can see there are people who hopes he fails.

I hope he's impeached, but that's not on any ideological grounds. I don't live in America, the usual cycle is a two term democrat president followed by a two term republican president - it was was the republican turn. I want him impeached because he is so blatantly unfit for the role.

Hank Scorpio

MightyMandarin wrote: »

If you don't trust him why support him? and for the love of god please don't answer with something about Hillary, I dislike her as much anyone but that doesn't make me support Trump.

Fair enough, but would you honestly trust Trump more than them?

Not speaking for Robert, for me that's easy to answer. I don't like PC culture and how it's affecting society, I think that immigration has gotten out of control, I think globalization as much as certain people dismiss it exists and it's hurting individual countries and decent people.

I believe Trump is the kryptonite to that where he'll say and do things than most European politicians are too spineless to even if it's what many decent people believe but are in fear of being called racist or whatever else for speaking out. That's why I support him. I think he's made mistakes but he's done nothing so catastrophic to make me consider dropping support for him.

RobertKK

listermint wrote: »

You trust trump one hundred percent.

You've yet to question a decision


Act as you say not as you do.

PLEASE DO NOT TELL ME HOW I THINK, OR WHO I TRUST.

I was going to reply to your earlier post but I am not going to waste my time on you.

You tell lies.

http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/newreply.php?do=newreply&p=102498023

I have also posted that given US presidents are unaccountable, people who become the president become war criminals, and I have posted more than once how Trump will be no different to Obama.
I don't like war criminals for the record.

This week we saw Obama enjoying himself on the private island owned by Richard Branson having a great time, while in the Middle East and North Africa there are many families suffering physically and mentally from his wars that he expanded, and where innocent loved ones died at his command, it doesn't matter if it was intentional or not, one can't bring back the dead or make missing limbs grow back.
Trump's presidency started the same as Obama's in this aspect.

Hank Scorpio

RasTa wrote: »

Then go post over there and stop me reading your drivel in this thread.

I post on both sites, less so here lately. Your wish will be granted soon enough.

RobertKK

MightyMandarin wrote: »

If you don't trust him why support him? and for the love of god please don't answer with something about Hillary, I dislike her as much anyone but that doesn't make me support Trump.

Fair enough, but would you honestly trust Trump more than them?

If I was a US citizen I would vote Republican, but Trump would not have been my choice for president, but since he is president, I hope he does a good job for the people who placed their hope in him with their votes.
That said I think Ted Cruz was worse than Trump. I had wanted Paul Ryan to run. Kasich was an option but he did not motivate people enough to vote for him, the way Trump did, and it was clear that people wanted new blood in politics.

johnnyskeleton

Ok, there have been a lot of different views expressed here. Maybe posters can remember that there can be spirited debate without it getting too personal.

Water John

Those trumpeting Trumps actions and beliefs really now have a dilemma. Do they continue to back Trump's attack on a 'so called' judge or do they back his nominee for the Supreme Court in what he said.
It's a simple choice.

Christy42

http://edition.cnn.com/2017/02/08/politics/donald-trump-travel-ban-delay/index.html

Not even Trump is standing behind the worst excesses of the ban. One of the big points was people getting caught abroad during the ban who were already us residents. Even Trump is now saying he argued against it coming in as an immediate effect and wanted to talk to members of Congress. I mean the visa process alone would stop "bad dudes" rushing in legally before the ban hit (and any who comes in illegally are not affected).

The cynic in me wonders if these law makers wanted to avoid someone talking Trump out of the ban before it came into effect. Either by pointing out the legal challenges it would face or other reasons. By enforcing it immediately it forces Trump and Republicans to try and defend the ban if at all possible.

Next is who are these law makers that are making the real decision. Obviously the first name that comes to mind is Bannon but I would advise caution. There could be another power or powers behind the throne. Another possibility is that Trump is attempting to shift the blame as a way of digging out of this hole (though it does make him look weak and open to manipulation).

Edit: It makes him look weak if he now decides a delay would have been a good thing. If he sticks by the immediate order it is just him taking advice.

TommyKnocker

Christy42 wrote: »

http://edition.cnn.com/2017/02/08/politics/donald-trump-travel-ban-delay/index.html

Not even Trump is standing behind the worst excesses of the ban. One of the big points was people getting caught abroad during the ban who were already us residents. Even Trump is now saying he argued against it coming in as an immediate effect and wanted to talk to members of Congress. I mean the visa process alone would stop "bad dudes" rushing in legally before the ban hit (and any who comes in illegally are not affected).

The cynic in me wonders if these law makers wanted to avoid someone talking Trump out of the ban before it came into effect. Either by pointing out the legal challenges it would face or other reasons. By enforcing it immediately it forces Trump and Republicans to try and defend the ban if at all possible.

Next is who are these law makers that are making the real decision. Obviously the first name that comes to mind is Bannon but I would advise caution. There could be another power or powers behind the throne. Another possibility is that Trump is attempting to shift the blame as a way of digging out of this hole (though it does make him look weak and open to manipulation).

