Jump to content
Required Reading for any Longhorn ×

Donald Trump 2019

Francisco 2.0

By Francisco 2.0
in Cloak Room

 Share

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 48.5k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

  • Hugo Stiglitz

    2695

  • 4th&Five

    1699

  • jimmyjazz

    1286

  • atomheartbevo

    1219

Popular Days

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Popular Posts

GHOSTUSER
GHOSTUSER

I fucking love this President. My 2 faves during my lifetime are Trump and Nixon. They share a lot of similarities and were besieged by the same groups of assholes. No I’m not trolling. Y’all, the lef

Francisco 2.0
Francisco 2.0
Brisketexan
Brisketexan

This.....is magnificent. The "younger generation" is going to have to work double-time to fund YOUR Social Security, which YOUR generation of elected officials raided the fuck out of.  And which,

Posted Images

jimmyjazz

jimmyjazz 46,153

Posted
Posted
17 hours ago, Anastasis said:

The highway system was funded as a pay as you go program supported by user taxes such as the fuel tax.  The example is no more relevant to a debate about personal and corporate income tax rates than a discussion of tariffs.  

The thing is, Trump is trying to draw a distinction between mid-20th century and current revenue generation by focusing on one aspect (tariffs) and ignoring another (taxes).  I seriously doubt he's informed enough to be intentionally misleading, as he was probably spoon-fed this partial truth by FOX News or one of his own henchmen, but the fact is that his base will now eat it up and regurgitate it at will without any attempt to assess the veracity of what he is saying.  Of this, he is quite aware.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites
jimmyjazz

jimmyjazz 46,153

Posted
Posted
Quote

"we are on course to have one of the best Months of June in US history..."

The S&P 500 hit an all-time closing high on April 30, 2019.  From there, it began a month-long slide that terminated down 6.84% on the first trading day of June.  It has since rebounded and erased those losses.

It's not hard to have "one of the best Months (sic) of June in US history" when June kicks off at the bottom of a sell-off.  If he's going to take credit for June, he needs to take credit for May (which was probably a historical whopper but in the opposite direction).

Link to comment
Share on other sites
atomheartbevo

atomheartbevo 89,808

Posted
Posted (edited)
37 minutes ago, Mojo Hand said:

So now this idiot is begging China to project its military power into vital Middle East shipping lanes?   

I take it as he’s surrendered, and trying to get the Navy out of that area.  

Edit: and I’m fine with that.  At least he can’t fuck up anymore and get us in a war with Iran that gets a lot of Americans killed.  

Edited by atomheartbevo
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Lagunamadre

Lagunamadre 1,975

Posted
Posted
2 hours ago, 4th&Five said:

 

He might be the dumbest person in the world. 

1) Oil is obviously a global commodity. If oil is $200/bl in China and $50/bl here, it will take two nano seconds for that Permian/EagleFord/Bakken oil to be on a boat to China until those indices meet in the middle. He must not understand that. 

2) The Fed cuts rate to stimulate the economy. He, in the same breath, brags about the economy being at all time high and wants the Fed to provide stimulus. 

I mean, he is quite literally the dumbest world leader of all time. 

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites
RPM

RPM 26,355

Posted
Posted
4 minutes ago, Lagunamadre said:

He might be the dumbest person in the world. 

1) Oil is obviously a global commodity. If oil is $200/bl in China and $50/bl here, it will take two nano seconds for that Permian/EagleFord/Bakken oil to be on a boat to China until those indices meet in the middle. He must not understand that. 

He'll just add some tariffs and everything will be fine.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
triplehorn

triplehorn 2,664

Posted
Posted
4 minutes ago, Lagunamadre said:

He might be the dumbest person in the world. 

1) Oil is obviously a global commodity. If oil is $200/bl in China and $50/bl here, it will take two nano seconds for that Permian/EagleFord/Bakken oil to be on a boat to China until those indices meet in the middle. He must not understand that. 

2) The Fed cuts rate to stimulate the economy. He, in the same breath, brags about the economy being at all time high and wants the Fed to provide stimulus. 

I mean, he is quite literally the dumbest world leader of all time. 

He's also talking about us protecting shipping lanes while he was within the length of a pornstar butt hair of shutting down a fifth of global crude transport through the Straight Strait with an ego driven bombing attack on Iran.  We may never know, but I suspect someone outside of Bolton/Pompeo got to Trump fast enough to scuttle the attack.  Now he's trying to reproduce his newfound understanding of the impact of not protecting peaceful commercial shipping through the Strait of Hormuz as if he knew it all along.  

