Donald Trump 2019

[DixonHur 11959]

1 minute ago, Js1 said:

Also, why does Spanky travel with cans of soup in his carry-on?

Where the fuck are you heating those up, brother?

Who said anything about heating?

[TornACL 7792]

The State of the Union is a teleprompter speech and not in front of his legions of dumbasses. This is a win for Trump to sneak out of that. 

[Doc Sam Beckett 5902]

8 minutes ago, Asithappens said:

I heard that, too.

Pathetic.

The interviewer (can't remember - David Green) flat out asked her "why is it so hard for you to answer the question if the shutdown is worth a possible air disaster or terrorist attack" (or words to that effect). She was a blithering idiot.

 

I haven't listened to it, and I'm sure she's a blithering idiot, but can you imagine trying to back up Trump’s positions? Holy shit, you'd have to be a debate champion just to come away with a draw. 

[HenryJames 67326]

 

[Js1 87175]

19 minutes ago, Doc Sam Beckett said:

 

I haven't listened to it, and I'm sure she's a blithering idiot, but can you imagine trying to back up Trump’s positions? Holy shit, you'd have to be a debate champion just to come away with a draw. 

"Why is it so hard for you to answer the question if the shutdown is worth a possible air disaster or terrorist attack?"

"Will it makes the libtards cry? Worth it. Checkmate." 

Edited January 24, 2019 by Js1

[SubliminalHorn 7009]

43 minutes ago, Asithappens said:

I heard that, too.

Pathetic.

The interviewer (can't remember - David Green?) flat out asked her "why is it so hard for you to answer the question if the shutdown is worth a possible air disaster or terrorist attack" (or words to that effect). She was a blithering idiot.

Also, I don't hear too many talking heads discussing how this may affect the 2020 elections. Maybe most have already decided that the GOP is toast. Except for the "base", that is.

At the sake of my sanity, do you have a link to the “interview”?

[Loco 3754]

4 minutes ago, SubliminalHorn said:

At the sake of my sanity, do you have a link to the “interview”?

https://www.npr.org/2019/01/24/688123082/white-house-wants-democrats-to-come-to-the-table-spokeswoman-says

[GRHorn 105]

 

56 minutes ago, Asithappens said:

I heard that, too.

Pathetic.

The interviewer (can't remember - David Green?) flat out asked her "why is it so hard for you to answer the question if the shutdown is worth a possible air disaster or terrorist attack" (or words to that effect). She was a blithering idiot.

What an inane question. If you have to bring in the threat of muh terrorists, then your argument is shitty. 

That includes anyone trying to link building the wall with fighting terrorists. 

[Loco 3754]

1 minute ago, GRHorn said:

 

What an inane question. If you have to bring in the threat of muh terrorists, then your argument is shitty. 

That includes anyone trying to link building the wall with fighting terrorists. 

Listen to the interview...  it's a valid question and was framed well (including citing FBI's lack of funding for informants and investigations).  The spokesperson sucked, I know that because i could have done a better job defending Trump's position.  There were a few softballs tossed in and she whiffed.

[Serak The Preparer 3484]

4 minutes ago, GRHorn said:

 

What an inane question. If you have to bring in the threat of muh terrorists, then your argument is shitty. 

That includes anyone trying to link building the wall with fighting terrorists. 

You realize, of course, that there is a difference between FBI shutting down / reducing resources into investigation of threats vs a wall which would do nothing to prevent non-existent terrorists from entering the southern border?

[Asithappens 978]

5 minutes ago, GRHorn said:

 

What an inane question. If you have to bring in the threat of muh terrorists, then your argument is shitty. 

That includes anyone trying to link building the wall with fighting terrorists. 

Really? Why? 

If the shutdown reduces our ability to fight terrorism (FBI/DEA/Homeland/etc.) to a measurable degree, or if it may significantly degrade air safety, why is that a shitty argument?

Not really following you there.

And it's not really a good analogy, imo anyway, to equate that type of argument to that of "build the wall, terrorists will fall". There are other, much better, ways to combat terrorism that building a wall. And, again imo, this shutdown is adversely affecting those much better ways.

[Gooby 642]

16 minutes ago, GRHorn said:

 

What an inane question. If you have to bring in the threat of muh terrorists, then your argument is shitty. 

