Donald Trump 2018

[RomaVicta 30008]

17 minutes ago, David Dennison said:

This is where the credibility of Donald Trump becomes important.

It will not go well for you at the party meeting if you question the honesty of our leader. He is the identifier of liars not a liar himself.

You will be denied donuts. Speak out again, and you will be denied even more, my friend.

Free yourself from the chains of Fake News. Pick up your shovel and help us drain the swamp of the hideously misnamed Department of Justice. Salty Sailor leads us! Follow us or be crushed under the feet of we who will make America Great Again!

You will not replace us. The Jews will not replace us. 

Tomorrow belongs to us!

 

The whole excellent scene from Cabaret, a movie I disliked when young then finally got when I was older:

 

Edited May 23, 2018 by RomaVicta

[SubliminalHorn 6811]

1 minute ago, relapse98 said:

Nah. I'm willing to give him the time to get an iron clad case.

Yes, of course. But this fucking traitor is goong to completely undermine our republic and if given enough time, may completely destroy it. We don’t have a lot of time. 

[retread 2951]

 

[GW Hayduke 1953]

19 minutes ago, GRHorn said:

Not sure if serious. 

Very much so. He’s had high level positions in the intelligence apparatus for decades under presidents of both parties. He was DNI during the period of Russian attacks on our democracy and trump campaign’s probable conspiring.

Are you referring to 2013 where he failed to acknowledge the existence of the Patriot Act? Or something else?

Or is this an instance where you disagree with what he said, or at least want to disagree, because you don’t want it to be true. Ad Hominem is a logical fallacy FYI.

It boils down to whether trump’s victory was legitimate or not. Imagine the Sooners beating us but then we realized they cheated. That win would be removed from the books

Edited May 23, 2018 by GW Hayduke

[SimonBolivar 10959]

I'm just happy that most Americans have heard of him. 

[Anastasis 23482]

Just now, retread said:

 

The formulation of the survey questions is half ass.

[Nice Guy Eddie 13523]

2 minutes ago, SubliminalHorn said:

Fucking Mueller needs to hurry up 

I'm at the point it really will not matter.  Most likely it isn't possible to criminally indict a sitting President.  The appropriate method is to impeach/convict a President leading to their removal for appropriate crimes.  The assumption is that Congress would remove a President even if from their own party.   I don't think the GOP will remove Trump for basically any crime.  I know you can create some strange scenarios where they remove Trump but they're very unlikely to occur.    FYI, I also think that if you flipped the situation so that Obama is President and the Dems control Congress, they most likely would not remove Obama as well.

2020 can't get here soon enough.  I actually fear the scenario where the Dems win both the House and Senate in 2018.  If they moved to impeach/indict, I don't know if Trump accepts it.  And if he can get the military to stand behind him, we have a constitutional crisis.   And when people say Mathis would stand up to Trump, you're making an assumption that Mathis is still there.  Trump can easily find someone to replace Mathis.    Would Trump accept a scenario of losing in 2020?   If millions and millions of undocumented immigrants voted against him, why should he comply with an invalid election?

Maybe my fears are unfounded, but I think we are in a world that we wouldn't have imagined as recently as 2014 or 15.

[Dr. Teeth 5845]

7 minutes ago, retread said:

 

We have both a stupid and distracted electorate. We need to stop being surprised by it. And this type of thing doesn’t improve. It only gets worse. Pencil him in for 2020. Shit 2024 

[Ted Lange 16134]

Any word on how the Dotard’s IRS audit is going?

[Nice Guy Eddie 13523]

3 minutes ago, Ted Lange said:

Any word on how the Dotard’s IRS audit is going?

the one that he promised when complete, he would happily realize his tax returns even against if his attorneys said otherwise?   We haven't heard about that, and as SHS says, the american people knew who they elected so we can't complain about poor behavior, lies and broken promises.

[hayden_horn 11365]

2 hours ago, Nice Guy Eddie said:

I'm sure my comment will get lost in the mix but Trump's words are starting to go into a much darker place.  He's always complained about Hillary or Comey or Mueller, etc., etc.  Now he is full-on attacking the US govt as against him and, in proxy, against the ~50% of the nation who voted for him.    He is basically saying that the deep state is or wants to remove him and democracy out of the US.  