It's almost enough to distract from the latest news that we're dealing with a bonafide sexual predator in the Oval.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Francisco 2.0

Francisco 2.0 32,430

Posted
  • Author
Posted
13 minutes ago, triplehorn said:

He's also talking about us protecting shipping lanes while he was within the length of a pornstar butt hair of shutting down a fifth of global crude transport through the Straight Strait with an ego driven bombing attack on Iran.  We may never know, but I suspect someone outside of Bolton/Pompeo got to Trump fast enough to scuttle the attack.  Now he's trying to reproduce his newfound understanding of the impact of not protecting peaceful commercial shipping through the Strait of Hormuz as if he knew it all along.  

It's almost enough to distract from the latest news that we're dealing with a bonafide sexual predator in the Oval.

But we do know.  It was Tucker.

https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2019/06/tucker-carlson-talked-trump-out-of-iran-attack.html

 

Quote

When President Donald Trump was considering military options against Iran he suddenly grew “frustrated” with John Bolton, his national security adviser, and the way he seemed to constantly advocate for a strike, reports the AP. So he started broadening his scope and seeking out advice from others, including Tucker Carlson. The Fox News host had a different take than most of his hawkish advisers, insisting that a military strike would not be in the country’s best interests and that it would severely hurt his re-election chances, according to the New York Times. Although there is no indication that Carlson’s voice was the deciding factor in ultimately calling off the strike, he does at least seem to have been one of the ones who planted a seed of doubt in his mind.

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Lagunamadre

Lagunamadre 1,975

Posted
Posted
2 minutes ago, Hugo Stiglitz said:

I still don’t buy the Tucker Carlson story. 

I mean what part? That Tucker is an isolationist who doesn't think we should be involved in the Middle East? Or that Trump would take direction from a Fox News anchor? 

Obviously it would be the former, as we know the latter is as true as gravity. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Hugo Stiglitz

Hugo Stiglitz 23,367

Posted
Posted
10 minutes ago, Lagunamadre said:

I mean what part? That Tucker is an isolationist who doesn't think we should be involved in the Middle East? Or that Trump would take direction from a Fox News anchor? 

Obviously it would be the former, as we know the latter is as true as gravity. 

Trump didn’t want to order the strike, he didn’t need Tucker to talk him out of it.  

He just needed someone to blame/credit for talking him out.  

Tucker was there. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Chooky

Chooky 13,319

Posted
Posted
8 minutes ago, Hugo Stiglitz said:

Trump didn’t want to order the strike, he didn’t need Tucker to talk him out of it.  

He just needed someone to blame/credit for talking him out.  

Tucker was there. 

Nah, I fully believe that a television personality is the shiniest, most influential object in any room full of people in the non-bronzed, pasty butthole eyes of Donald Trump. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Lagunamadre

Lagunamadre 1,975

Posted
Posted
21 minutes ago, Hugo Stiglitz said:

Trump wouldn’t move against Iran militarily without an okay from daddy. 

Ehh, he did against Syria. Different beast all together, not doubt, but I wouldn't be so sure Hannity doesn't pull more weight than Putin these days. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
henrygandorf

henrygandorf 29,194

Posted
Posted
1 hour ago, Hugo Stiglitz said:

I still don’t buy the Tucker Carlson story. 

so here's the extra bit to think about in regards to the tucker angle on this.

let's say that trump knew there were two sides of this thing, and the conversation with tucker ultimately led him to what was probably his own instinct as an isolationist or whatever you want to call it.  and let's ignore that tucker used the magic phrase "it'll hurt your reelection chances" which is probably when trump stopped listening anyway.

the real reason he listened to tucker (or at the very least was glad tucker agreed with him) is because he wants the media (which to him is only fox news) to praise him and commend him and help carry the narrative that he is a great president.  he is, first a foremost, a self-promoter.  which in the current context, means he never stops campaigning.

if the entire room of advisers said one thing, but then he was faced with the decision of fox news commending or bashing the decision to his "base" of idiots - the people he would need (and then some) to get reelected, is there any doubt which side he chooses?

and can we take a step back to understand just how dangerous this is, and how the fate of our country is in the hands of cable news anchors?

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
triplehorn

triplehorn 2,664

Posted
Posted (edited)
41 minutes ago, Lagunamadre said:

Ehh, he did against Syria. Different beast all together, not doubt, but I wouldn't be so sure Hannity doesn't pull more weight than Putin these days. 

Specifically, in Syria US forces obliterated an advancing column of Russian mercenaries not responding to US warnings.  I'm guessing that attack probably happened within established military guidelines around self defense in an active combat theatre that did not require specific presidential approval.  It's kind of like the revelation in the last week or so about publicized Pentagon CYBERCOM actions of infiltrating Russia's domestic infrastructure as a prong of attack/counterattack - a measure that also did NOT require Trump's specific knowledge or approval.  

