Donald Trump Presidency discussion thread II

recedite

I don't always stand for Amhrán na bhFiann, but then I don't expect to be invited to a state reception at Áras an Uachtarain. You can't have it both ways.

pitifulgod

recedite wrote: »

I don't always stand for Amhrán na bhFiann, but then I don't expect to be invited to a state reception at Áras an Uachtarain. You can't have it both ways.

I think the players have made clear where they stand and it's not with Trump who continues to behave terribly in light of all this. An actual POTUS trying to arrange a boycott of a sport, it's bizarre.

Christy42

recedite wrote: »

I don't always stand for Amhrán na bhFiann, but then I don't expect to be invited to a state reception at Áras an Uachtarain. You can't have it both ways.

I don't think they are looking for a white house invite. I think they are making the choice.

ancapailldorcha

Mod: Less of the link-spamming and one-liners please. Posts deleted.

Igotadose

Nice. Now some Trumpists are encouraging fans to turn off NFL games because of protests. http://www.espn.com/nfl/story/_/id/20805209/political-action-committee-supporting-president-trump-begins-ad-campaign-nfl


This, I don't think, will go to well for them. Elections and politicians and DC and whatever - most of the US doesn't care. Turn off football?! No chance.

I wonder if the college players will get in on the act. They can be disciplined, though, colleges and teams have 'codes of conduct'. Berkeley players might, Tennessee/Notre Dame/Nebraska/... - probably not.

Nody

Igotadose wrote: »

Nice. Now some Trumpists are encouraging fans to turn off NFL games because of protests. http://www.espn.com/nfl/story/_/id/20805209/political-action-committee-supporting-president-trump-begins-ad-campaign-nfl

Fun add specifically stating how people should support the veterans; I guess someone forgot to tell them Trump's stand on veterans. You know dodging draft and bragging about it, taking medals from veterans who've actually earned them, claiming prisoners of war were not real soldiers, banning actual military personnel in the SEALs etc. for being cross gender. Yup; Trump really supports the veterans 100%...

david75

Donald just tweeted that he 'made the ultimate sacrifice and joined military school'

He dodged the draft theee different times.

He's playing some long game sh!t here or he's actually deluded and insane.

Water John

Stevie Wonder, a legend.

rossie1977

Igotadose wrote: »

Nice. Now some Trumpists are encouraging fans to turn off NFL games because of protests. http://www.espn.com/nfl/story/_/id/20805209/political-action-committee-supporting-president-trump-begins-ad-campaign-nfl


This, I don't think, will go to well for them. Elections and politicians and DC and whatever - most of the US doesn't care. Turn off football?! No chance.

I wonder if the college players will get in on the act. They can be disciplined, though, colleges and teams have 'codes of conduct'. Berkeley players might, Tennessee/Notre Dame/Nebraska/... - probably not.

NFL ratings and attendance have been falling for a few years and those on the right point to political protests but reality is like every sport it's a star driven business and all the stars in NFL have been around for years. Tom Brady is the biggest star in the NFL and he is now 40.

The boycott stuff is a familiar tactic from the Trump fans though. Hamilton, CNN, Colbert have all gotten similar calls.

volchitsa

david75 wrote: »

Donald just tweeted that he 'made the ultimate sacrifice and joined military school'

He dodged the draft theee different times.

He's playing some long game sh!t here or he's actually deluded and insane.

No that's sort of true, he went to military school : they're secondary schools, not necessarily for boys who will go on to join the military. In fact boys felt to be "in need of discipline" are regularly sent there by wealthy parents, or just to get them out of the way.

And totally unrelated to the draft, which as you say he actively dodged.

Christy42

volchitsa wrote: »

No that's sort of true, he went to military school : they're secondary schools, not necessarily for boys who will go on to join the military. In fact boys felt to be "in need of discipline" are regularly sent there by wealthy parents, or just to get them out of the way.

And totally unrelated to the draft, which as you say he actively dodged.

The deranged comment was that military school was the ultimate sacrifice. That bit is obviously not true.

volchitsa

Christy42 wrote: »

The deranged comment was that military school was the ultimate sacrifice. That bit is obviously not true.

Especially because he didn't "join" military school as he would have been a minor at the time. His parents sent him. He may or may not have wanted to go - but if he did, then it would hardly have been a sacrifice, and if he didn't, then he can't claimed to have "joined" off his own bat.

