The President Donald Trump Thread - page 87

I thought I would create a thread where we can talk about what he's currently up to. No particular topic but one that's ongoing with what he's doing and saying. I'll start with this speech on... Read More

  1. by   ElvishDNP
    ahhhhh, never mind. Don't engage anymore, Elvish.
  2. by   Avid reader
  3. by   elkpark
    Quote from SC_RNDude
    So, I get replies to my nothing-burger and fiddle comments. Did anyone actually read this?

    No, Trump Did Not Engage in ‘Witness Tampering’ Just Because Comey Maybe Got Shook | Law News

    Anyone have anything meaningful to say about it?
    Well, my comment would be that it's an opinion piece by a law student, so, meh, and you have previously been dismissive of others' sources as being "opinion pieces," but I'm guessing you wouldn't consider that "meaningful."
  4. by   macawake
    Quote from SC_RNDude
    Did your 150 IQ help you detect he had the ability to win the election?
    If you go back and read my posts from before the election you'll see that I said several times that I didn't think it was likely that he'd win, but I also never ruled it out. The reason I didn't was because I was worried that the widespread and organized campaign to smear Clinton, might actually work. That and the fact that I'm keenly aware of the condition that I refer to as the human folly. Again, if you look back at my posts I said on more than one occasion that deciding to vote for Trump motivated mainly by dislike for Clinton, would be cutting off your nose to spite your face.

    There have been populist, isolationist and even authoritarian winds blowing for some time. I actually saw Brexit as a very real possibility before the referendum, when most people thought it couldn't happen. That was another incident that proves that the democratic system isn't completely without flaws/vulnerabilities, still it's superior to all the other systems out there. It's not perfect, but we just have to live with the warts. Yes, I realize that I'm sounding rather condescending and elitist, but it is what I believe.

    Ask yourself, why I would have been here sharing my warnings about a potential Trump presidency if I didn't think there was any chance at all that he'd win?

    Great. More anonymous sources, who didn't want to be named citing "the sensitivity of the issue".
    I get the feeling that your knee-jerk reaction is to reject every story which is based on anonymous sources, especially when published in media outlets that you don't favor, out of hand. In my opinion that's a mistake. The Washington Post piece that avid reader links to is extremely interesting. It's also of course, deeply troubling. This is explosive stuff. If it turns out to be accurate, no wonder the sources don't want to be named. Do you grasp the sensitive nature of a source with direct access to Putin (whether that means a human asset or some sort of technological method)? There is very real risk involved here for someone.

    If the WaPo piece proves accurate in all parts, the way the Obama administration chose to handle this will no doubt be analyzed and dissected for many years to come. I don't know what the best course of action would have been. Considering the climate at the time, with the allegations of election "rigging" that were floating around. If I remember correctly, wasn't even Trump and the campaign declining to state in advance that they would accept the outcome of the election as legitimate? That in itself was astounding as it stoked the flames in an already overheated and adversarial political climate.

    Casting doubt on the legitimacy and fairness of the elections is to undermine people's faith in the democracy they live in. Serious (and irresponsible) business indeed. (I suspect this might have been helped along by foreign influences with the intent to destabilize). Imagine if the Obama administration would have made all the details of the meddling public just before the election? How would Donald Trump and his supporters have reacted?

    Doesn't the fact that an adversarial nation did its level best to interfere with your election bother you? The fact that they did, isn't up for debate. It's an established fact. If the Trump campaign colluded and coordinated with Russia to aid and abet in Russia's meddling is still up for debate, since the investigation is still ongoing and we haven't seen the end result yet, but the meddling itself is real. It happened. Even if it seems to have benefited you this time it should still concern you. It should concern you for patriotic reasons and it should concern you because Putin is neither a Democrat or a Republican. You don't know how he'll direct his efforts next time. Or the next, or the one after that.. Because make no mistake, you haven't seen the end of it.

    I don't know if you have the required knowledge of history and geopolitics to understand how a strengthened Russia and a weakened Europe will ultimately affect the U.S.? Despite Trump's desire to build walls and attempt to isolate/barricade yourselves/screw the rest of the world (the Bannon factor), you are inexorably linked to the global community. You do not function in a vacuum and what Trump's doing, is affecting the world order as we've known it for the past 70 years. A world order that has brought peace and prosperity for both of us.