In the Syria episode, to my knowledge, Trump has never commented on it or even made a public acknowledgement it ever happened.  With the cybercom news leaked to the NYT, he overtly stated it was false, never happened, and threatened the NYT again.  It's a peculiar stance, and appears very defensive in the face of the blow between the eyes of Putin.  Interestingly, I'm not aware of Putin ever making public acknowledgement or response to either event occurring despite the obvious magnitude of both events.  Quite the delicate charade they are pretending to hide despite all the obvious indicators.

We know Hannity was messaging with Manafort for a year to shape national TV news around his prosecution and to attack Mueller.  It's no stretch for it to be a two-way flow of messaging.  In this case, Tucker would simply be a messenger, not the decider.  It's potentially a way for Trump to get reached day to day without actual "deciders" having their fingerprints on the contact with Trump.  

Edited by triplehorn
NOT*
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Biff Tannen

Biff Tannen 45,742

Posted
Posted
14 minutes ago, henrygandorf said:

if the entire room of advisers said one thing, but then he was faced with the decision of fox news commending or bashing the decision to his "base" of idiots - the people he would need (and then some) to get reelected, is there any doubt which side he chooses?

Didn't he already do this in like 2017 over some issue?  It escapes me, but as soon as Fox started bashing it he completely changed his mind.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
David Dennison

David Dennison 18,948

Posted
Posted
Just now, Biff Tannen said:

Didn't he already do this in like 2017 over some issue?  It escapes me, but as soon as Fox started bashing it he completely changed his mind.

The bipartisan immigration deal that would have provided $25 billion for border security and provided a pathway to citizenship for Dreamers.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
WhatTheBuck

WhatTheBuck 28,798

Posted
Posted
9 minutes ago, Biff Tannen said:

Didn't he already do this in like 2017 over some issue?  It escapes me, but as soon as Fox started bashing it he completely changed his mind.

Yeah, it's what led to the government shutdown when Ann Coulter and Rush Limbaugh went off on him for making a deal that didn't provide funding for the wall. So he shut down the government for five weeks. Then he caved and made a deal that didn't provide funding for the wall. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Js1

Js1 85,583

Posted
Posted (edited)
9 minutes ago, WhatTheBuck said:

Yeah, it's what led to the government shutdown when Ann Coulter and Rush Limbaugh went off on him for making a deal that didn't provide funding for the wall. So he shut down the government for five weeks. Then he caved and made a deal that didn't provide funding for the wall.  

Wasn't it even worse?

Like he got wall funding in exchange for making DACA permanent.  They flipped at him for the DACA part, calling it full blown amnesty, so he reneged on the deal he made with Chuck and Nance. 

Edited by Js1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
SuingToGetAMessageBoard?

SuingToGetAMessageBoard? 3,861

Posted
Posted
22 minutes ago, WhatTheBuck said:

They changed the rules in 2010. 

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk/8604625.stm

Not the proper noun aspect.  Trump is perfectly fine (like in cards).  It’s the fact that someone would have had to play “SA” at some point to get that board configuration.  Otherwise it is impressive. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Hugo Stiglitz

Hugo Stiglitz 23,367

Posted
Posted
56 minutes ago, Lagunamadre said:

Over a hundred. Read up on the battle of khasham. 

That was an ISIS related strike with pro-Syrian government forces that attacked our positions. I don’t think I’ve seen any evidence that Trump had anything to do with the decisions in that event.  

I was talking about Trump’s 50 tomahawks on an abandoned air strip as a response to the chemical weapons used by Assad.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites
suddenly shaggy

suddenly shaggy 929

Posted
Posted (edited)
1 hour ago, Hugo Stiglitz said:

Trump wouldn’t move against Iran militarily without an okay from daddy. 

Iran and Russia are disputing $3.2 Trillion in off shore oil and gas assets in the Caspian Sea (actually a lake). Russia dredged canal to connect the Caspian to the Volga and started treating it like a sea instead of a lake. That lets Russia and former Soviet states keep almost all of the money rather than dividing it equally as is required if it's a lake. Russia also took control of much of Iran's oil production and has been squeezing them there too. Iran has been protesting, but Putin is teaching them to shut up or it will get a lot worse. 

https://oilprice.com/Energy/Energy-General/How-Iran-Was-Swindled-Out-Of-32-Trillion.html

Edited by suddenly shaggy
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
 Share
Go to topic listing


Football ... Basketball ... Baseball ... Other Sports ... Futbol ... 🤫995🤫 ... Gambling ... Movies & TV ... Music ... Hobbies ... Lulz ... Food & Travel ... Daily Texan ... Business and Markets ... Cloak Room ... Help ... For Sale ... Board Discussion ... Subscribe!... Donate!... Advertise... COOKIE MONSTER!

×
×
  • Create New...