Donald Trump 2020

[4th&Five 41,526]

 

[UpperWestside 6,163]

11 minutes ago, Ted Lange said:

 

 

 

 

Oh don’t worry. Wait until he gets in front of those supporters on Saturday and tells them the complete opposite. Hell wait until he goes on a late night twitter rant this week saying the opposite. He cannot help but say something stupid and ignorant on this and it’ll be sooner rather than later.

Edited June 15, 2020 by UpperWestside

[Michael Knight 12,977]

2 minutes ago, UpperWestside said:

Oh don’t worry. Wait until he gets in front of those supporters on Saturday and tells them the complete opposite. Hell wait until he goes on a late night twitter rant this week saying the opposite. He cannot help but say something stupid and ignorant on this and it’ll be sooner rather than later.

He literally said nothing in that statement, once someone tells him his opinion he'll tweet something about it.

[RPM 26,318]

2 minutes ago, UpperWestside said:

He cannot help but say something stupid and ignorant on this and it’ll be sooner rather than later.

But his base will eat up it like crack coated M&M's.

[DigglerontheHoof 21,194]

6 minutes ago, Longhorn_Fan68 said:

might be the first time he has tweeted something I agree with

I have a hard time believing that's him.  

But, in a way, the SCOTUS is the one institution he can't bully or threaten.  The buck stops w/ them and he might be learning loyalty to him has limits.   Or, someone just snatched his phone from his tiny hands. 

[TwiceHorn 31,453]

17 minutes ago, Ted Lange said:

 

 

 

 

Well, he can't really blame it on "Obama" judges, or "Mexican" judges, or that "nutty Ninth Circuit" this time, can he?

Plus, "his judges" has been one of his campaign points.  He can't really come out and acknowledge that one of "his judges" defected.

Edited June 15, 2020 by TwiceHorn

[Ted Lange 16,084]

13 minutes ago, Longhorn_Fan68 said:

might be the first time he has tweeted something I agree with

He didnt tweet it, it was a quote.

[Pasken 1,309]

13 minutes ago, Michael Knight said:

 

This is dictator shit.

[Beau Vine 54,215]

 

[Longhorn_Fan68 33,869]

2 minutes ago, Ted Lange said:

He didnt tweet it, it was a quote.

you know what I meant

[Guest Lobo]

I can't believe we are this many hours into this post-decision and he hasn't tweeted that Article II gives him explicit authority to directly overturn any SCOTUS decision he disagrees with.  I'll bet all I'll ever earn that you could put that question to 1000 of his supporters and at least 600-700 of them would think that's an explicit power that his office possesses.  

I also like the Trump tweet, "that we would have problems, criminal."  Reminds me of Frank Costanza vaguely describing what would happened to Aunt Baby, "She had problems...internal."  

Edited June 15, 2020 by Lobo

[UpperWestside 6,163]

4 minutes ago, Michael Knight said:

He literally said nothing in that statement, once someone tells him his opinion he'll tweet something about it.

Right. It is just there is an expectation that he immediately goes flying off the handles on most everything. I agree someone will tell him what his opinion is and he’ll go on a twitter rampage blaming everyone ranging from protestors to Mexicans (always gotta work them in) for what has happened today.

[TwiceHorn 31,453]

1 minute ago, Pasken said:

This is dictator shit.

Congress needs to legislate to remove Presidential authority to classify information without review or recourse.

That's bad idea jeans.

[Michael Knight 12,977]

1 minute ago, UpperWestside said:

Right. It is just there is an expectation that he immediately goes flying off the handles on most everything. I agree someone will tell him what his opinion is and he’ll go on a twitter rampage blaming everyone ranging from protestors to Mexicans (always gotta work them in) for what has happened today.

The only time he has an opinion ready is when its about himself. If someone asks him about anything else he's "many people think its ____" fill in the blank with "surpising" ," a powerful statement",  "interesting". Again never giving his opinion unless he's personally involved or the last person he spoke with gave him their opinion and they complimented Trump while doing so.