Leroy42

recedite wrote: »

I don't always stand for Amhrán na bhFiann, but then I don't expect to be invited to a state reception at Áras an Uachtarain. You can't have it both ways.

What? So you think you should not be invited to Aras if and when it is required on the basis of a protest you did, legally, in the past?

My reading of what you are saying is that you would 'fall into line' if there was a carrot waved at you.

Paully D

You'd almost think Trump had a story to bury. Oh wait:

http://www.politico.com/story/2017/09/24/jared-kushner-private-email-white-house-243071?cid=apn

Christy42

Paully D wrote: »

You'd almost think Trump had a story to bury. Oh wait:

http://www.politico.com/story/2017/09/24/jared-kushner-private-email-white-house-243071?cid=apn

Pretty sure private e-mails are only a big deal if a Democrat does it.

A Little Pony

Trump aiming for his base again and his enemies falling for it yet again. Americans, a very odd group of people who can't seem to see a trap from a mile off.

For Forks Sake

Paully D wrote: »

You'd almost think Trump had a story to bury. Oh wait:

http://www.politico.com/story/2017/09/24/jared-kushner-private-email-white-house-243071?cid=apn

Whither the cries of "LOCK HIM UP, LOCK HIM UP"?

oscarBravo

A Little Pony wrote: »

Trump aiming for his base again and his enemies falling for it yet again. Americans, a very odd group of people who can't seem to see a trap from a mile off.

You don't quite get what the job of POTUS is supposed to involve, do you?

SkepticQuark

A Little Pony wrote: »

Trump aiming for his base again and his enemies falling for it yet again. Americans, a very odd group of people who can't seem to see a trap from a mile off.

You do know what he is doing is actually illegal?

See https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/227

A Little Pony

oscarBravo wrote: »

A Little Pony wrote: »

Trump aiming for his base again and his enemies falling for it yet again. Americans, a very odd group of people who can't seem to see a trap from a mile off.

You don't quite get what the job of POTUS is supposed to involve, do you?

Trump doesn't give a damn about his enemies or interested in unity. He is all about protecting his base, that's all this is. His base is lapping it up. He needs a divided American, it can't work otherwise.

aloyisious

The Trump Admin is introducing some more travel restrictions to the US. Chadians, Venezuelans, North Koreans, Iranians and some African nations are on the list [presumably one not already existing]. Also [presumably] those people on diplomatic papers from the affected nations travelling to the UN and Diplomatic Missions won't be refused entry. Edit:CNN reporting that The Sudan has been removed from the list since it was published a few hours ago.

Christy42

A Little Pony wrote: »

Trump aiming for his base again and his enemies falling for it yet again. Americans, a very odd group of people who can't seem to see a trap from a mile off.

It was not a trap. No matter what people did in response Trump had pleased his base. They are not hard for him to please. Either people gave in and make it look like Trump stopped the protests or continue with the protest that Trump's base does not like. No matter what Trump's base are happy. Trump just has to keep saying inappropriate things and they will be happy no matter what his enemies say in response.

Manic Moran

roddy15 wrote: »

You do know what he is doing is actually illegal?

See https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/227

Doesn't apply.

Nothing in his statements refer to party affiliation, and he did not make any statements about the potential employment prospects of any sportsmen of any particular political persuasion.

Neither, I would argue, is his wording an 'influence'. A statement of opinion which is absent any threat or suggestion of power, repercussion or ramification to NFL owners would be a stretch to count.

As for the Kushner email thing, Politico makes an interesting point.
http://www.politico.com/story/2017/09/24/jared-kushner-private-email-white-house-243071

Private email traffic among White House aides — some of it sent between personal email accounts rather than to or from government addresses — could skirt the requirements of the Presidential Records Act, which requires all documents related to the president’s personal and political activities to be archived. [...]
Lowell said Kushner has adhered to government record-keeping requirements by forwarding all the emails to his account, though POLITICO could not verify that.[...]There is no indication that Kushner has shared any sensitive or classified material on his private account

Should be easy enough to verify. If true, it may look bad, but is apparently not illegal.

I think the players have made clear where they stand and it's not with Trump who continues to behave terribly in light of all this. An actual POTUS trying to arrange a boycott of a sport, it's bizarre.

