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

Overheal

ICYMI #FreeMelania

http://www.nydailynews.com/news/politics/melania-slaps-president-trump-hand-israel-article-1.3185725

Jamiekelly

Celticfire wrote: »

The world is a lot bigger than that region and just because you found a meme to support your bias doesn't affirm your statement. The fact is that the vast majority of Muslims were not affected and for you to try to pick a geographical area of relatively stable country's that are surrounded by countries that can't verify travelers identities still doesn't prove that Trump only banned country's he didn't invest in.




That's some long winded way of proving absolutely nothing.



Considering you are the only person to issue this statement I'll give it the consideration it deserves.....none.

Your debating tactics are reminiscent of Reddit sub forums. If you are not willing to even consider someones argument, or at the very least acknowledge it as being valid or plausible, then what are you doing here? Trolling for the lulz?

You can argue against reality all you want, we don't buy it. It might surprise you but Alex Jones is not an intellectual powerhouse and the same tactics you use remind me of him in his more unhinged phases.

I've seen more measured responses from Twitter.

oscarBravo

Celticfire wrote: »

Considering you are the only person to issue this statement I'll give it the consideration it deserves.....none.

Actually, that statement was issued by Trump's "doctor".

BabyCheeses

oscarBravo wrote: »

Actually, that statement was issued by Trump's "doctor".

That was ages ago, a man of Trump's state can deteriorate very quickly, especially with the stress of having to work a full week.

Celticfire

Jamiekelly wrote: »

Your debating tactics are reminiscent of Reddit sub forums. If you are not willing to even consider someones argument, or at the very least acknowledge it as being valid or plausible, then what are you doing here? Trolling for the lulz?

You can argue against reality all you want, we don't buy it. It might surprise you but Alex Jones is not an intellectual powerhouse and the same tactics you use remind me of him in his more unhinged phases.

I've seen more measured responses from Twitter.

Oh I'm sorry to actually question the blatant one sided narrative that passes for debate in this thread. After what could only be described as a successful trip to SA not one other person has acknowledged that this was the case. So much for others in this thread looking at the subject of Trump objectively. So before you accuse me of not looking at someones point of view I'll ask you to look at how others respect the point of view of those that don't play along with the bash Trump game.

Billy86

Celticfire wrote: »

The world is a lot bigger than that region and just because you found a meme to support your bias doesn't affirm your statement. The fact is that the vast majority of Muslims were not affected and for you to try to pick a geographical area of relatively stable country's that are surrounded by countries that can't verify travelers identities still doesn't prove that Trump only banned country's he didn't invest in.

It's not a meme - it's a proven fact. You can disagree with it all you want, but the fact is federal judges found that to be the case too, largely because Trump himself kept referring to it as a Muslim ban.

You have not named a single country in that region by the way, because all of the ones from that area left off the ban were ones that help fill Trump's family's pockets.

hat's some long winded way of proving absolutely nothing.
Except for the actual, literal definition of health both according to the .

You can claim they are wrong all you want just like you can claim federal judges are wrong but it's not convincing in the slightest as you don't appear to have anything to back it up whatsoever.


Considering you are the only person to issue this statement I'll give it the consideration it deserves.....none.

*Ahem*




So now, your consideration and answer... do you agree with the statement at the end?

Celticfire

oscarBravo wrote: »

Actually, that statement was issued by Trump's "doctor".

Actually it wasn't ....

"If elected, Mr. Trump, I can state unequivocally, will be the healthiest individual ever elected to the presidency."

Billy86's statement

So in light of that, do you agree with the following statement: Donald Trump is unequivocally the healthiest individual ever elected to the presidency.

So you can see that is a statement by Billy86 not the quote from the doctor.
I'vee no idea if Billy86's statement is true of false.

Billy86

Celticfire wrote: »

Actually it wasn't ....




Billy86's statement


So you can see that is a statement by Billy86 not the quote from the doctor.
I'vee no idea if Billy86's statement is true of false.

