Donald Trump presidency discussion thread V

Itssoeasy

Brian? wrote: »

Yesterday Trump was saying the Mueller report completely exonerated him.

Today it’s “The crazy Mueller report, written by 18 Trump hating Democrats”.

Which is it? Leaving aside that Bob Mueller is a life long Republican.

It seems someone has read the report to him.

Brian?

Itssoeasy wrote: »

It seems someone has read the report to him.

I doubt he’d sit through it. I’d say he watched Fox News last night and it wasn’t the pro Trump parade he’d hoped for

Itssoeasy

Trump this morning on air force one wrote:

"He said he didn't meddle," Trump said, answering questions in the press cabin on Air Force One. "I asked him again. You can only ask so many times. . . . He said he absolutely did not meddle in our election. He did not do what they are saying he did."

The Mueller report said there wasn't enough evidence to show a conspiracy to collude from the Trump campaign. If that's the case as set out in the mueller report then fair enough Trump should run with it and take the win. Then he makes the above comments and then you wonder why he seems so determined to not blame Russia and Putin for what now seem a certainty that Russia interfered in the 2016 Presidential election.

batgoat

Lots of interesting things in the report including the communications between GRU and Julian Assange to get the dnc mails. The weirdest aspect of all this is Assange's interest in pushing Seth Rich as the leak. But more than anything, it's just further validated the weird agenda of Wikileaks in all this.

https://www.thedailybeast.com/mueller-report-julian-assange-smeared-seth-rich-to-cover-for-russians

manual_man

Brian? wrote: »

Yesterday Trump was saying the Mueller report completely exonerated him.

Today it’s “The crazy Mueller report, written by 18 Trump hating Democrats”.

Which is it? Leaving aside that Bob Mueller is a life long Republican.

Many Republicans both before and after the election have tried to damage Trump

Don't allow the fact Mueller is a Republican exonerate him from any possible anti-Trump bias

Trump ruffled a lot of feathers in Washington. He is the Great Disruptor. A lot of people who were comfortable with the status quo deeply resent him for that.

FrostyJack

manual_man wrote: »

Don't allow the fact Mueller is a Republican exonerate him from any possible anti-Trump bias

He said it was Democrats that started the "Witch hunt", that is not the same as anti Trump republicans started it. Comey, McCabe and Mueller are/where all republicans, so just another example of his lies.

Trump ruffled a lot of feathers in Washington. He is the Great Disruptor. A lot of people who were comfortable with the status quo deeply resent him for that.

He ruffled feathers alright by stacking his team and cabinet with inept corrupt people who make a mockery of the positions they are/were in. Anti environmental protection lobbyist's into key environment positions. People who paid to get positions they have no idea about (DeVos). Unqualified family members that are security risks all around him. Unhinged tweets, cyber bullying, inciting violence at the media, rolling back on Paris and Iran deals, constant attempts to obstruct justice, caging children, constant attacks on intelligence and security services, constant praise of dictators, the list goes on. Yeah people don't like him because he shakes things up.

amandstu

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-47980143

The American Civil Liberties Union described the group as an "armed fascist military organisation" in a letter to the governor and attorney general.

"The Trump administration's vile racism has emboldened white nationalists and fascists to flagrantly violate the law," they say.

"This has no place in our state: we cannot allow racist and armed vigilantes to kidnap and detain people seeking asylum. We urge you to immediately investigate this atrocious and unlawful conduct."

First they came for?

Will these armed groups attempt to set themselves up up as a permanent armed Trump fanbase?

Trump seems to have encouraged such groups ....bikers etc. as well as attempting to get officers* to break the law in exchange for a pardon apparently.

That must be impeachable in its own right ,I'd have thought.

**not sure who it was ,an officer or someone higher up the chain of command probably.

everlast75

IIRC that joke of a lawyer/spokesman for Trump, Schwartz?, used to call him "The Disruptor in Chief". Everytime I heard that I cringed so hard I nearly pulled a muscle.

If a bloke walks into a party and starts slapping the drinks out of people's hands and upturning plates, he's not some sort of misunderstood genius - he's just an a hole.