Unsure about that. Note that Alejandro Villanueva either declined a request or broke ranks with his team today by coming out for the anthem. He's a three-time Afghanistan veteran and shares attitudes with a lot of folks around here on the issue. From what I'm seeing on my FB feed and the news, he is getting a lot of positive attention and support. Frankly, I would say more than the protesters did. Trump's position is... unPresidential... but it is not a particularly minority viewpoint.

Samaris

I think intention would have to be taken into account, MM. He's trying to use his presidential platform to influence managers to fire players he disapproves of (i.e. those protesting). He can say "I only said they SHOULD be fired, I didn't demand that they WERE fired..." (basically the same excuse with Comey), but given he is now trying to spearhead a national boycott of the NFL until they do what he says...yeah, this looks pretty blatantly against that law.

I don't see the relevance of political affiliation for not being allowed to do that. The President is specifically covered by this rule.

Nody

[QUOTE=Manic Moran;104776702As for the Kushner email thing, Politico makes an interesting point.
http://www.politico.com/story/2017/09/24/jared-kushner-private-email-white-house-243071

Private email traffic among White House aides — some of it sent between personal email accounts rather than to or from government addresses — could skirt the requirements of the Presidential Records Act, which requires all documents related to the president’s personal and political activities to be archived. [...]
Lowell said Kushner has adhered to government record-keeping requirements by forwarding all the emails to his account, though POLITICO could not verify that.[...]There is no indication that Kushner has shared any sensitive or classified material on his private account

Should be easy enough to verify. If true, it may look bad, but is apparently not illegal.[/QUOTE]Bush junior's administration deleted over 22 million e-mails over their presidency inc. before, during and after the Iraq invasion which covered 95% of all e-mails from Bush and his inner circle of advisors. Hence clearly it's not seen as a big deal but as always Trump supporters will go wild about Hillary's e-mails instead...

On a separate note there's a battle of ideology going down in Alabama among the Republicans. On the one side there's the Republican party and Trump backed candidate Luther Strange; on the other there's Sarah Palin, Tea Movement and Bannon supported candidate (and general nutcase by the looks of it) Roy Mooreto help drain the swamp. Roy is a judge who told his colleagues to ignore a Supreme court decision on same sex marriage, that State should use its powers to punish "homosexual behavior" in a custody battle over a lesbian asking for custody of her child due to the husband being abusive and violent, and to put a plaque of the 10 commandments in his court and held before session group prayers in the court house. He's clearly a man who don't care about minor things such as the constitution which is a complaint the republicans like to leverage on moderate judges; however if you still had some doubts if he was really that bad simply know that Nigel Farage is campaigning for him as well as that should clarify any outstanding concerns you may have.

Christy42

Manic Moran wrote: »

Doesn't apply.

Nothing in his statements refer to party affiliation, and he did not make any statements about the potential employment prospects of any sportsmen of any particular political persuasion.

Neither, I would argue, is his wording an 'influence'. A statement of opinion which is absent any threat or suggestion of power, repercussion or ramification to NFL owners would be a stretch to count.

As for the Kushner email thing, Politico makes an interesting point.
http://www.politico.com/story/2017/09/24/jared-kushner-private-email-white-house-243071

Private email traffic among White House aides — some of it sent between personal email accounts rather than to or from government addresses — could skirt the requirements of the Presidential Records Act, which requires all documents related to the president’s personal and political activities to be archived. [...]
Lowell said Kushner has adhered to government record-keeping requirements by forwarding all the emails to his account, though POLITICO could not verify that.[...]There is no indication that Kushner has shared any sensitive or classified material on his private account

Should be easy enough to verify. If true, it may look bad, but is apparently not illegal.



Unsure about that. Note that Alejandro Villanueva either declined a request or broke ranks with his team today by coming out for the anthem. He's a three-time Afghanistan veteran and shares attitudes with a lot of folks around here on the issue. From what I'm seeing on my FB feed and the news, he is getting a lot of positive attention and support. Frankly, I would say more than the protesters did. Trump's position is... unPresidential... but it is not a particularly minority viewpoint.

It might not be a massively minority viewpoint in general but the nfl seems pretty united. There might be a few who disagree but that was a pretty clear show of unity across the league yesterday.

I don't really get that so many can't see the protest has nothing to do with the military and everything to do with the fact that those people believe the US is not living up to the ideals behind that flag. Honestly I think the military thing is largely a smokescreen to avoid talking about the actual issues.