"If elected, Mr. Trump, I can state unequivocally, will be the healthiest individual ever elected to the presidency."

vs

"Donald Trump is unequivocally the healthiest individual ever elected to the presidency."



Was Trump elected or not? I think he won the election back in November, no? Correct me if I'm wrong but I'm pretty sure Trump won the election?

oscarBravo

Celticfire wrote: »

Oh I'm sorry to actually question the blatant one sided narrative that passes for debate in this thread.

There's something annoying self-pitying about someone who puts forward one of the two sides of a debate constantly decrying how one-sided the debate is.

After what could only be described as a successful trip to SA not one other person has acknowledged that this was the case.

It's shocking how low the bar has been set for Trump to be considered "successful". It's like his address to the joint session: he didn't say anything overtly racist or grab anyone by the pussy, which led to people describing an utterly nondescript speech as "presidential".

So, yes: by the astonishingly low standards Trump has so far set for himself, his visit to Saudi Arabia was successful. It will be interesting to see how he gets on when his trip takes him to some liberal democracies.

Billy86

oscarBravo wrote: »

So, yes: by the astonishingly low standards Trump has so far set for himself, his visit to Saudi Arabia was successful.

I'm going to actually have to correct you there and remind you that it wasn't. By Trump's own standards he lacked the stamina he was so busy giving out about his opponents' supposed lack of during the election campaign and even missed an event in SA on terrorism because of it, while he both bowed to Saudi royalty which he was so explicitly against Obama doing, and the First Lady did not wear a headscarf which he so so critical of her predecessor about. By Trump's standards, this was a definite failure.

https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/230033235407671297

https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/560839957426999297

"She doesn't have the stamina.I said she doesn't have the stamina. And I don't believe she does have the stamina. To be President of this country, you need tremendous stamina."




The even lower (and continuously sinking) bar his supporters have set for him to avoid the reality of his uselessness however, is a different matter.

oscarBravo

Billy86 wrote: »

I'm going to actually have to correct you there and remind you that it wasn't. By Trump's own standards he lacked the stamina he was so busy giving out about his opponents' supposed lack of during the election campaign and even missed an event in SA on terrorism because of it, while he both bowed to Saudi royalty which he was so explicitly against Obama doing, and the First Lady did not wear a headscarf which he so so critical of her predecessor about. By Trump's standards, this was a definite failure.

https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/230033235407671297

https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/560839957426999297

"She doesn't have the stamina.I said she doesn't have the stamina. And I don't believe she does have the stamina. To be President of this country, you need tremendous stamina."




The even lower (and continuously sinking) bar his supporters have set for him to avoid the reality of his uselessness however, is a different matter.

Oh to be sure: by the standards he sets for other people, it was a disaster. But, as has become abundantly clear, Trump grants himself a blanket exemption from those standards, and his supporters are only too happy to collude.

Overheal

Celticfire wrote: »

Oh I'm sorry to actually question the blatant one sided narrative that passes for debate in this thread. After what could only be described as a successful trip to SA not one other person has acknowledged that this was the case.

A lot like the SEAL team raid early in this man's presidency, that all depends on how you choose to spin "success." Unlike that incident, nobody died, so I guess that is a success in that regard.

The US delegation, lead by Donald Trump, did successfully sign a $110 Bn arms deal with Saudi Arabia, along with other oil deals with American companies. This is good for the national debt. Good for the economy.

That said, we're selling weapons to Saudi Arabia, which has been so heavily implicated in promoting global terror that Trump even went so far as to support the idea they were the masterminds of 9/11. The Senate even wrote legislation to allow the families of 9/11 victims sue the kingdom.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alleged_Saudi_role_in_September_11_attacks

Before taking office, however, Trump identified Saudi Arabia as the “world’s biggest funder of terrorism.” He wrote these comments in his 2011 book, “Time to Get Tough: Make America Great Again!”