I mean, even if Trump had a plan or vision to "shake up politics", or "expose corruption" and that was his reason for running, I might understand the temptation to vote for him. But it was clear to me and should have been clear to most that he is only in this for himself, to line his own pockets while doing as little as possible. All bar the 40% "base" must see that now.

They must see him for the immoral, inept embarrassment he is.

And to think - he was thought of also as a hard man. His followers are keen to use the term "snowflake" and that they should toughen up. He however had Barr march out and say that he behaved the way he did because he was "frustrated"!?!? An utter joke.

And speaking of immoral and inept, his two mouthpieces were out in force today.

KAK was saying that "she welcomed apologies" today. She said Trump's greatest rebuttal will be that "he is still in office". Well, if a bloke punches a woman, the fact that he's still standing doesn't mean a goddamn thing.

Incidentally, as per the report, she repeated IRA talking points through her tenure. No apologies from her though.

Sanders was called on but didn't apologise for lying about the rank and file FBI losing faith in Comey. Her response was that it was a slip of the tongue. Well, she said it twice - and was very specific. I saw the clip.

She lies with no tells, not an ounce of shame. She lied multiple times, I've no doubt at all. She introduced a level of viciousness into the press room and then blamed it on those doing their jobs. After doing that - she reduced her briefings to one maybe once every two months.
I was sanctioned here for a trivial comment I made about how I would wish karma to visit her, so I'll just say that I couldn't possibly think any lower of her, or Conway for that matter.

derb12

listermint wrote: »

Chips Lovell wrote: »

In the US, yes, it's beyond doubt. In the UK, the evidence is very thin. If there was, it was certainly nothing on the scale of what they attempted in the US.

That's because brexit was a training ground for the US elections and they pulled it off.

Russian interference in Brexit has never truly been investigated. They are still in the middle of the resulting s***storm.
Carole Cadwalladr of the guardian has some interesting podcasts and articles about this. https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2019/mar/30/mueller-report-is-a-warning-britain-wont-listen-russian-interference

Billy Mays

Donny getting that post Mueller report showing there was no obstruction bump as predicted

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-trump-russia-poll/trump-approval-drops-3-points-to-2019-low-after-release-of-mueller-report-reuters-ipsos-poll-idUSKCN1RV16S

everlast75

Billy Mays wrote: »

Donny getting that post Mueller report showing there was no obstruction bump as predicted

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-trump-russia-poll/trump-approval-drops-3-points-to-2019-low-after-release-of-mueller-report-reuters-ipsos-poll-idUSKCN1RV16S

Only works with people who didn't read the report.

Warren now calling for Donny's impeachment.

Couple of other thoughts...

1) Barr should be impeached or censured. *Blatant* lying. Outrageous conduct.
2) Sanders should be ridiculed by the press for being a liar each and every time she speaks
3) all antagonists in the report should be summoned before congress and it should be televised. That will put it in simpler terms for those that don't have the will or time to read the report. It'll be ironic if TV leads to the fall of Trump
4) when Mueller lands for his time to testify, the dems better have their sh1t together. 15 mins per congressman with 2 passing up their time to one lead questioner
5) the counter intel work is still going on. Is trump still a target?
6) there are crimes here which Trump may be found guilty of - Mueller says so in the report (as per the preservation of evidence remark). We may be on the way to getting trump to resign if more stuff comes from the SDNY re tax fraud etc. A wild conspiracy yes. (100% speculation before I'm hounded for it)

everlast75

https://twitter.com/elianayjohnson/status/1119364939892908035?s=19

More of this expected for those that featured in the report.

Trump can't help himself.

Itssoeasy

everlast75 wrote: »

https://twitter.com/elianayjohnson/status/1119364939892908035?s=19

More of this expected for those that featured in the report.

Trump can't help himself.

Disloyalty. So telling the truth is disloyal to Trump ? It’s not Don McGahn’s fault that Trump is lacking in the basic sense of how things operate in Washington DC.

TomOnBoard

everlast75 wrote: »

Only works with people who didn't read the report.

Warren now calling for Donny's impeachment.

Couple of other thoughts...