That includes anyone trying to link building the wall with fighting terrorists. 

Bringing up "muh terrorists" certainly worked for all of the mouthbreathers who are clamoring for the wall.

[Seasick Sailor 3747]

 

[Brisketexan 106876]

1 hour ago, Js1 said:

Also, why does Spanky travel with cans of soup in his carry-on?

Where the fuck are you heating those up, brother?

 

1 hour ago, DixonHur said:

Who said anything about heating?

This.

If you never got back to your room in college at 3:00 am, drunk as hell and broke as fuck, and popped open a can of Campbell's Sirloin Burger Chunky Soup and ate that shit cold and straight outta the can, I don't want to know you.  You are dead to me.

[SuingToGetAMessageBoard? 3871]

29 minutes ago, GRHorn said:

 

 What an inane question. If you have to bring in the threat of muh terrorists, then your argument is shitty. 

That includes anyone trying to link building the wall with fighting terrorists. 

"Trump Keeps Invoking Terrorism To Get His Border Wall"

[Biff Tannen 46158]

3 minutes ago, Brisketexan said:

 

This.

If you never got back to your room in college at 3:00 am, drunk as hell and broke as fuck, and popped open a can of Campbell's Sirloin Burger Chunky Soup and ate that shit cold and straight outta the can, I don't want to know you.  You are dead to me.

I 100% did this.  That exact soup too.

[Js1 87175]

4 minutes ago, Brisketexan said:

 

This.

If you never got back to your room in college at 3:00 am, drunk as hell and broke as fuck, and popped open a can of Campbell's Sirloin Burger Chunky Soup and ate that shit cold and straight outta the can, I don't want to know you.  You are dead to me.

Hey, I've ready Spanky's travel manifestos.  The dude can afford food, he doesn't need to travel with canned soup in his carry-on.

[Asithappens 978]

2 minutes ago, Js1 said:

Hey, I've ready Spanky's travel manifestos.  The dude can afford food, he doesn't need to travel with canned soup in his carry-on.

It doesn't look like Spanky ever went to college. Or at least took an economics class.

Referring back to his exhortation to "prosecute and deport ALL" (emphasis his) illegals. Jesus, someone doesn't understand the marginal costs involved of getting those final few illegals out of the country. Simply not worth the money. 

[DigDug 1738]

9 hours ago, Mach 1 said:

I'm entering here at my own risk, once and only once.

I'm watching the movie Wall Street and it's very prescient re: Donald Trump.  He's obviously the Gecko character, preaching greed and loyalty above all else, selling bullshit to further his personal interests. 

The movie came out when Trump was on the rise in New York ... I suspect this is part of his DNA, the "greed is good" speech.  His (and our) problem is he probably assumed when the movie ended and Bud Fox went to jail without any mention of Gecko, that everything was cool, the rat took the heat and Gecko sailed off into the sunset.

Problem is none of that translates to government.  He'll hopefully learn soon enough.

I see what you're saying, but Trump's not anywhere smart enough for Gecko. He's much more a Billy from Fyre Fest.  Just full of shit at every turn. 

[SameSame 1751]

2 hours ago, Bojack said:

Has anyone ever gotten Trump to answer whether Wall will be built across Big Bend?  I think that's one of the easiest ways to show the absurdity of this bullshit.  

 

Are there any supporters of Wall here who'd like to answer that?

That neither of our senators or any of our reps have stood up and made a point to publicly ask this question or bring it out as an issue is disappointing, but not unexpected. 

Fucking pussies

[Brisketexan 106876]

6 minutes ago, Asithappens said:

It doesn't look like Spanky ever went to college. Or at least took an economics class.

Referring back to his exhortation to "prosecute and deport ALL" (emphasis his) illegals. Jesus, someone doesn't understand the marginal costs involved of getting those final few illegals out of the country. Simply not worth the money. 

Well, it also demonstrates a complete misunderstanding of an economic system built on the flow of money.

Let's take the ABSURD cost of a massive deportation effort out of the equation.  Let's just imagine, as a fantasy, that the Lord God Jehovah issued a command booming from the heavens, and POOF, every undocumented person in America was teleported back to their country of origin.  Let's look at the cascade of economic effects there.