If someone was to ever stage a coup against the US govt from the White House, this is the process you would take.  First discredit the media as liars.  Second, discredit the established administration as the deep state.   Finally if and when Congress or even just the House turns blue, Trump will discredit them as the unduly elected.   If you believe Trump and assume all the above is true, then you would want and even expect Trump to ignore the Constitution and assume complete control of the govt?  He would be the hero in that story and not the villain.

I'm not saying that this is Trump's end game but if someone wanted to assume a dictatorship of the US, this is how a civilian would go about it.  

talk about comments that did not actually get lost in the mix. heh.

but yeah, see also hugo chavez. trump is following that roadmap.

[Aqua Buddha 14608]

2 hours ago, Fozzz said:

I'm a big fan of Dana's fascist NRA videos.  

 

Second Amendment?  Chiseled in stone from God's own hand.

First Amendment and Fourth Amendment?  Meh, who's counting?

[hayden_horn 11365]

i just watched that nra video. 

they give no shits about the ramifications of their message or how it will be construed by the average nra member. that's just irresponsible and dangerous.

[Anastasis 23482]

Just now, Aqua Buddha said:

Second Amendment?  Chiseled in stone from God's own hand.

First Amendment and Fourth Amendment?  Meh, who's counting?

If the posts above suggesting a military coup and/or trump refusing to leave the WH after removal by the Senate or the electorate reflect a realistic outcome over the next 2-4 years, we're gonna need our ARs. 

Edited May 23, 2018 by Anastasis

[Aqua Buddha 14608]

When you look at the NRA as a consumer marketing organization to sell products (guns) they make a lot more sense than if you see them as a political group.

[Nice Guy Eddie 13523]

2 minutes ago, hayden_horn said:

talk about comments that did not actually get lost in the mix. heh.

but yeah, see also hugo chavez. trump is following that roadmap.

What Trump really needs is a national crisis to suspend rights to finally take him over the edge.  If 9/11 happened tomorrow, do we not believe that concentration camps (freedom camps?) aren't build up immediately.   And criticisms of the good govt. become subversive actions.     When you see movies like V for Vendetta, we're not as far from that world as you think.  

With that being said, I actually don't think any of this will occur.  I still believe that enough people would oppose it if we ever had a leader that tried to become a dictator.

[Aqua Buddha 14608]

Just now, Anastasis said:

If the posts above suggesting a military coup and/or trump refusing to leave the WH after removal by the Senate or the elector reflect a realistic outcome over the next 2-4 years, we're gonna need our ARs. 

That's what bothers me about the hard core 2nd amendment types.  They totally miss what it is about.  It's not about the right to have guns just for the sake of having guns.  It's about protecting against government tyranny and they'll yammer on about the 2nd amendment without realizing it's there to protect the 1st and the 4th.

[RomaVicta 30008]

3 minutes ago, hayden_horn said:

i just watched that nra video. 

they give no shits about the ramifications of their message or how it will be construed by the average nra member. that's just irresponsible and dangerous.

And the ground was laid for this long ago with American Spectator and then internet web-of-lies-blogs. FOX News then makes it all look respectable.

PT Barnum scratches his chin from the afterlife. "Lotta money in politics. No elephant shit or tigers, either. Man, I could have made a lot of money in politics."

[GW Hayduke 1953]

1 minute ago, Aqua Buddha said:

When you look at the NRA as a consumer marketing organization to sell products (guns) they make a lot more sense than if you see them as a political group.

I see the NRA’s primary purpose is to shape their members into believeing what the gun industry wants them to believe. Things such as “good guy with gun is only solution to bad guy with gun” or “law abiding citizens are under attack by gun grabbers.”

[Mdhorn 5987]

1 hour ago, David Dennison said:

This is where conservative media is so important. His base doesn't know they've been lied to.

Yes they do--their complicit. 