1) Barr should be impeached or censured. *Blatant* lying. Outrageous conduct.
2) Sanders should be ridiculed by the press for being a liar each and every time she speaks
3) all antagonists in the report should be summoned before congress and it should be televised. That will put it in simpler terms for those that don't have the will or time to read the report. It'll be ironic if TV leads to the fall of Trump
4) when Mueller lands for his time to testify, the dems better have their sh1t together. 15 mins per congressman with 2 passing up their time to one lead questioner
5) the counter intel work is still going on. Is trump still a target?
6) there are crimes here which Trump may be found guilty of - Mueller says so in the report (as per the preservation of evidence remark). We may be on the way to getting trump to resign if more stuff comes from the SDNY re tax fraud etc. A wild conspiracy yes. (100% speculation before I'm hounded for it)

Re. 4), the Dems should use a single questioner and allocate all/most of their time to allow for a coherent approach.. I'd be going for someone like Preet Bharara. Let the Reps use 'Mayor' Rudi...

everlast75

Billy Mays wrote: »

Donny getting that post Mueller report showing there was no obstruction bump as predicted

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-trump-russia-poll/trump-approval-drops-3-points-to-2019-low-after-release-of-mueller-report-reuters-ipsos-poll-idUSKCN1RV16S

Sorry! Didn't open your post to appreciate the irony :O

KyussB

listermint wrote: »

But.....



Everyone agrees Russia meddled in the US election, and also in brexit.

So erm. Can you point to where a Russia phobic media is a thing. They merely report the facts .

Or perhaps you think Russia should be allowed to meddle in elections across the globe ? I'm sure a charge that you would have a different view on if say it was the US doing it.

The main issue I take in my post, is the vast array of lies that mainstream news media has being propagating for the last number of years - even if Russia has been meddling (the proven extent of which is far smaller than has been claimed), there has been a majorly discrediting (for news media) number of varied lies that have been published - attempting to vastly overstate the meddling, sometimes in extremely hysterical/farcical ways.

It's incredibly damaging to public discourse and the quality of democratic oversight - far more than any proven Russian meddling.

DreamsBurnDown

KyussB wrote: »

The main issue I take in my post, is the vast array of lies that mainstream news media has being propagating for the last number of years - even if Russia has been meddling (the proven extent of which is far smaller than has been claimed), there has been a majorly discrediting (for news media) number of varied lies that have been published - attempting to vastly overstate the meddling, sometimes in extremely hysterical/farcical ways.

It's incredibly damaging to public discourse and the quality of democratic oversight - far more than any proven Russian meddling.

Stop talking sense. The average American can see through the bull****, and actually decide from themselves. They don't need Twitter police to tell them what to think. Literally nobody depends on Fox, CNN or MSNBC to tell them what to think on any issue. The idea that mainstream media influence most people in the US is ridiculous, most people don't even watch.

The bottom line is Democrats need to get their act together and formulate a platform for 2020 that is not just not-Trump, as the American public actually want to know what your vision is for the future.

Brian?

KyussB wrote: »

The main issue I take in my post, is the vast array of lies that mainstream news media has being propagating for the last number of years - even if Russia has been meddling (the proven extent of which is far smaller than has been claimed), there has been a majorly discrediting (for news media) number of varied lies that have been published - attempting to vastly overstate the meddling, sometimes in extremely hysterical/farcical ways.

It's incredibly damaging to public discourse and the quality of democratic oversight - far more than any proven Russian meddling.

Can you give some examples of the "vast array of lies" that were propagated? I'd like specifics.

Leroy42

Trump still has a 40% odd support rating so claiming the average American has any ability to see through BS is highly dubious.

It would appear that the average American has a massive capacity to accept any amount of BS once it aligns with their position, however tentatively

hill16bhoy

KyussB wrote: »

The main issue I take in my post, is the vast array of lies that mainstream news media has being propagating for the last number of years - even if Russia has been meddling (the proven extent of which is far smaller than has been claimed), there has been a majorly discrediting (for news media) number of varied lies that have been published - attempting to vastly overstate the meddling, sometimes in extremely hysterical/farcical ways.

It's incredibly damaging to public discourse and the quality of democratic oversight - far more than any proven Russian meddling.

How so?