[mchookem 16,330]

26 minutes ago, Ted Lange said:

 

 

question... does the military follow normal employment laws, or are they exempt from a ruling such as this?

if it does apply...🤔

 

Edited June 15, 2020 by mchookem

[DDD Dad 14,336]

21 minutes ago, Michael Knight said:

 

Something something prior restraint.

[Beau Vine 54,215]

 

[jimmyjazz 45,907]

You know, for a Monday in 2020, I'd say today hasn't sucked all that bad.

[Biff Tannen 45,678]

5 minutes ago, DDD Dad said:

Something something prior restraint.

Oh please, DEAR

[RPM 26,318]

14 minutes ago, mchookem said:

question... does the military follow normal employment laws, or are they exempt from a ruling such as this?

if it does apply...🤔

 

afaik the military follows the UCMJ. Civilian rulings have little effect other than swaying leadership to make changes.

[wildcat09 29,352]

4 hours ago, TwiceHorn said:

Well most of the analysis around here ends with "appointed by Trump."  Which is fine as far as it goes, but both Gorsuch and Kavanagh could have been appointed by any GOP president.  Kavanagh and his kind of Opus Dei-y nature might have disqualified him from consideration by a couple.

I still think Gorsuch is an evil worm who’s goal is to help summon the non delegation doctrine from the underworld of completely made up bullshit, but I’ll certainly take his help on the rare occasion he finds it useful to not be evil. It’s nice to have a conservative swing vote on a gay rights issue be able to actually craft a coherent legal opinion too.

[henrygandorf 29,189]

19 minutes ago, Lobo said:

I can't believe we are this many hours into this post-decision and he hasn't tweeted that Article II gives him explicit authority to directly overturn any SCOTUS decision he disagrees with. 

the thing is, i don't think he actually disagrees with it.

i think he'll say he does, because he knows his evangelical base (and other assorted crazies) who support him "because judges" are losing their collective shit over it, and that 41% is starting to look a lot like 37%.

like someone has said, when it's not about him, he doesn't have an immediate strong reaction.  also when it's something he didn't give a shit about pre-politics, he also doesn't have an immediate response on it.  he may not even know details.  those opinions can be long and trump isn't much with the reading, even if he could keep his hands steady that long.

also, on cnn right now, they're starting to hammer the "health concern" angle because of the ramp and the water.

all in all, not a bad little monday.

[RPM 26,318]

1 minute ago, wildcat09 said:

It’s nice to have a conservative swing vote on a gay rights issue be able to actually craft a coherent legal opinion too.

He was a frat guy. You know he's had a few "Sacred brotherhood rituals".

[RPM 26,318]

1 minute ago, henrygandorf said:

also, on cnn right now, they're starting to hammer the "health concern" angle because of the ramp and the water.

Remember when Hillary slipped getting into a van?

[Horn Dog 9,825]

16 minutes ago, Beau Vine said:

 

Conservatives:  Title 7 could not apply to transgenders cause they had no such concept at the time he law was written!

Also Conservatives-  Of course the 2A applies to assault rifles, armor piercing bullets and any future weapons.  Also we can ignore the who “militia” wording cause sticking to ‘original text’ is highly relative

 

[WhatTheBuck 28,777]

55 minutes ago, Macanudo said:

Does the mean Christians will have to start loving the sinner and the sin now?

No. Their hatred of the LGBTQ community never had anything to do with their religion. They just use their religion as cover for their personal bigotry. 

[Longhorn_Fan68 33,869]

7 minutes ago, RPM said:

Remember when Hillary slipped getting into a van?

no

[F250 28,769]

39 minutes ago, TwiceHorn said:

Well, he can't really blame it on "Obama" judges, or "Mexican" judges, or that "nutty Ninth Circuit" this time, can he?

Plus, "his judges" has been one of his campaign points.  He can't really come out and acknowledge that one of "his judges" defected.

This is how I see it. To an extent, "the Judicial appointments" are what has allowed Trump to get away with so much and now it looks like the Republican faustian bargain was a bargain for magical beans. A lot of wind was let out of his sail with this ruling.