    I wonder if people appreciate exactly how extensive and widespread the efforts to thwart Hillary Clinton's chance to win the election actually was. The tentacles even reached the political forum on AllNurses

    I don't know if some of the troll-like presences we had here before the election were actually on the Russians' payroll, or just the far right's propaganda machine, but what was clear was that they were getting all their lines from some handbook/manual. When I warned about the Putin's shenanigans (and this was before the election), one of them in an attempt to taunt or ridicule me asked if I was afraid of Russians underneath my bed. At the time, I just thought that was a rather intellectually stunted way of avoiding real debate. Just more deflection and hoopla.

    Then I saw posters in the comment sections of two U.S. online newspapers, one German, two French and one Italian newspaper ask the exact same thing of other posters voicing concern about Russian aggression. "You afraid of Russkies under your bed?" (brainless guffaw)... Funny how that little taunt actually showed up in at least (these are only the ones I'm aware of, but there might be more) four different countries/languages.

    Remember how these posters were always exitedly telling us when the next wikileaks "bombshell" was due to arrive shortly? Huge drumroll of anticipation... And sure, enough.. Something would land shortly. (Most of the so called bombshells were really kind of "meh", but they tried hard to make them sound very significant). I seem to remember that one or two Trump surrogates were also doing the rounds promoting the next wikileaks "revelation" in advance.

    And then you have the man himself; "Russia, if you're listening"...

    So, I get replies to my nothing-burger and fiddle comments. Did anyone actually read this?
    You got fiddle comments because you brought up fiddles

    You seem to be focusing heavily on the meaning of Trump's tweet to former FBI Director Comey. I'm not an expert on U.S. law, but I can still offer an opinion. The tweet itself, in isolation, probably doesn't fulfill the legal requirements for witness tampering. However, I suspect that the investigators are looking at the big picture.

    Director Comey was in charge of the agency investigating possible collusion between the Trump campaign and Russian interference in your election. Trump fires Comey. The official White House story is initially that this was because of the AG's and deputy AG's recommendation. Trump then contradicts that narrative, saying that he was going to fire Comey regardless and that he was thinking about the Trump/Russia thing when he made his decision. Then he says something rather unfortunate to the Russian (of all people) foreign minister about the pressure being off.. Then he tweets that Comey "better hope there are no 'tapes'". Then he admits that this was done to pressure Comey (yes, ostensibly to garner the truth, but it was still done with the express purpose of trying to influence behavior). Do you see why this whole chain of events might potentially become problematic for him?

    I don't know what the final outcome of the investigation will be, but it's premature to dismiss the whole thing as a "nothing-burger". As I've said a zillion times before, we'll just have to wait and see.




    If I have to guess, I'm still sticking to my previous assessment. I think that the heart of this matter lies in financial ties. That's in my opinion where the investigators really need to shine a bright light so that we can find out if something unsavoury hides in the murky depths.






    Avid reader, I'm stuck between a rock and a hard place If I "like" your posts where you say nice things about me I kind of look pretty conceited , if I don't I look impolite. I always try to be polite, so my likes are thanks for your kind words! There are a lot of smart people posting here, it's one of the charms of AN.


    @ElvishDNP, please keep posting! I appreciate and enjoy your posts.
    Last edit by macawake on Jun 26
  5. by   Lil Nel
    Quote from ElvishDNP
    ahhhhh, never mind. Don't engage anymore, Elvish.
    I completely understand this sentiment. Nobody on this post is going to change anybody else's mind regarding Trump.

    I will share this story. Last month, I traveled to NY. During my flight from BWI to ALB, I was seated in the middle seat next to a White, elderly man on the aisle. Many of you know that I had been reading David McCollough's book about John Adams.

    Well, I opened my John Adams book, and the elderly man on my left looked over (several times) to see what I was reading. I said: John Adams, second president of the United States. We then had a short discussion as to whether his son, John Quincy was president number 4 or 8 (I said 8).

    This man then asked who my favorite president was. I replied: John Adams, and then asked if he had a favorite president. He bellowed: Number 45! It took me a minute to recall 45, and then I said, oh, Trump.

    I then said, funny you should say that because I have marked passages in this book where Adams would differ with Trump. Abigail and John Adams raised their children to have a duty to country, humanity and public service.

    I then asked this man if he lived in NY. He YELLED back: It doesn't matter where I live. I am a deplorable.

    His reaction stunned me since I never said anything about him being a deplorable, nor had I raised my voice during our interaction.

    So I said: I ask because I am from the northeast and think about moving to upstate NY, but the friend I am visiting warns me that it isn't as liberal as I think it is. Perhaps you would enjoy where I live. I live in Kentucky.

    The man then threw his hands towards me and yelled: I have had enough of this. I am done!