The so called "mainstream press" have been thoroughly vindicated in their reporting while the likes of Glenn Greenwald, Matt Taibbi and Michael Tracey have been left with a large amount of egg on their faces.

The likes of Greenwald took a position based on no evidence and then, ostrich-like, defended that position in the face of all the evidence for fear of losing face that they had called it wrong.

The Mueller report provides ample evidence of collusion.

Even Greenwald's own media outlet The Intercept has made a fool of him.

There are endless psychological theses to be done on the total delusion that has gripped those defending Trump.

hill16bhoy

DreamsBurnDown wrote: »

Stop talking sense. The average American can see through the bull****, and actually decide from themselves. They don't need Twitter police to tell them what to think. Literally nobody depends on Fox, CNN or MSNBC to tell them what to think on any issue. The idea that mainstream media influence most people in the US is ridiculous, most people don't even watch.

The bottom line is Democrats need to get their act together and formulate a platform for 2020 that is not just not-Trump, as the American public actually want to know what your vision is for the future.

That's arrant nonsense.

The bottom line is despite claiming to be a Democrat since registering here (nobody believes that) that you've curiously avoided anything to do with specifics regarding Trump's conduct and continually refused to answer any questions put to you.

Then you revert to your default out which is to talk about horse race politics for 2020, always with the same line: "Democrats need to debate on policy". This provides zero insight into anything.

If I didn't know better I'd guess you were trying to shut down discussion about Trump's collusion and flagrant corruption.

I think you'd also make a very poor political strategist.

hill16bhoy

hill16bhoy wrote: »

The bottom line is despite claiming to be a Democrat since registering here (nobody believes that)

Are you calling him a liar?

Itssoeasy

Just to make a point about Trump and his allies claiming there was no collusion. Mueller talks about the OLC statement in the 1970's at the start of the report so mueller was never going to indict the president if he followed the OLC ruling.

Rjd2

Brian? wrote: »

Can you give some examples of the "vast array of lies" that were propagated? I'd like specifics.

Plenty their.

https://theintercept.com/2019/04/18/robert-mueller-did-not-merely-reject-the-trumprussia-conspiracy-theories-he-obliterated-them/

The Buzzfeed story is the obvious one.

Glenn deserves a lot of credit here, he has always stated how much he hates Trump but calls out the breathless "PUTIN~!!!! DEMOCRACY STOLEN~"" hype spouted by the likes of Maddow, Abramson etc who have made a lot of money exploiting those on the left who live in collusion echo chambers and those who don't want to accept that America could elect a ****show like Trump by themselves. He took a lot of abuse for this but he stuck by his guns credit where its due.

spacecoyote

Leroy42 wrote: »

Trump still has a 40% odd support rating so claiming the average American has any ability to see through BS is highly dubious.

It would appear that the average American has a massive capacity to accept any amount of BS once it aligns with their position, however tentatively

Is it fair to call that 40% number his base?

If you look at the breakdown in, say, the yougov polling, which shows a 40% approval rating, it shows 23% as strong approve, but of the 51% disapproval, its 40% strongly disapprove.

So really is it more 23% always Trump, 40% never Trump, so the remaining 37% are effectively in play for both?

I know that's a bit black & white, because a lot of reps that would somewhat approve will hold their nose & always vote Rep irrespective of who's on the ticket

DreamsBurnDown

hill16bhoy wrote: »

That's arrant nonsense.

The bottom line is despite claiming to be a Democrat since registering here (nobody believes that) that you've curiously avoided anything to do with specifics regarding Trump's conduct and continually refused to answer any questions put to you.

What an arrogant post and sadly typical of someone who appears to be informed solely from their Twitter feed. You don't speak on behalf of anyone (nor do I), so let others express their opinion rather than claiming to speak on their behalf.

What questions have I not answered? Having lived in the US for most of my adult life I am well equipped to comment on what people on all sides of the political spectrum hold as opinions. Have you lived in the US or spent considerable time there?

I am a registered Democrat and have voted Democrat at local and federal level for decades. My opinion of Trump is that he is a narcissistic asshole that the country needs to get rid of in 2020, but I am also intelligent enough to know he is a formidable opponent who has proven everybody wrong since entering the race in 2015. Know your enemy.