Samaris

A Little Pony wrote: »

Trump aiming for his base again and his enemies falling for it yet again. Americans, a very odd group of people who can't seem to see a trap from a mile off.

He. Is. The. President.

This is no longer about partisan whatevers. He has no right to be trying to appeal only to his precious base. He is the president. Of the entire country. No president should be trying to spread division for their own (dubious) gain. No president should be trying to encourage a national boycott due to a fit of pique. No president should -abuse his role- in that way.

This isn't a case of no-one sees the trap and everyone is fooled by the president's highly intelligent eleven-dimension chess. He wouldn't know a chessboard if it bit him. He is a fool without the remotest idea of what it is to lead. Lead, not dictate. He could not lead by example if there was a gun to his head, let alone by his own instincts. And that is a problem.

Billy86

Christy42 wrote: »

It might not be a massively minority viewpoint in general but the nfl seems pretty united. There might be a few who disagree but that was a pretty clear show of unity across the league yesterday.

I don't really get that so many can't see the protest has nothing to do with the military and everything to do with the fact that those people believe the US is not living up to the ideals behind that flag. Honestly I think the military thing is largely a smokescreen to avoid talking about the actual issues.

Pretty sure you're up on this but just to add for anyone who doesn't watch NFL...

What's funny is there has been huge fallout over players not standing for the anthem, one guy who refused to in protest last year called Colin Kaepernick kickstarted it. He is a quarterback, and it's hard to explain to someone who doesn't watch American football just how important a QB is to a team (far, far, far more than any position in football, GAA or rugby), yet despite being pretty decent at the position and some teams being useless there (in the NFL you basically can't succeed without at least a passable QB) nobody has taken a sniff at him. Some teams would without question have been significantly better yet opted not to pick the guy up for no other reason than he would not stand for the anthem.

Kaepernick had the (mostly quiet) support of some players but not too much in the lines of people speaking out for him and lots of the 'talking heads' on the networks were basically sh*tting all over him because he was an easy target. The only other player I can think of that did similar was Marshawn Lynch, who is one of the very best at his position (running back - the guy who stands behind the QB and tries to carry the ball forward like a rugby player) and who got somewhat of a free pass because he's always been known to be a bit odd, very outspoken and stubborn that he won't stand down on it - the Raiders who picked him up also have a long history of taking in the leagues outcasts, 'problem kids' and bad boy types. Lynch is also from Oakland where the Raiders play, the list of other teams that would have taken him on could have been counted on one hand, despite him being one of the very best in a crucial position.

Then Trump, the leader of the country and apparently free world, the guy tasked with trying to bring together one of the more divided nations in the world (divisions he helped cultivate and openly exploited), the "great negotiator", decided to step up and prove to the world that he's got no clothes once more.

Within less than 24 hours you've got players kneeling everywhere, nearly every player on the Raiders perhaps most notably - or if not, then the Ravens/Jaguars in what is a major international showpiece in Wembley was another. Commentators across the league openly agreeing with or not giving criticism to them for doing so, coaches and the players union coming out against Trump's comments and even the NFL owners themselves (including Robert Kraft who owns the New England Patriots and has been on close terms with Trump for years) doing so. Never have all aspects of the NFL been so unified on something in my fifteen years of watching... and they're unified against Trump. So I guess he can consider than an achievement.

He's got the likes of Lebron James outright calling him a bum as sports fans around the nation and the world laugh at him. This weekend might have been the most open and clear example of just how big an embarrassment he is as their supposed head of state.

A Little Pony

Samaris wrote: »

A Little Pony wrote: »

Trump aiming for his base again and his enemies falling for it yet again. Americans, a very odd group of people who can't seem to see a trap from a mile off.

He. Is. The. President.

This is no longer about partisan whatevers. He has no right to be trying to appeal only to his precious base. He is the president. Of the entire country. No president should be trying to spread division for their own (dubious) gain. No president should be trying to encourage a national boycott due to a fit of pique. No president should -abuse his role- in that way.

This isn't a case of no-one sees the trap and everyone is fooled by the president's highly intelligent eleven-dimension chess. He wouldn't know a chessboard if it bit him. He is a fool without the remotest idea of what it is to lead. Lead, not dictate. He could not lead by example if there was a gun to his head, let alone by his own instincts. And that is a problem.

Irrelevant, he is the President but he is also Donald Trump, a reality TV star who loves to create headlines and get great ratings. Americans can whine and moan and bitch all day long about it, the fact is the American people elected him under the electoral system of which he cleaned up.