“Saudi Arabia funnels our petro dollars, our very own money, to fund the terrorists that seek to destroy our people while the Saudis rely on us to protect them,” Trump wrote. His attacks on the Arab nation continued during his presidential campaign.

The Intercept noted Thursday that twice in a single day Trump said Saudi Arabia was behind the 9/11 terror attacks. He asked “Fox and Friends” hosts on Feb. 17, 2016, “Who blew up the World Trade Center?”

“It wasn’t the Iraqis, it was Saudi — take a look at Saudi Arabia, open the documents,” Trump continued.

At a campaign rally in South Carolina, he said, “It wasn’t the Iraqis that knocked down the World Trade Center … because they have papers in there that are very secret, you may find it’s the Saudis, OK?”

The Daily Caller has reported that the 9/11 Commission Report found links between the-then Saudi Ambassador to the U.S. Prince Bandar bin Sultan and a Saudi intelligence officer who provided assistance to the 9/11 hijackers.

Former Florida Sen. Bob Graham also said in a 2012 affidavit, “I am convinced that there was a direct line between at least some of the terrorists who carried out the September 11 attacks and the government of Saudi Arabia.”

Hillary Clinton also tied Saudi Arabia to jihadi terrorism in a speech and email released by WikiLeaks.

http://dailycaller.com/2017/05/19/trump-signs-arms-deal-and-visits-saudis-after-saying-they-fund-terror-and-were-behind-911/

So it's very strange of Trump to do this, and it certainly damages his already fragile image. Certainly a lot of people still seem to support him regardless, but it will be a few days before the next approval ratings come out. He did dip to 38% though a couple days ago. It just doesn't look good for a man who used Muslim Demagoguery to attract voters to his base, to bow/bend/crouch/slouch/lean-in/accept a gold chain/medal for the "Highest Civilian Honor" from this country. Much less get photographed holding that globe in such a megalomaniacally-suggestive manner. Shoe on the other foot: if this had been Obama on this same trip, all hell would have broken loose and folks would be actively calling for his 'Muslim' head (more than they already had been).

To say that the trip could only be described as "successful?" That is in the eye of the beholder. If I was a betting man, I would say that in a few years this arms deal will haunt us, like leaving military hardware in the middle east after our withdrawals under Obama which ultimately found ISIS hands. These weapons will be used to kill Americans in due course.

BuilderPlumber

America has the nerve to grandstand and condemn so-called 'state sponsors of terrorism', especially when those actions are made by the president of the biggest state sponsor of terror on the planet and said in the second biggest state sponsor of terror. America of course will never condemn Saudi Arabia's malign role in the Middle East and it won't apologise for the pigs ear it has made out of virtually everything it ever did in the region from the 1970s on. People think Donald Trump is a different type of president. I wish he was. It would be nice to see an American president apologise for the wars his or her country waged and to condemn Saudi Arabia's oppressive and terrorist sponsoring regime. Trump = the same old tired and infantile policy with a bigger mouth!

MadYaker

The trip appears to be going ok. How was speech in Saudi? I can't stand listening to the man talk so I didn't watch it. I'm guessing it must have been unremarkable since he didn't get slated in the press for it.

Overheal

At the end of the day, President Trump is getting ubiquitously slapped by realities that the Candidate Trump was not seemingly aware of. That does include things like America's doublethink stance toward Middle Eastern countries like Saudi Arabia. You will however find that this is why most candidates, those who are candidly aware of these cold truths, choose their words much more carefully. More high profile contradictions like this (as opposed to his normal run of the mill lying and broken promises) will not bode well for a 2nd term. Remember that Bush Sr. was undone in part to his prolific lie about creating new taxes. That said, Obama also made some high profile claims on the campaign trail that hurt him, so it's possible to spin his way out of a lot, this President Trump.

Overheal

MadYaker wrote: »

The trip appears to be going ok. How was speech in Saudi? I can't stand listening to the man talk so I didn't watch it. I'm guessing it must have been unremarkable since he didn't get slated in the press for it.