The fact you attack Matt Taibbi, one of the best journalists in the US, says everything. It's head in the sand stuff to deny that partisan politics has reached an all time low in Washington. Why do you think the approval rating of Congress is at 17%? It is literally a den of liars and Democrats are by no means innocent. One has to be completely consumed by confirmation bias to not see that.

Now, what were your questions again?

hill16bhoy

DreamsBurnDown wrote: »

What an arrogant post and sadly typical of someone who appears to be informed solely from their Twitter feed. You don't speak on behalf of anyone (nor do I), so let others express their opinion rather than claiming to speak on their behalf.

What questions have I not answered? Having lived in the US for most of my adult life I am well equipped to comment on what people on all sides of the political spectrum hold as opinions. Have you lived in the US or spent considerable time there?

I am a registered Democrat and have voted Democrat at local and federal level for decades. My opinion of Trump is that he is a narcissistic asshole that the country needs to get rid of in 2020, but I am also intelligent enough to know he is a formidable opponent who has proven everybody wrong since entering the race in 2015. Know your enemy.

The fact you attack Matt Taibbi, one of the best journalists in the US, says everything. It's head in the sand stuff to deny that partisan politics has reached an all time low in Washington. Why do you think the approval rating of Congress is at 17%? It is literally a den of liars and Democrats are by no means innocent. One has to be completely consumed by confirmation bias to not see that.

Now, what were your questions again?

What questions have you answered? Because I haven't seen any answers from you.

Do you think Trump is a racist?

Do you think Trump is an anti-Semite or has engaged in anti-Semitism?

Did Trump or his campaign engage in collusion with Russia?

Did he engage in corruption?

Is Barr corrupt? Has Barr a long history of misrepresentation and cover up?

How should Barr's "summaries" be treated? Seriously, or with the same worth as one would treat soiled toilet paper with?

Did Barr act honourably?

Did Richard Burr act in a corrupt manner when he acted as a back channel to Trump as regards the FBI investigating him?

Did Trump obstruct justice?

Has he committed impeachable offences?

Should he be impeached? Given that the redacted Mueller report is a clear call for his impeachment, like. Do you admit it is?

Should the matter of impeachment be considered purely as a matter of right and wrong?

Or, as you appear to suggest, should it be considered purely on the basis of whether it will be advantageous or not to the Democrats in an electoral sense?

If one believes the impeachment question is to be considered purely on the basis of whether it is electorally advantageous or disadvantageous, what does that say about one's attitude to exposing and punishing corruption in politics? Does it lead one to think that you take it seriously?

Is the hiding and cover up of massive corruption bad or good for democracy? Your posts would appear to suggest the latter.

Would any other president who had a report like this written about them be faced with impeachment proceedings?

What is the hard left?

Calling Trump a "narcissistic asshole" seems very much like the sort of "criticism" one would make when one is trying to avoid actual criticism and is trying to give an illusion of balance to one's posts.

I find your tone both highly arrogant, abusive and also ironic given that your post is written in a manner that is squarely guilty of everything you erroneously accuse me of - and it's not the first time. I think there's a lot of projection there.

For a supposed "registered Democrat", you sure come across as anything but - your posts seem curiously evasive of anything that would paint Trump in a bad light, bar calling him a "narrcissistic asshole", which is sort of a given and doesn't provide any insight at all.

Some positive trump news for a change.

https://www.theguardian.com/science/2019/apr/20/space-explorers-trillion-dollar-lift-off-private-frontier

Hoping he can push through some major things regarding space. The willingness to use Spacex goes against everything before where it was just a government jobs program.

And hill16bhoy, you called his post nonsense when it was perfectly reasonable.

Maybe point out how his post was nonsensical instead of going for an overarching argument against the poster. As I say, it was logical and part of a natural discussion as opposed to your what can only be described as rants at this stage.

hill16bhoy

Brian? wrote: »

Yesterday Trump was saying the Mueller report completely exonerated him.

Today it’s “The crazy Mueller report, written by 18 Trump hating Democrats”.

Which is it? Leaving aside that Bob Mueller is a life long Republican.

Be interesting to get some actual answers on this from pro-Trump posters here.

Don't hold your breath.