[SuingToGetAMessageBoard? 3861]

My complicit. 

[Aqua Buddha 14608]

Just now, GW Hayduke said:

I see the NRA’s primary purpose is to shape their members into believeing what the gun industry wants them to believe. Things such as “good guy with gun is only solution to bad guy with gun” or “law abiding citizens are under attack by gun grabbers.”

Their primary purpose is to goose gun sales.  The gun industry is in free fall right now and their consumer marketing arm has kicked it into high gear.

[GW Hayduke 1953]

3 minutes ago, Aqua Buddha said:

That's what bothers me about the hard core 2nd amendment types.  They totally miss what it is about.  It's not about the right to have guns just for the sake of having guns.  It's about protecting against government tyranny and they'll yammer on about the 2nd amendment without realizing it's there to protect the 1st and the 4th.

And they also miss that our greatest protection against government tyranny is the rule-of-law, a free press, an honestly informed electorate, and our democratic processes. 

[RPM 26349]

8 minutes ago, hayden_horn said:

that's just irresponsible and dangerous so NRA.

fify

[Aqua Buddha 14608]

3 minutes ago, GW Hayduke said:

And they also miss that our greatest protection against government tyranny is the rule-of-law, a free press, an honestly informed electorate, and our democratic processes. 

Exactly.  They want that 72 year old with a can watching Fox News to honestly believe that him and his gun are the only thing standing between the Republic and total chaos.

[Anastasis 23482]

Just now, GW Hayduke said:

And they also miss that our greatest protection against government tyranny is the rule-of-law, a free press, an honestly informed electorate, and our democratic processes. 

Rule of law?  Yeah, that's showing out real well.

A free press?  Our information distribution systems are broken. 

Honestly informed electorate? LOFL.

Democratic processes?  The institutions that we have turned over the execution of our democratic processes to are a corrupted tragedy of incompetence.

So yeah, I think that I'll keep my ARs for the time being. 

[GW Hayduke 1953]

3 minutes ago, Anastasis said:

Rule of law?  Yeah, that's showing out real well.

A free press?  Our information distribution systems are broken. 

Honestly informed electorate? LOFL.

Democratic processes?  The institutions that we have turned over the execution of our democratic processes to are a corrupted tragedy of incompetence.

So yeah, I think that I'll keep my ARs for the time being. 

No one said those pillars aren’t currently under attack by something considered tyrannical.

You can’t defeat fake news, stop Russian troll farms, protect the Mueller investigation, or push a Republican House/senate to provide meaningful oversight with an AR.

[Ted Lange 16134]

 

[Ted Lange 16134]

What a time to be alive. 

[jimmyjazz 46116]

The NRA was about little more than gun safety for decades.  Things started to change ~ Reagan's election.

[Judge Roybeanbag 11820]

Just now, Ted Lange said:

 

Judge is probably a mexican!

[Longhorn94 2458]

34 minutes ago, hayden_horn said:

i just watched that nra video. 

they give no shits about the ramifications of their message or how it will be construed by the average nra member. that's just irresponsible and dangerous.

wow she is evil. i mean pure evil. crazy...

 

so how can republicans justify attacking the feds but supporting the police? federal vs state? i dont get it.

 

and who is they in the video? i mean THEY are in control of the WH. THEY are in control of the House. THEY are in control of the Senate. THEY are in control of the Supreme Court. THEY are in control of the DOJ AND FBI. THEY are in control of Fox News and Sinclair news. so who is this THEY that keep referring to that seems to be running everything?

[F250 28817]

29 minutes ago, Aqua Buddha said:

When you look at the NRA as a consumer marketing organization to sell products (guns) they make a lot more sense than if you see them as a political group.

Exactly, that video was meant to feed paranoia. The ominous tone along with the creepy speech cadence coupled with the bat shit crazy message isn't about the 2nd Amendment. That's the NRA creating a demand for more guns.

I'm pro 2nd Amendment but I clearly see the how the gun industry generates sales.