If Americans are so stupid to not be able to get two better candidates than Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump then they don't deserve any sympathy. They are probably the most stupidest nation on the planet. You only have to look at what they call police brutality, yet the police would never in an environment which had gun control laws police in the way they do.

It's a recipe for disaster and yet nothing ever changes, country full of guns and the police are trigger happy in crap hole areas. It's no wonder you get people being shot by the police, I would be on high alert too if I knew I was policing in a country which had next to no tight controls on who owns guns like here in the UK/IRE.

You even had black people vote for Trump because of the 2nd Amendment issue.

Disgruntled Badger

I think protesting national symbols is the wrong way to go. Next step is flag burning. You wont get a good reception anywhere doing that. Can you imagine it being done in Ireland. You wouldn't get far before someone would be having a word in your ear....

Billy86

A Little Pony wrote: »

If Americans are so stupid to not be able to get two better candidates than Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump then they don't deserve any sympathy. They are probably the most stupidest nation on the planet.

And yet I recall you being a huge Trump fan 12 months back...

As for the rest of your post, while I agree that gun control is an issue that the US needs to address, this is an issue that Clinton actually was trying to do so on with the likes of increased background checks and reinstating bans on assault weapons that went away under Bush and improvements in mental health care to reduce arms attacks, and I recall you calling that tyrannical and just cause for an uprising. A bit odd to be complaining about the number of guns around now, given how much Trump catered to the NRA crowd.

Billy86

Disgruntled Badger wrote: »

I think protesting national symbols is the wrong way to go. Next step is flag burning. You wont get a good reception anywhere doing that. Can you imagine it being done in Ireland. You wouldn't get far before someone would be having a word in your ear....

I can certainly imagine it being done in the UK, by a British born citizen; I supported that right to protest/refuse to partake just like I support this one.

ancapailldorcha

A Little Pony wrote: »

If Americans are so stupid to not be able to get two better candidates than Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump then they don't deserve any sympathy. They are probably the most stupidest nation on the planet.

This sort of inflammatory nonsense is not welcome here. No more please.

Leroy42

But they are not burning the flag. Why bring that into it. Thats akin to saying that Trump is mean on tweets but what next is he goes out and beats people up. This is the same lines as W Bush argument that you are either on the US side of a terrorist!

They are protesting because the anthem is supposed to be for the USA, a country based on equality and that they feel that as people of colour that ideal is not being upheld and why would they choose to stand to attention for the anthem of a country that doesn't exist.

They are not being violent, they are no disrespecting those that choose to stand. CK merely wanted to raise the issue and felt that he needed to take a stand (of kneel in this case) in order to get people to talk about it.

Trump has called them Son of B1tches, and called for their livelihoods to be removed. Not due process, no discussion of their grievences. Call them names and threaten them and their families. His job is to uphold the constitution, and he is actively trying to usurp it

Have you listened to his explanation of why he choose this course?

A Little Pony

Billy86 wrote: »

A Little Pony wrote: »

If Americans are so stupid to not be able to get two better candidates than Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump then they don't deserve any sympathy. They are probably the most stupidest nation on the planet.

And yet I recall you being a huge Trump fan 12 months back...

As for the rest of your post, while I agree that gun control is an issue that the US needs to address, this is an issue that Clinton actually was trying to do so on with the likes of increased background checks and reinstating bans on assault weapons that went away under Bush and improvements in mental health care to reduce arms attacks, and I recall you calling that tyrannical and just cause for an uprising. A bit odd to be complaining about the number of guns around now, given how much Trump catered to the NRA crowd.

I'm not complaining about it, I am just giving an observation on the contradictory position of those against Trump of which a lot of them would not vote to put reforms on the 2nd Amendment or scrap it altogether.Hillary didn't get elected because she is more dodgy than Trump of which the people got to know over 20+ years.

Christy42

Disgruntled Badger wrote: »

I think protesting national symbols is the wrong way to go. Next step is flag burning. You wont get a good reception anywhere doing that. Can you imagine it being done in Ireland. You wouldn't get far before someone would be having a word in your ear....

It is always the wrong way to protest. Anything but talk about the issue being protested. The only way this argument goes away is if they protest in their own homes and no one knows about it. This is the only way they are going to get any sort of reception. Similarly with the unpatriotic bull. The players have repeatedly said they have no issue with the military and the protest has nothing to do with them. People keep calling them unpatriotic to avoid talking about the issues with policing in the states.