Farms?  They're fucked.  I hope you like your strawberries and lettuce in rotten piles on the dirt, because that's where they'll be.  Alternatively, quadruple the price.

Construction?  Totally fucked in much of the country.  I mean, as a litigator, I'd love it -- the blown deadlines and liquidated damages litigation would keep me going for YEARS.

Restaurants?  They're fucked too.  Some will close (some have already closed in Austin because they can't find adequate staff at wages that make the business work).  At the rest, prices will go up.

Landscaping and janitorial services?  Same story.

How many landlords would go broke after losing many of their tenants?

How many stores (think La Michoacana on N. Lamar, and 100 other stores like it in Austin alone) will shut down because of a loss of customers?

How many local restaurants would take a similar hit?

And of course, we're also not including any of the calculations netting out their contribution to the tax base -- remember, when that illegal buys a new pair of boots, those are taxes going into our coffers.  When the apartment complex he was in depreciates because it can't fill its beds, that's value off of our tax base.  When he isn't working on that construction project, even under a fake SSN, those are SS dollars that aren't going into the coffers.

Immigration is one of those issues that, because of a minor itch, we seem intent on shooting ourselves in the dick economically with a .357.  It's just so fucking stupid.

 

[Chad Fuck 18134]

21 minutes ago, Biff Tannen said:

I 100% did this.  That exact soup too.

Those little bitty hamburgers are so cute and delicious.

[AbeFroman 3112]

29 minutes ago, Brisketexan said:

 

This.

If you never got back to your room in college at 3:00 am, drunk as hell and broke as fuck, and popped open a can of Campbell's Sirloin Burger Chunky Soup and ate that shit cold and straight outta the can, I don't want to know you.  You are dead to me.

Ranch style beans from a tin can hobo style.  /RM

[M12BH 545]

5 minutes ago, Chad Fuck said:

Those little bitty hamburgers are so cute and delicious.

Fucking amateurs.  I was pulling that shit in high school.  My mom never knew why she had to keep replacing that particular kind of soup.  

 

 

Edited January 24, 2019 by M12BH

[Texas Jeff 1999]

2 hours ago, Bojack said:

Has anyone ever gotten Trump to answer whether Wall will be built across Big Bend?

You would probably first have to explain that there *is* a Big Bend ...  start with the basics.

[Doc Sam Beckett 5902]

6 minutes ago, Brisketexan said:

 

Farms?  They're fucked.  I hope you like your strawberries and lettuce in rotten piles on the dirt, because that's where they'll be.  Alternatively, quadruple the price.

 

 

 

You mean like the Nunes farm in Iowa that employs undocumented immigrants? The one he and his family set up, after sneaking out of California? 

[Bozo_Casanova 26845]

Also, why does Spanky travel with cans of soup in his carry-on?
Where the fuck are you heating those up, brother?

I travel with cans of Tuna and Sardines packed in Olive Oil, because it’s a delicious snack and keeps me out of tedious conversations on the road.
Don’t understand soup, but you do you brother.

[Brisketexan 106876]

Just now, Doc Sam Beckett said:

 

You mean like the Nunes farm in Iowa that employs undocumented immigrants? The one he and his family set up, after sneaking out of California? 

Maybe.  It ain't just farms along the border.

I have a half brother who lives outside of Fargo - their whole circle of family and friends is connected to farming up there somehow.  And there's a shitton of mexicans up there.  A good number of them legal residents or citizens (there's a huge extended family from Crystal City up there).  But many others, not so much.  His take, and that of his peers, is "they're good folks who do good work.  And, when there are enough of 'em in an area, we get a new taqueria."  That's it.  Oh, and without them, the farmers in the area would have a damned hard time getting their work done.

But, you know, I mean, why should we even try to set up a system where those folks can do that hard work, benefiting the farmer and the end consumer, AND be "on the grid" in some way so that they pay appropriate taxes, and even a special guest worker fee, and be able to freely travel back and forth between home so they don't have to worry about their family (that is, if they can go home and spend time with their family, they won't feel compelled to bring them here)?

Naaah.  Let's shoot our dicks clean off with the "build a wall and deport 'em all!" plan.

[Brisketexan 106876]

2 minutes ago, Bozo_Casanova said:

I travel with cans of Tuna and Sardines packed in Olive Oil, because it’s a delicious snack and keeps me out of tedious conversations on the road.
Don’t understand soup, but you do you brother.