[Longhorn94 2458]

36 minutes ago, Anastasis said:

If the posts above suggesting a military coup and/or trump refusing to leave the WH after removal by the Senate or the electorate reflect a realistic outcome over the next 2-4 years, we're gonna need our ARs. 

and thats what is crazy to think about. the very people that are so paranoid about the govt taking over and taking their guns are the very people that are making it happen!!! i dont understand how they dont see that. they are enabling the whole fantasy and making it possible. when will they wake up?

[Ted Lange 16134]

https://twitter.com/rpbp/status/999339069120360453?s=21

[Anastasis 23482]

3 minutes ago, Ted Lange said:

 

This is fucking hilarious. Merica!

[Longhorn94 2458]

37 minutes ago, Aqua Buddha said:

That's what bothers me about the hard core 2nd amendment types.  They totally miss what it is about.  It's not about the right to have guns just for the sake of having guns.  It's about protecting against government tyranny and they'll yammer on about the 2nd amendment without realizing it's there to protect the 1st and the 4th.

right, the 2nd Amendment exists to allow us the ability to preserve our Freedoms of Speech, Religion, Unreasonable Searches, etc.... not just to have a gun. 

[F250 28817]

4 minutes ago, jimmyjazz said:

The NRA was about little more than gun safety for decades.  Things started to change ~ Reagan's election.

I'm not old enough to remember the political landscape during the Reagan administration but it seems shit really changed during the Clinton administration. I enrolled in college during Clinton's first year in office so it's possible I just wasn't paying attention to things during the H.W. Bush years.

 

[David Dennison 18946]

2 minutes ago, F250 said:

I'm not old enough to remember the political landscape during the Reagan administration but it seems shit really changed during the Clinton administration. I enrolled in college during Clinton's first year in office so it's possible I just wasn't paying attention to things during the H.W. Bush years.

 

For some reason this just reminded me of what a little cunt Lee Atwater was.

[SuingToGetAMessageBoard? 3861]

1 minute ago, F250 said:

I'm not old enough to remember the political landscape during the Reagan administration but it seems shit really changed during the Clinton administration. I enrolled in college during Clinton's first year in office so it's possible I just wasn't paying attention to things during the H.W. Bush years.

 

That’s the era of the Brady bill.  Proposed under Reagan, opposed by NRA.  Ultimately signed under Clinton.  

[Anastasis 23482]

13 minutes ago, GW Hayduke said:

No one said those pillars aren’t currently under attack by something considered tyrannical.

You can’t defeat fake news, stop Russian troll farms, protect the Mueller investigation, or push a Republican House/senate to provide meaningful oversight with an AR.

What you had on the last page were people predicting a military coup to depose a president who was removed from office but refused to leave. Or a military backed dictatorship coming to power. Or some other form of fundamentally undermining the Constitution. If we're going there, the shit is going to hit the fan.  We are at any moment approximately 72 hours from total societal collapse. If it comes to that, and a despotic takeover of the federal government is in play to set that off, I'm going to go ahead and keep my ARs close by.   

[staboner 4984]

 

1 hour ago, Nice Guy Eddie said:

I'm at the point it really will not matter.  Most likely it isn't possible to criminally indict a sitting President.  The appropriate method is to impeach/convict a President leading to their removal for appropriate crimes.  The assumption is that Congress would remove a President even if from their own party.   I don't think the GOP will remove Trump for basically any crime.  I know you can create some strange scenarios where they remove Trump but they're very unlikely to occur.    FYI, I also think that if you flipped the situation so that Obama is President and the Dems control Congress, they most likely would not remove Obama as well.

2020 can't get here soon enough.  I actually fear the scenario where the Dems win both the House and Senate in 2018.  If they moved to impeach/indict, I don't know if Trump accepts it.  And if he can get the military to stand behind him, we have a constitutional crisis.   And when people say Mathis would stand up to Trump, you're making an assumption that Mathis is still there.  Trump can easily find someone to replace Mathis.    Would Trump accept a scenario of losing in 2020?   If millions and millions of undocumented immigrants voted against him, why should he comply with an invalid election?

Maybe my fears are unfounded, but I think we are in a world that we wouldn't have imagined as recently as 2014 or 15.