He got slated, as I just kind of alluded to, for not living up to Candidate Trump. Candidate Trump was always very loud about his position on the phrase, "Radical Islamic Terror," which he and many GOP of course slammed Obama and the Democrats for never saying. But again, President Trump's handlers restrained him from saying any such thing, and it's just one more thing that will chip away at his image in the eyes of his base, many of whom got on board because of the candidate's rhetoric.

aloyisious

I've been checking the usage of the 5th and it seems that if Gen Flynn gave the documents into another person's possession (say a lawyer) that third-party person cannot claim 5th amendment immunity on them as they are the General's property. That was a USSC ruling on how far the 5th amendment rights extend when it came to documents handed over to a third party, tax lawyers for a client.

The subpoena is seeking the presence of the general to appear before it and the surrender of his papers to the committee. Questions as to what is in the papers have not been asked of anyone, let alone the general, by any committee as they are sight unseen. The questions would have to be relevant to what's in the papers and refusable only if a truthful answer would tend to incriminate him in some criminal act.

I don't know if any Senate or House committee could find a person claiming the 5th to be culpable merely because the 5th's protection was availed of.

aloyisious

MadYaker wrote: »

The trip appears to be going ok. How was speech in Saudi? I can't stand listening to the man talk so I didn't watch it. I'm guessing it must have been unremarkable since he didn't get slated in the press for it.

Politically polite... No feathers ruffled. Todays in the PM's home was a paper-scripted one, which he took from his jacket. Very little off-the-cuff except for his usual "great, very great" type add-ons.

Overheal

Trump will largely stick to the guiderails handlers have given him for the duration of the trip. I don't expect he will do anything (during this trip anyway) to upset any of the places he visits.

aloyisious

Lolling at Fox News report that House Oversight Committee Chairman {Jason Chaffetz] said "W/H leakers should be put in handcuffs, thrown in jail". Seems it was on ABC's "This Week" show yesterday.

On a historical aside, I was amused by Fox reporting that Don was staying at the King David Hotel, and how it is secured by the Israelis. I guess the hotels history was not researched, ala the Irgun and the British "Palestine Mandate" Military Admin wing.

Itssoeasy

I see president trump has said the Middle East peace is "tough" but hopes to "get there eventually." I mean if it wasn't tough then it would have been sorted out years ago. Also most US presidents recently have hoped to get peace eventually so hardly groundbreaking stuff there. The Israelis have to stop building settlements otherwise it's a pointless exercise.

namloc1980

Washington Post have a story that Trump asked the Heads of National Intelligence and the NSA to intervene in the FBI Trump-Russia probe and publicly deny any evidence existed. This guy is finished. More potential obstruction of justice actions.

Look

Professor Moriarty

namloc1980 wrote: »

Washington Post have a story that Trump asked the Heads of National Intelligence and the NSA to intervene in the FBI Trump-Russia price and publicly deny any evidence existed. This guy is finished. More potential obstruction of justice actions.

Look

Wow! He's toast if this is true. Please God, let it be true.

namloc1980

MadYaker wrote: »

The trip appears to be going ok. How was speech in Saudi? I can't stand listening to the man talk so I didn't watch it. I'm guessing it must have been unremarkable since he didn't get slated in the press for it.

Well there was this clanger today:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hhizeFP8H5U

You can literally see Netenyahu saying "shut up, shut up, shut up!!".

ThisRegard

And this one, Trump saying, while in Israel, that he just got back from the middle East. I love the guy on the right going from a face palm into fingers through his hair

https://twitter.com/yashar/status/866757128501035008

Christy42

namloc1980 wrote: »

Washington Post have a story that Trump asked the Heads of National Intelligence and the NSA to intervene in the FBI Trump-Russia probe and publicly deny any evidence existed. This guy is finished. More potential obstruction of justice actions.

Look

Count the number of Republicans in the house and senate. Till that changes the only thing that will get him impeached is a bigger dip in the polls. (My guess is -25% net popularity).