Most protests tend to start off unpopular in any case. Some stay that way and die, some don't.

The next step argument is also random. No one has mentioned flag burning.

Yeah I can imagine it being done in Ireland. I can't see a massive backlash either.

Disgruntled Badger

Billy86 wrote: »

I can certainly imagine it being done in the UK, by a British born citizen; I supported that right to protest/refuse to partake just like I support this one.

Sort of the point. Does not achieve anything. Just gets right up people's noses. There are smarter ways to get your point across rather than just being highly inflammatory. Wear a 'I Hate Trump' tee shirt. Rather than make a gesture that says I hate the USA which is how some will and do interpret it.

oscarBravo

Christy42 wrote: »

The only way this argument goes away is if they protest in their own homes and no one knows about it.

That's precisely the point. It doesn't matter what form the protest takes; the bottom line is that some people are offended by the fact of the protest, but won't admit it.

It's why I asked one poster earlier what form of protest would be considered acceptable. The whole "disrespecting the flag" rubbish is a dog-whistle for "I wish black people would just shut up already".

Kneeling during the anthem isn't even particularly disrespectful, by comparison with the way flag protocol is flagrantly violated on a daily basis by self-styled patriots.

Phonehead

Disgruntled Badger wrote: »

Sort of the point. Does not achieve anything. Just gets right up people's noses. There are smarter ways to get your point across rather than just being highly inflammatory. Wear a 'I Hate Trump' tee shirt. Rather than make a gesture that says I hate the USA which is how some will and do interpret it.

How does it in anyway say "I hate the USA" The truth of the fact is that those who take exception to this kneel would also take same stance if African Americans wrote a harshly worded letter to their politicians.

Leroy42

CK was really smart about this. He did it respectfully, didn't create a fuss. He didn't call anyone else out on it, or even ask others to join him or berate those that disagreed with him.

That is all down to Trump. He has taken what was really one mans protest, and he is no longer part of the NFL, and create a nationwide discussion. He called those protesting Sons on Bitches and called for their livelihoods to be taken away from them.

So when you ask what does it achieve, well on its own it probably would have achieved nothing. But Trump's inability to deal with anything in a remotely intelligent way means that this has exploded onto the national consciousness.

Of course you will get those that simply attack the protester and never even wonder why they have a problem. "if you don't like US get out!" is their response rather than wondering why a person with apparently so much going for them still feels the US is not working. Rather than try to look at the issue (and by all means reject it after that) they simply call them names. They are simply following the example Trump is setting them.

Yet they are the very ones saying that Trump is a protest candidate. They want things to change. They accept that Trump may cause some serious issues but their desire for change means they will accept that.

This is a man that refused to fight for his country when asked to.

Billy86

A Little Pony wrote: »

I'm not complaining about it, I am just giving an observation on the contradictory position of those against Trump of which a lot of them would not vote to put reforms on the 2nd Amendment or scrap it altogether.Hillary didn't get elected because she is more dodgy than Trump of which the people got to know over 20+ years.

That's the thing about being president he nor his voters seem too aware of, whether that's a result of confusing politics with sports or not I couldn't say for certain, but once the election is over whoever wins it has the job of attempting to represent, lead and look out for the entirety of the country and not just those who voted for them. It's possibly the single biggest reason that Trump's regime has not only been horrific in their intent but also horrendous in their execution, ultimately leading to nothing getting done because of their utter ineptness; the debacle this weekend really encapsulates that perfectly.

Trump however has surpassed himself and gone on to already be possibly the dodgiest high profile politician in the entirety of the US' history. So there's that...

Leroy42

Of course it is on not coincidence that Trump kicked this off on the weekend that it was reported that Jared is now using personal e-mail. This is the SIN that HC was so attacked over, resulting in the Lock her Up mantra.

Now of course we will hear all the excuses and 'facts' that he didn't use it for confidential business etc but lets not pretend that those chanting Lock Her Up knew of the details. That fact that she used her own server was 'proof' enough that she was up to something. The whole if she had nothing to hide why do it.

Yet I can bet 100% that Trump won't even reprimand Jared. And none of his supporters will have a question about it. And therein lies the hypocrisy. They can dress their 'ideals' and 'protest vote' as much as they want, but in the end the very things they said they railed against - Financial gain from office, financial connections with foreign powers, shady dealings are exactly what Trump is doing but now is seems it isn't a problem.