 

42 minutes ago, Nice Guy Eddie said:

What Trump really needs is a national crisis to suspend rights to finally take him over the edge.  If 9/11 happened tomorrow, do we not believe that concentration camps (freedom camps?) aren't build up immediately.   And criticisms of the good govt. become subversive actions.     When you see movies like V for Vendetta, we're not as far from that world as you think.  

With that being said, I actually don't think any of this will occur.  I still believe that enough people would oppose it if we ever had a leader that tried to become a dictator.

We are absolutely ripe for everything you are saying here. constitutional crisis, government goose stepping, and fucking freedom camps. 

Wars don't happen because of certain events. WWI was going to happen no matter the final trigger (i.e. the murder of Archduke Ferdinand). The structure of the world was already broken and just needed a push. Same shit now. The world goes to war because children are in charge - and they magnify the seeds or hatred and irrationality to the point that almost any event will send us into a shitshow. 

Infrastructure hack, bank collapse, bio attack, terrorist attack, you name it. you know its coming. its always coming. Obviously my expectation for how we  react is really fucking low. I am just hoping for no nukes my Gs.

Have a good wednesday friends

[GW Hayduke 1953]

1 minute ago, Anastasis said:

What you had on the last page were people predicting a military coup to depose a president who was removed from office but refused to leave. Or a military backed dictatorship coming to power. Or some other form of fundamentally undermining the Constitution. If we're going there, the shit is going to hit the fan.  We are at any moment approximately 72 hours from total societal collapse. If it comes to that, and a despotic takeover of the federal government is in play to set that off, I'm going to go ahead and keep my ARs close by.   

Sure. But self defense in the event of societal collapse is different from protecting against tyranny

[staboner 4984]

Quote

I still believe that enough people would oppose it if we ever had a leader that tried to become a dictator.

and to this point specifically? i mean really? we have a leader acting like that now and people don't care. we are in a civil war here, dictator or not. its the same problem - no one is listening to anyone else. 

[David Dennison 18946]

3 minutes ago, staboner said:

and to this point specifically? i mean really? we have a leader acting like that now and people don't care. we are in a civil war here, dictator or not. its the same problem - no one is listening to anyone else. 

A lot of people care. A lot of people don't care.

[Fozzz 152]

52 minutes ago, hayden_horn said:

i just watched that nra video. 

they give no shits about the ramifications of their message or how it will be construed by the average nra member. that's just irresponsible and dangerous.

It is dangerous.  There was a report a few days ago that the Las Vegas mass killer was a far right "government is coming for your guns" type that feeds off of this kind of stuff.  

Quote

Paddock said that the evacuation of people by the Federal Emergency Management Agency (Fema) after Hurricane Katrina was a a “dry run for law enforcement and military to start kickin’ down doors and ... confiscating guns”.

“Somebody has to wake up the American public and get them to arm themselves,” the man says Paddock told him. “Sometimes sacrifices have to be made.”

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2018/may/19/stephen-paddock-las-vegas-shooter-conspiracy-theories-documents-explained

[staboner 4984]

6 minutes ago, David Dennison said:

A lot of people care. A lot of people don't care.

and they can't communicate

and when the can't communicate or trust each other, they can't solve problems

ergo when problems happen you eventually end up with authoritarian behaviors needed to solve them

Edited May 23, 2018 by staboner

[Ted Lange 16134]

 

[Chrispy 132]

2 minutes ago, Ted Lange said:

 

Oh, hell yes. 

[relapse98 634]

1 minute ago, Ted Lange said:

 

Ah. The evidence for the 1st Amendment case by Kapernick just writes itself. Keep opening your trap, idiots,  you are just building his case for him. Surely Trump and Pence know that Robert Kraft has already been deposed and asked about the call Trump made to him to tell his buddies to fire any player that kneels, right?

If the teams want to give up their public incentives, than I have no problem with them enforcing the rule (well, I still have a problem, but it wouldn't be a 1st amendment issue). But when the president is pressuring tax payer funded companies to fire their employees for kneeling, I gots an issue.