This guy kept a can of tuna in his car in case of emergencies....

The resemblance to Bozo is uncanny.

[horncyclist 1391]

On the question about big bend, he's started saying that in some places natural barriers make a wall unnecessary. I assume this would apply to Big Bend. But is there any where to see where he's proposing to build new wall? My understanding is that they can be effective in urban areas but I'm guessing most of those areas already have physical barriers. 

[GRHorn 105]

50 minutes ago, Gooby said:

Bringing up "muh terrorists" certainly worked for all of the mouthbreathers who are clamoring for the wall.

 

 

37 minutes ago, SuingToGetAMessageBoard? said:

"Trump Keeps Invoking Terrorism To Get His Border Wall"

Congrats on not even reading the 3rd sentence in my 3 sentence post. 

[Pescado_Rojo 19583]

4 minutes ago, Bozo_Casanova said:

I travel with cans of Tuna and Sardines packed in Olive Oil, because it’s a delicious snack and keeps me out of tedious conversations on the road.
Don’t understand soup, but you do you brother.

I like to reheat Salmon in the office microwave for the same reason

 

[GRHorn 105]

1 hour ago, Asithappens said:

Really? Why? 

If the shutdown reduces our ability to fight terrorism (FBI/DEA/Homeland/etc.) to a measurable degree, or if it may significantly degrade air safety, why is that a shitty argument?

Not really following you there.

And it's not really a good analogy, imo anyway, to equate that type of argument to that of "build the wall, terrorists will fall". There are other, much better, ways to combat terrorism that building a wall. And, again imo, this shutdown is adversely affecting those much better ways.

Does anyone have any specifics as far as how much funding has been cut for FBI/Dea/Homeland Security?

[SimonBolivar 11063]

I loved a cold can of spaghetti-o's with meatballs as a kid. I thought it lost some flavor when heated up.

[GRHorn 105]

I suspect that a not insignificant amount of the outrage/attempted hysteria over the shutdown is that it’s indirectly highlighting how much of our government is probably expendable. I wouldn’t even think about it if the news wasn’t going on and on about it. 

[Brisketexan 106876]

Just now, horncyclist said:

On the question about big bend, he's started saying that in some places natural barriers make a wall unnecessary. I assume this would apply to Big Bend. But is there any where to see where he's proposing to build new wall? My understanding is that they can be effective in urban areas but I'm guessing most of those areas already have physical barriers. 

That's the hell of it.  He's more focused on a rhetorical "win" to appeal to his moron base than he actually is in any sound policy or action.

A sane, rational president would present a border security package.  It would include funding for BP, some more immigration judges, some technology as appropriate, and maybe even refurbishing/replacing and adding to fencing in specifically-defined areas.  He could even give a short speech demonstrating that: "For example, here you see our current border fencing just ending abruptly 4 miles outside of McAllen.  Monitoring shows that illegal border crossings in this area are up to 100 per week.  Our analysis shows that by extending the fence an additional 2 miles, where more rugged country starts, we can sharply reduce those illegal crossings, for a cost of this segment of only $10 million -- and that's a fence that will last for decades, and continue to protect this vulnerable spot."

A rational, cogent approach like that would be difficult to oppose.

But he doesn't have one.  He literally has "build a wall, crime will fall!"  That's as much of an explanation as he's capable of giving.  And to negotiate for it....he's engaged in classic, negative negotiation tactics: do something harmful (say, take away DACA protection), then offer to STOP doing that harmful thing if you'll give him what he wants (WALL!), or else he'll do something ELSE harmful (shut down the government).  That's a stupid game, and WOPR had it figured out:

[hobbes2702 13453]

Just now, GRHorn said:

I suspect that a not insignificant amount of the outrage/attempted hysteria over the shutdown is that it’s indirectly highlighting how much of our government is probably expendable. I wouldn’t even think about it if the news wasn’t going on and on about it. 

That’s because you’re not getting your food at homeless shelters. What an unbelievably stupid fucking post.

[bad_teammate 13501]

Brain Genius: "If it doesn't impact me, why should it even exist?"

[GRHorn 105]

1 minute ago, Brisketexan said:

That's the hell of it.  He's more focused on a rhetorical "win" to appeal to his moron base than he actually is in any sound policy or action.