Billy86

Disgruntled Badger wrote: »

Sort of the point. Does not achieve anything. Just gets right up people's noses. There are smarter ways to get your point across rather than just being highly inflammatory. Wear a 'I Hate Trump' tee shirt. Rather than make a gesture that says I hate the USA which is how some will and do interpret it.

If it gets up peoples noses, that's their own issue - doesn't stop an athlete from having the right to refuse to take part in something like an anthem or poppy day, that they don't want to.

Disgruntled Badger

Leroy42 wrote: »

But they are not burning the flag. Why bring that into it. Thats akin to saying that Trump is mean on tweets but what next is he goes out and beats people up. This is the same lines as W Bush argument that you are either on the US side of a terrorist!

They are protesting because the anthem is supposed to be for the USA, a country based on equality and that they feel that as people of colour that ideal is not being upheld and why would they choose to stand to attention for the anthem of a country that doesn't exist.

They are not being violent, they are no disrespecting those that choose to stand. CK merely wanted to raise the issue and felt that he needed to take a stand (of kneel in this case) in order to get people to talk about it.

Trump has called them Son of B1tches, and called for their livelihoods to be removed. Not due process, no discussion of their grievences. Call them names and threaten them and their families. His job is to uphold the constitution, and he is actively trying to usurp it

Have you listened to his explanation of why he choose this course?

I didn't say they were. I said the next step is flag burning. His explanation is irrelevant if it is misinterpreted, and pointless if it leads to further division which it does. Just not a smart way to go. The smart way would be to reclaim the symbol from those you feel misrepresent it.

Phonehead

Disgruntled Badger wrote: »

I didn't say they were. I said the next step is flag burning. His explanation is irrelevant if it is misinterpreted, and pointless if it leads to further division which it does. Just not a smart way to go. The smart way would be to reclaim the symbol from those you feel misrepresent it.

The next step is flag burning? that's one seismic step!

Christy42

Disgruntled Badger wrote: »

I didn't say they were. I said the next step is flag burning. His explanation is irrelevant if it is misinterpreted, and pointless if it leads to further division which it does. Just not a smart way to go. The smart way would be to reclaim the symbol from those you feel misrepresent it.

They have repeatedly stated their reasons repeatedly. If they are still being misinterpreted there is not a whole lot they can do but repeat themselves. No matter they do it would misinterpreted.

Further division was inevitable as people simply don't want to listen to it and it means a lot to others. Division was already there. What is happening is that one side is no longer putting up with it for the sake of not speaking up.

Leroy42

He has no control over how others behave in response, only his behaviour. So are the cops not to blame when they shoot a black man and some of the community interpreted as racism. Are you really putting the blame for people taking offence on the protester? Yet these are the very same people who call people snowflakes and SJW.

Should one only ever protest if one is assured that nobody will take offence?

How is the next step flag burning? They haven't torn down a flag, ripped up a flag, spoken out against the flag. Nothing actually against the flag.
They are not protesting about the USA as a country, only about the fact that to them, the USA as it currently is falls short of what that country is supposed to be.

wes

I can't blame some African American's having issues with the US anthem, when it has lines like this:

‘The Star-Spangled Banner’ and Slavery

---

And where is that band who so vauntingly swore,
That the havoc of war and the battle’s confusion
A home and a Country should leave us no more?
Their blood has wash’d out their foul footstep’s pollution.
No refuge could save the hireling and slave
From the terror of flight or the gloom of the grave,
And the star-spangled banner in triumph doth wave
O’er the land of the free and the home of the brave.

---

Disgruntled Badger

Phonehead wrote: »

The next step is flag burning? that's one seismic step!

Well probably not on an NFL field alright.

I suppose the next step would be to turn their backs on it. Which would be bad. They could point the soles of their feet at it but that is going to be lost on a lot of Americans. Maybe they could moon at it? :-)

Phonehead

Disgruntled Badger wrote: »

Well probably not on an NFL field alright.

I suppose the next step would be to turn their backs on it. Which would be bad. They could point the soles of their feet at it but that is going to be lost on a lot of Americans. Maybe they could moon at it? :-)

Why do you keep jumping to "next steps" Why must everything lead to a massive escalation? this society of fear we live in is ridiculous.