 

[WhatTheBuck 28,777]

4 minutes ago, Longhorn_Fan68 said:

no

Really? Fox News reported it as though Hillary already had one foot in the grave. 

[henrygandorf 29,189]

ok, so let's talk real quick about this tulsa rally/ticket situation, and how it'll play out...

i don't believe that over a million requests have been received, but i do believe that ~100k real adult human people will want to go and be able to get themselves to tulsa for the rally (we already know people travel for this garbage, and they will definitely come from far and wide to the first shitshow after the hiatus).

the campaign can't guarantee seats, so i assume they tell people to get there early and wait in line.  so what we're talking about is 100,000 non-mask-wearing trumpsters wearing god-knows-what waiting 10-12 hours in the june tulsa heat.  (i used to have to drive past cbs television city a lot and would always see the line for "the price is right", and i feel like this will have a similar vibe). 

so 19,000+ will get into the arena.  possibly another 30-40k will be next door at the convention center, and another 40-50k will just be hanging out around the area.  i'd be shocked if there were more than 2,500 total masks involved, and i assume zero social distancing.

does the waiver they're signing cover people who didn't get in to the rally?

[RPM 26,318]

16 minutes ago, Longhorn_Fan68 said:

no

https://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2016/09/11/video_clinton_stumbles_and_falls_escorted_into_van_after_abruptly_leaving_911_memorial.html

It was made high drama news level 11 on FOX. Not sure how you missed it.

Edited June 15, 2020 by RPM

[Lagunamadre 1,975]

3 minutes ago, henrygandorf said:

 

does the waiver they're signing cover people who didn't get in to the rally?

Like any of those people would dare sue their own God. 

[Guest Lobo]

Even with private ticketing processes for secure events, seats and printing/e-tickets still go through Pacquola. 

Just call them and ask about BOK Center.  Any journalist can do it in a heartbeat.  They say 40,000 ticket requests thusfar have been pushed through to them by the campaign.  Assume another 40,000 will come through every 4 days between now and then as has been the case the last four days (I know it doesn't always work like that, you have a surge at the beginning and a surge at the end), let's call that back of the envelope---120,000 or even 150,000 if Oklahoma gets enough Gundy fever between now and then.  That's not really 4.0mm people, is it?  Again, the campaign can say that many millions of people just clicked on some facebook banner that says, "Click Here if you want to see Trump in person next week!"  and they just clicked it.  I'm quite sure that many clicks happened/will happen. 

But even a secure campaign event still has to work with the venue because the right number of attendees with e-tickets/print-at-home tickets still have to jive with how many seats are in there.  Have you ever attended something where it was GA, or you were comped, or it was sort of fill in from the front to back as you get there, or it was a gift ticket or whatever?  But it still had a section, row, and seat # on it but you were just allowed to sit wherever?  That's paquola software that tracks that because you still have to know how many people you have in a place and who got their ticket from where.  They say it's gonna be less than a quarter million.  I'm inclined to believe them over Trump, call me crazy. 

[Dnaguy 11,948]

2 hours ago, trauma babe said:

My favorite arguments against this ruling are the ones that pretend trans people didn't exist until 1992's The Crying Game. 

Wait.... Forest Whitaker is trans?

Damn. You learn something new every day.

[Gil Bang 25,946]

7 hours ago, DefinitelyNotHollywoodColt said:

So how does that work...you buy a ticket to a 19,000 seat stadium, and if they’re available you get one. Then, when they aren’t available for the other 6 million, what happens? 
 

side note: I somehow ended up on a republican phone list and am getting absolutely hammered by donation solicitations, all of which end by saying “5x MATCH TODAY ONLY!” I’m assuming there is a 0x chance of said match...could someone sue and seek discovery on that 5x match?

I get those too.  "This is Don Jr...."