Edit: It makes him look weak if he now decides a delay would have been a good thing. If he sticks by the immediate order it is just him taking advice.

This man has shown himself time and time again to economical with the truth and supporter of "alternative facts". Why would anybody believe off the bat anything he comes out with?

Zubeneschamali

Christy42 wrote: »

Even Trump is now saying he argued against it coming in as an immediate effect and wanted to talk to members of Congress.

He is the President, he doesn't have to argue with anyone about it: if he didn't want it to come into effect, he wouldn't have signed it.

Christy42

Zubeneschamali wrote: »

He is the President, he doesn't have to argue with anyone about it: if he didn't want it to come into effect, he wouldn't have signed it.

Obviously he still has to take the blame for it coming into effect.

However is a major back track and feeds into rumours of people behind the scenes having a large influence on his policy making.

Water John

Perhaps Trump should use his tweeting prowess, in defending Murza, a US resident who has 'fallen ill' for the second time whilst in Russia.
Also, excusing the pun, the trumped up charges that stop Navalny from running in the next election in Russia.

Maybe Elizabeth Warren will find herself in a similar situation.

Zubeneschamali

Christy42 wrote: »

However is a major back track and feeds into rumours of people behind the scenes having a large influence on his policy making.

They are not rumours - we know he has signed EOs without knowing what is in them.

He also complained about the EO that made Bannon a member of the NSC, that he did not understand it before he signed.

And there is video of him having no clue what is in the order rescinding Obama's order forcing financial agents to put their clients benefit first.

Christy42

Zubeneschamali wrote: »

They are not rumours - we know he has signed EOs without knowing what is in them.

He also complained about the EO that made Bannon a member of the NSC, that he did not understand it before he signed.

And there is video of him having no clue what is in the order rescinding Obama's order forcing financial agents to put their clients benefit first.

Heard the stories. Was unaware of absolute proof though thank you. Will take a look at the video after work.

Akrasia

Zubeneschamali wrote: »

He is the President, he doesn't have to argue with anyone about it: if he didn't want it to come into effect, he wouldn't have signed it.

He doesn't like to read long documents. It's entirely possible he never read any of his EOs before signing them.

There is a joke that Trump can't read, but there is lots of evidence that he only reads at a basic level and can't understand the legal documentation that he is signing unless someone explains exactly what it means.

Christy42

Akrasia wrote: »

He doesn't like to read long documents. It's entirely possible he never read any of his EOs before signing them.

There is a joke that Trump can't read, but there is lots of evidence that he only reads at a basic level and can't understand the legal documentation that he is signing unless someone explains exactly what it means.

I recall a post (can't remember who made it) saying that having a chance in the election did not stop Trump from being a joke candidate and if he won he would be a joke president.

Seems that post is quite apt.

demfad

Christy42 wrote: »

http://edition.cnn.com/2017/02/08/politics/donald-trump-travel-ban-delay/index.html

Not even Trump is standing behind the worst excesses of the ban. One of the big points was people getting caught abroad during the ban who were already us residents. Even Trump is now saying he argued against it coming in as an immediate effect and wanted to talk to members of Congress. I mean the visa process alone would stop "bad dudes" rushing in legally before the ban hit (and any who comes in illegally are not affected).

The cynic in me wonders if these law makers wanted to avoid someone talking Trump out of the ban before it came into effect. Either by pointing out the legal challenges it would face or other reasons. By enforcing it immediately it forces Trump and Republicans to try and defend the ban if at all possible.

Next is who are these law makers that are making the real decision. Obviously the first name that comes to mind is Bannon but I would advise caution. There could be another power or powers behind the throne. Another possibility is that Trump is attempting to shift the blame as a way of digging out of this hole (though it does make him look weak and open to manipulation).

Edit: It makes him look weak if he now decides a delay would have been a good thing. If he sticks by the immediate order it is just him taking advice.

Bannon is controlling Trump for now. The powers behind Bannon are The Mercer family who have used Conway, Bannon and Bossie over a decade. Robert Mercer owns half of Breitbart and runs Cambridge Analytica the big data psychographic firm used in US election and Brexit.
Trump is also beholding to Putin who worked with wikileaks to dump the Clinton emails daily to keep the media focus on her and away from Trumps Russia/China financial links.
It is probable that Putin is also blackmailing Donald Trump with Kompromat. Trump associates Carter Page, Paul Manafort and Roger Stone at least are under investigation by the FBI. Pre election Trump has to pass on info to Russia about dissident oligarcs in the US. And also he had to minimise Ukraine and focus on throwing doubt on Nato support for the Baltic States.

Wish it was a conspiracy theory.

The NYTimes had a chance to break this before the election...alas..