Haven't read it and have nonidea how likely it is to be true but at first glance it does not look worse than telling Comey to drop the investigation . Republicans didn't flinch then and they won't now.

aloyisious

namloc1980 wrote: »

Washington Post have a story that Trump asked the Heads of National Intelligence and the NSA to intervene in the FBI Trump-Russia probe and publicly deny any evidence existed. This guy is finished. More potential obstruction of justice actions.

Look

At the very least it's adding fuel to the fire, even if it's only smoke visible now. Don says there's no collusion, so no evidence, so no need for an investigation, no fear of anything being found. He's feeding the fire by asking high level officials to stymie an investigation he says will find nothing; funny peculiar.

Professor Moriarty

Christy42 wrote: »

Count the number of Republicans in the house and senate. Till that changes the only thing that will get him impeached is a bigger dip in the polls. (My guess is -25% net popularity).

Haven't read it and have nonidea how likely it is to be true but at first glance it does not look worse than telling Comey to drop the investigation . Republicans didn't flinch then and they won't now.

If true, I think it's tipping point. He asked the heads of two Intel agencies to publicly deny collusion with Russia. This was after Comey announced the investigation. Both declined the request. The GOP has a choice now. Support an unstable president who is publicly interfering in current investigations. Or throw him to the wolves and hope that President Pence mitigates the damage.

Billy86

Professor Moriarty wrote: »

If true, I think it's tipping point. He asked the heads of two Intel agencies to publicly deny collusion with Russia. This was after Comey announced the investigation. Both declined the request. The GOP has a choice now. Support an unstable president who is publicly interfering in current investigations. Or throw him to the wolves and hope that President Pence mitigates the damage.

They'll go with option number 1. The real telling point will be how they pay for it next November, and the single biggest threat(s) to Trump's support from them are the gerrymandering and voter ID cases. If Ossoff wins in Georgia next month, look for a lot of changing tunes in July, Quist in Montana this week somewhat too but not to the same extent as Georgia.

BuilderPlumber

It is funny that Trump visits 2 Middle East countries that have done more harm in the region along with America one after the other. Saudi Arabia and Israel on the face of it have little in common. One is on paper a theocratic monarchy and the other is a democracy. Saudi Arabia also hates Israel and funds anti-Israel Sunni groups and is the biggest state sponsor of Islamic terrorism. Yet, Israel (who are quick to act against other threats) turn a blind eye to Saudi Arabian funding of anti-Israel terrorism. Why? Because both are American allies. Israel can hit at these terror groups and blame someone else for funding them. Saudi Arabia's anti-Israel rhetoric from its religious leaders is seldom reported and is kept largely hidden.

Despite the fact that both these countries hate each other, Saudi Arabia and Israel also see their privileged positions as being much richer than their neighbours. The Saudis are an Islamic, Arab and oil heavyweight who have the advantages of having Mecca and Medina on its soil, being the richest Arab state and having the most oil. They like to see such Arab rivals as Iraq in bits. They oppose Persian Shia rival Iran, also a rising power that is peaceful and has potential. Israel for its part can live with both Saudi Arabia and Iran (who it can blame for what the Saudis are really at) as long as Syria, Iraq, Libya, Lebanon and Egypt are kept in place. Saudi Arabia never participated directly in a war against Israel and have instead taken a back seat when the likes of Syria or Egypt initiated wars in the past against Israel.

American support for these 2 countries and the current setup has lead to all the problems we know of in the Middle East. Israel on the face of it looks like an ordinary democratic country but of course it is based on emigration from Europe to land that belonged to Arabs. Saudi Arabia on the other hand despite all its friendship with the West remains one of the worst dictatorships on earth with backwards laws not far removed from the war-weary laws of the likes of ISIS and the Taliban both of who are inspired by Saudi Arabia's system. When the Americans talk about democracy in the Middle East, their support for Saudi Arabia and turning a blind eye to the abusive, fascist, repressive regime in it makes such statements a total joke.