A sane, rational president would present a border security package.  It would include funding for BP, some more immigration judges, some technology as appropriate, and maybe even refurbishing/replacing and adding to fencing in specifically-defined areas.  He could even give a short speech demonstrating that: "For example, here you see our current border fencing just ending abruptly 4 miles outside of McAllen.  Monitoring shows that illegal border crossings in this area are up to 100 per week.  Our analysis shows that by extending the fence an additional 2 miles, where more rugged country starts, we can sharply reduce those illegal crossings, for a cost of this segment of only $10 million -- and that's a fence that will last for decades, and continue to protect this vulnerable spot."

A rational, cogent approach like that would be difficult to oppose.

But he doesn't have one.  He literally has "build a wall, crime will fall!"  That's as much of an explanation as he's capable of giving.  And to negotiate for it....he's engaged in classic, negative negotiation tactics: do something harmful (say, take away DACA protection), then offer to STOP doing that harmful thing if you'll give him what he wants (WALL!), or else he'll do something ELSE harmful (shut down the government).  That's a stupid game, and WOPR had it figured out:

What would you say to say giving him half the money he wants for a wall along with a more comprehensive strategy to address border security/immigrants already here?

[Brisketexan 106876]

Just now, GRHorn said:

I suspect that a not insignificant amount of the outrage/attempted hysteria over the shutdown is that it’s indirectly highlighting how much of our government is probably expendable. I wouldn’t even think about it if the news wasn’t going on and on about it. 

I also wouldn't even think about the Calfornia wildfires killing 85 people if the news wasn't going on an on about it.

Oh wait, yes I would, because I'm not a fucking sociopath, and I give a shit about my fellow human beings.

Just because you are not a) a gov't worker or their family directly impacted by the shutdown, or b) are not directly involved in a business that relies on any number of gov't services that are presently unavailable, doesn't mean that it's not having a significant harmful effect.  It just means that you personally haven't been hurt by this particular disaster.  Just like I wasn't hurt personally by Harvey, Maria, the california fires, etc. etc.  But, I'm not a complete fucking sociopath, so I cared anyway.

[Brisketexan 106876]

Just now, GRHorn said:

What would you say to say giving him half the money he wants for a wall along with a more comprehensive strategy to address border security/immigrants already here?

Nope.  Not a penny.  Because the bad policy is only part of the problem.  Read the remainder of my post.  You cannot reward a negotiation tactic of "do something harmful (say, take away DACA protection), then offer to STOP doing that harmful thing if you'll give him what he wants (WALL!), or else he'll do something ELSE harmful (shut down the government)."  That is a guarantee of getting even more of that negotiation tactic.

His goal is fucking stupid and not articulated in any meaningful way.

His tactics are unacceptable, and rewarding them in any way would be stupid as hell.

Other than that, he's doing a great job on this issue.  Really bang-up work.

If he wants to abandon the tactics I quoted above, and instead, actually negotiate in good faith, AND he presented a plan that called for a physical barrier in specific locations for supportable reasons, I'd be all about it.  But he won't.  Because we're dealing with a toddler, who negotiates like a toddler.

[Biff Tannen 46158]

30 minutes ago, Brisketexan said:

Let's just imagine, as a fantasy, that the Lord God Jehovah issued a command booming from the heavens, and POOF, every undocumented person in America was teleported back to their country of origin.

[retread 2951]

20 minutes ago, Brisketexan said:

But, you know, I mean, why should we even try to set up a system where those folks can do that hard work, benefiting the farmer and the end consumer, AND be "on the grid" in some way so that they pay appropriate taxes, and even a special guest worker fee, and be able to freely travel back and forth between home so they don't have to worry about their family (that is, if they can go home and spend time with their family, they won't feel compelled to bring them here)?

Naaah.  Let's shoot our dicks clean off with the "build a wall and deport 'em all!" plan.

Preach. Why not look at immigrants from Central America as assets? Look at it as a problem with a solution as opposed to a concocted bogeyman that's gonna rape errbody up in here.

It's no more intractable than healthcare, but we've lost the ability to legislate and to govern ourselves equitably.