[RomaVicta 29,907]

30 minutes ago, RPM said:

https://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2016/09/11/video_clinton_stumbles_and_falls_escorted_into_van_after_abruptly_leaving_911_memorial.html

It was made high drama news level 11 on FOX. Not sure how you missed it.

And the clips showing her reacting wildly without context. She makes goofy faces. She's not just evil, she's physically unfit.

I'm sure the Clinton Cabal created a robot to replace her so the world would never no just how crazy and infirm she was. We really dodged a bullet there.

[DDD Dad 14,336]

15 minutes ago, Dnaguy said:

Wait.... Forest Whitaker is trans?

Damn. You learn something new every day.

[Eskimohorn 5,635]

Conservatives:  Title 7 could not apply to transgenders cause they had no such concept at the time he law was written!
Also Conservatives-  Of course the 2A applies to assault rifles, armor piercing bullets and any future weapons.  Also we can ignore the who “militia” wording cause sticking to ‘original text’ is highly relative
 

In the Federalist Papers, Hamilton (or Jay or Madison) spells out why individuals need the right to bear arms, as part of their duty to defend their community from foreign invaders, natives, or armed factions. The founders then outlined militia roles in the Constitution and when they could be called upon to repel armed insurrection. Its all there!

[Nope 3,114]

 

 

[brown water 3,777]

7 hours ago, RPM said:

COVID-19 is only serious if you have underlying health problems like overweight, smoking, diabetes and the like. Trumpkins have nothing to worry about.

Too late to add a DNR to those waivers?

[mdmost 43,001]

I guess Trump won't be putting up getting Gorsuch on the bench any more as a great achievement since Gorsuch went with the libtards. 

Edited June 15, 2020 by mdmost

[brown water 3,777]

2 hours ago, Ted Lange said:

He didnt tweet it, it was a quote.

Then it’s not official. 

[Fudge Nuggets 19,190]

2 hours ago, henrygandorf said:

the thing is, i don't think he actually disagrees with it.

i think he'll say he does, because he knows his evangelical base (and other assorted crazies) who support him "because judges" are losing their collective shit over it, and that 41% is starting to look a lot like 37%.

like someone has said, when it's not about him, he doesn't have an immediate strong reaction.  also when it's something he didn't give a shit about pre-politics, he also doesn't have an immediate response on it.  he may not even know details.  those opinions can be long and trump isn't much with the reading, even if he could keep his hands steady that long.

also, on cnn right now, they're starting to hammer the "health concern" angle because of the ramp and the water.

all in all, not a bad little monday.

And if it is something he disagrees with he will simply ignore the ruling and keep on keeping on.  Not like anyone’s going to stop his stupid, fat, broke ass.

[tx 3 putt 76,925]

today's court ruling was  gift for trump and hard line repubs. they can go scare evangelicals and the religious right into giving them millions to protect their religious freedom 

[Bama Chick 28,596]

A ramp with no steps??!

Why I never!

[Biff Tannen 45,678]

1 hour ago, Bama Chick said:

A ramp with no steps??!

Why I never!

 

Of the 138924574320 things to focus on this horrible president about, this is pretty much dead last.  Who gives a shit.

[Longhorn_Fan68 33,869]

8 minutes ago, Biff Tannen said:

Of the 138924574320 things to focus on this horrible president about, this is pretty much dead last.  Who gives a shit.

that's the crazy thing about it, THEY seem to be talking about more than WE are. THEY know something we don't.

[mdmost 43,001]

18 minutes ago, tx 3 putt said:

today's court ruling was  gift for trump and hard line repubs. they can go scare evangelicals and the religious right into giving them millions to protect their religious freedom 

Why? His first nominee added was the one who put the knife to their ideas of religious liberty. He's no Kavanaugh. 

[Beau Vine 54,215]

7 minutes ago, Longhorn_Fan68 said:

that's the crazy thing about it, THEY seem to be talking about more than WE are. THEY know something we don't.

#Watergait

[Blotto 23,498]

Between speakers at the democratic convention they should just loop video of Trump and Obama using the same ramp. My only concern is that Trump might actually nuke the place by the end of day 2.