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/01/20/public-editor/trump-russia-fbi-liz-spayd-public-editor.html

Mr.Micro

No surprises that Trump does not know what he is signing. He is not too sharp, if he was he would not come out with the nonsense he utters. He is there now to be manipulated by the boys in the background. His lack of understanding of everything, is what makes him so dangerous IMO

Zubeneschamali

demfad wrote: »

Bannon is controlling Trump for now.l

Not for long. The more people Tweet about President Bannon, the sooner Trump's ego will make him fire Bannon.

Trump's pick for the Supreme Court has gone on record criticising Trumps attacks on judges. I expect Democrats to ask about nothing else during his confirmation.

Trump's head will explode at this betrayal.

eire4

Zubeneschamali wrote: »

Not for long. The more people Tweet about President Bannon, the sooner Trump's ego will make him fire Bannon.

Trump's pick for the Supreme Court has gone on record criticising Trumps attacks on judges. I expect Democrats to ask about nothing else during his confirmation.

Trump's head will explode at this betrayal.

Your right Trump's pick for the supreme court Gorsuch was critical of Trump's intimidation of the judiciary. However Gorsuch is not on the record in that regard. The reason we know this is after a meeting with Senator Blumenthall the senator talked about publically these comments made by Gorsuch in their meeting. Gorsuch himself has not made the comments himself in public on the record at this point.

Professor Moriarty

eire4 wrote: »

Your right Trump's pick for the supreme court Gorsuch was critical of Trump's intimidation of the judiciary. However Gorsuch is not on the record in that regard. The reason we know this is after a meeting with Senator Blumenthall the senator talked about publically these comments made by Gorsuch in their meeting. Gorsuch himself has not made the comments himself in public on the record at this point.

Trump has accused (on Twitter of course) a senator of lying:

"Sen.Richard Blumenthal, who never fought in Vietnam when he said for years he had (major lie),now misrepresents what Judge Gorsuch told him?"

However, one of Gorsuch's own spokespersons, Ron Bonjean, confirmed that he called Trump's comments regarding the judge "disheartening" and "demoralising". As did Republican Senator Ben Sasse.


The words 'plot' and 'lost' spring to mind.

Hank Scorpio

demfad wrote: »

Trump is also beholding to Putin who worked with wikileaks to dump the Clinton emails daily to keep the media focus on her and away from Trumps Russia/China financial links.

You are making things up with. NYT article is long winded but offers zero evidence. Clapper and even Obama said on his last day they didn't have anything linking Wikileaks to Russia. They don't know how Wikileaks got the emails or who their source is.

Around the eight-minute mark of the press conference, Obama says he hasn’t “commented on WikiLeaks generally,” and that the “conclusions of the intelligence community with respect to the Russian hacking were not conclusive as to whether WikiLeaks was witting or not in being the conduit through which we heard about the [Democratic National Committee] DNC e-mails that were leaked.”

8.20 in

Zubeneschamali

Hank Scorpio wrote: »

Around the eight-minute mark of the press conference, Obama says he hasn’t “commented on WikiLeaks generally,” and that the “conclusions of the intelligence community with respect to the Russian hacking were not conclusive as to whether WikiLeaks was witting or not in being the conduit through which we heard about the [Democratic National Committee] DNC e-mails that were leaked.”

Obama is saying Russia definitely hacked the DNC and leaked the hacked info to wikileaks, but they cannot say for certain that wikileaks knew it was the Russians.

Hank Scorpio

Zubeneschamali wrote: »

Obama is saying Russia definitely hacked the DNC and leaked the hacked info to wikileaks, but they cannot say for certain that wikileaks knew it was the Russians.

He's not. He's saying the same thing Clapper is saying. If you assume the possibility that there was only one party who obtained the emails then it had to be Russia, but we don't know that.

Zubeneschamali

Hank Scorpio wrote: »

He's not. He's saying the same thing Clapper is saying. If you assume the possibility that there was only one party who obtained the emails then it had to be Russia, but we don't know that.

It's right there in black and white in the quote you pasted.

Hank Scorpio

Zubeneschamali wrote: »

It's right there in black and white in the quote you pasted.

Call me an idiot but I'd still take Assange at his word over what the intelligence agencies say. They claimed guccifer was a Russia agent who provided the emails but FBI dumps on the Clinton Foundation showed he was using Russian Tor sites for anonymity and is still dumping leaks. I don't doubt that Russia hacked the DNC, I think many Countries probably did. What I doubt is how Wikileaks got the emails because they never gave any a sniff of evidence in the 2 reports that were released.

Itssoeasy

So I see Kellyanne Conway has promoted ivanka trumps clothing line in the White House briefing room.
I only saw the clip because of Fox News were showing it and even they said it was borderline and if not illegal the optics look bad.

Dear god this administration can't stop messing up. I mean there are rules against the thing Kelly Anne might have done.

Also I saw that Sean spicer may have not being aware that Martin Luther king jr wife is still alive.

I mean take out the policy issues they've had. The optics are shockingly bad. It gives the impression that no one is in control.