Edited January 24, 2019 by retread

[GRHorn 105]

7 minutes ago, Brisketexan said:

Nope.  Not a penny.  Because the bad policy is only part of the problem.  Read the remainder of my post.  You cannot reward a negotiation tactic of "do something harmful (say, take away DACA protection), then offer to STOP doing that harmful thing if you'll give him what he wants (WALL!), or else he'll do something ELSE harmful (shut down the government)."  That is a guarantee of getting even more of that negotiation tactic.

His goal is fucking stupid and not articulated in any meaningful way.

His tactics are unacceptable, and rewarding them in any way would be stupid as hell.

Other than that, he's doing a great job on this issue.  Really bang-up work.

If he wants to abandon the tactics I quoted above, and instead, actually negotiate in good faith, AND he presented a plan that called for a physical barrier in specific locations for supportable reasons, I'd be all about it.  But he won't.  Because we're dealing with a toddler, who negotiates like a toddler.

What would be negotiating in good faith?  Re-establishing DACA protections and then starting over?  I’m gonna go out on a limb and say Pelosi wouldn’t do anything then. It wouldn’t satisfy you either.  As you said, it’s about Trump and his tactics and personality. 

[Patrick Bateman 3966]

8 hours ago, ChiTownDoc said:

I was nodding in agreement until you named Icahn.  Icahn is an asshole but no where near the buffoon trump is.  Icahn wouldn’t bankrupt a fucking casino (multiple times).   

No, I meant Gekko is actually influenced as a character by Icahn and Boesky per Oliver Stone.

 

Edited January 24, 2019 by Patrick Bateman

[Js1 87175]

14 minutes ago, GRHorn said:

What would you say to say giving him half the money he wants for a wall along with a more comprehensive strategy to address border security/immigrants already here?

Because every "strategy" by this White House to offer this in exchange for wall money turns out to be pretty bad/restrictive poison pill and just a Stephen Miller masturbatory fantasy.

Edited January 24, 2019 by Js1

[Biff Tannen 46158]

WALL TALK STILL NOT GOING AWAY

[Dertyberd 394]

12 minutes ago, GRHorn said:

I suspect that a not insignificant amount of the outrage/attempted hysteria over the shutdown is that it’s indirectly highlighting how much of our government is probably expendable. I wouldn’t even think about it if the news wasn’t going on and on about it. 

It's not highlighting shit.  We can't know if parts of the gov't are expendable or not like AirTraffic Control, Justice, Courts, TSA, IRS, or FBI.  They're still going to work, just not getting paid.  That's the fucking problem.  The workers should be able to not show up without reprisal and truly shut the fucker down.  Then you'd see it matters.  

[horncyclist 1391]

19 minutes ago, GRHorn said:

I suspect that a not insignificant amount of the outrage/attempted hysteria over the shutdown is that it’s indirectly highlighting how much of our government is probably expendable. I wouldn’t even think about it if the news wasn’t going on and on about it. 

A lot of the impact of this is not going to be apparent immediately or possibly not ever discernible, but there's no doubt an impact. I'm a federal antitrust attorney. We had to suspend the investigations we working on. We'll eventually continue, but the month of lost work means a one month delay in those investigations and that resources will be lost down the road that could go to investigating other conduct. Other than targets and third-parties connected to these investigations, no one is going to notice but that doesn't mean there's not an impact. I would guess most of the effects of the shutdown fall in this category of longer-term projects. 

In case I'm doxxed, I'm speaking in my personal capacity and these views are my own. Not that I could represent my agency anyway, as I am not legally permitted to work. 

Edited January 24, 2019 by horncyclist

[Doc Sam Beckett 5902]

22 minutes ago, Brisketexan said:

Maybe.  It ain't just farms along the border.

I have a half brother who lives outside of Fargo - their whole circle of family and friends is connected to farming up there somehow.  And there's a shitton of mexicans up there.  A good number of them legal residents or citizens (there's a huge extended family from Crystal City up there).  But many others, not so much.  His take, and that of his peers, is "they're good folks who do good work.  And, when there are enough of 'em in an area, we get a new taqueria."  That's it.  Oh, and without them, the farmers in the area would have a damned hard time getting their work done.

 

They wouldn't have a damned hard time, their farms would crumble just like the watermelon, tomato, blueberry etc farms did in Alabama when that state chased away the undocumented immigrants...