    He then attempted to lower his seat tray, but his large, rotund stomach was in the way, and prevented the tray from lowering.

    I sat there, reading my book and thought: Besides the fact that we are both citizens of the United States, I have NOTHING in common with this person. NOTHING. If a Syrian, refugee family of five had been sitting in the back of the plane, I would have moved and sat with them.

    I share this story because it is obvious that we are ALL deeply entrenched in our own beliefs.
  6. by   Avid reader
    Maccas, you should be conceited. You obviously like myself spend the time reading various reputable publications and you understand and most importantly are able to relate the Geo politics to current events. Not many people can make the connections. I think there are many intelligent posters and being that they are Nurses makes me ever so proud. I like that they are both Republicans and Democrats, I wish the Republicans would explain their views more clearly with rationales but I suspect that the base knowledge to expound upon re Geo politics and history may be lacking. It's not from a lack of intelligence, just a poor education system. We were lucky to have European education facilities where almost every facet is touched upon or covered. It's disheartening that in a country that is tied to the global economy, so few people actually know the world. It's tragic how much our culture is tied to beauty and appearance instead of Substance. It shouldn't matter one whit what a politician looks like, only his knowledge and abilities. It's preposterous that people are unable to know a used car salesman like Trump when they see one but I'm flabbergasted that one segment of the population is so ignorant that 90% of Republicans actually voted for Trump. I really fear for our future when so many college educated were part of that 90% and unable to differentiate rhetoric from seriously accomplished people who were so very capable. In the 21st century, the misogyny leaves me speechless because it had to have played a major part in discrediting Hillary.

    How can people who are so wrapped up in their politics know so little about politics?
  7. by   macawake
    Quote from Avid reader
    Maccas, you should be conceited.
    Oh no, I try very hard not to be. From a practical viewpoint, you simply don't win hearts and minds that way. More importantly though, it's a trait that I definitely don't find at all attractive in others, so I really do my best to avoid it.

    And again, all it really boils down to; is dumb luck. I was fortunate enough to have parents and grandparents who had the will, means and ability to support and nurture my inquisitive mind. It doesn't make me special, it makes me lucky. Enough about me.

    I really fear for our future when so many college educated were part of that 90% and unable to differentiate rhetoric from seriously accomplished people who were so very capable.
    This is the part that really has me stumped. I could understand if people said that yes, they see him for what he is but for whatever (ideological?) reason decided to vote for him despite that. (I still wouldn't think it was a good idea, but at least I would understand it).

    What I can't understand is the refusal to see (or is it acknowledge?) the fact that he's constantly contradicting himself, forever changing his own position to the polar opposite, on a dime. Says things that are demonstrably not true. Backs down on campaign promises. How can people keep on ignoring and/or defending that? It shouldn't matter if you have a college degree or not, I would expect that any and every adult should be able to see right through him. It's not like his character traits and behaviors are subtle.

    So far in the many threads I've posted I've always referred to him by his name, but I just thought of a suitable moniker. In my humble opinion you've elected yourselves a Gaslighter-in-Chief. I don't necessarily think that's it's a deliberate strategy. If I were to hazard a guess, I suspect he's simply saying what he thinks is the most advantageous for him at the specific moment he's saying it. Makes for a perpetually changing narrative.



    I must be tired I forgot one of the most important things in the Trump-Comey saga when I was outlining the timeline in my previous post. How could I forget that ill-fated little tête-à-tête that took place at the White House when he asked Comey to seeing his way clear to letting Flynn go? And the loyalty thing? Asking the AG and the VP (as well I think?), to leave the room first, at the very least suggests that he realized that this request wasn't entirely on the up-and-up.





    @Lil Nel, what a terrible trip I'm not convinced that I would have been able to keep my poker face intact if I had encountered that man.

    I then asked this man if he lived in NY. He YELLED back: It doesn't matter where I live. I am a deplorable.

    His reaction stunned me since I never said anything about him being a deplorable, nor had I raised my voice during our interaction.
    He sounds angry. Perhaps he felt that his judgment has been questioned before, and he instantly took a defensive position. He probably could tell from your tone of voice when you said: oh, Trump. I'm not blaming you, he would have heard it in my voice too. No matter how hard I tried, if an answer like his caught me off guard; the incredulity would have been there. It is rather sad though that the climate is so inflamed and divisive, that this is the response you get from a stranger in what was supposed to have been polite, inconsequential small talk.
  8. by   margin261
    Adding my 2¢ on the "tapes" discussion. It was clearly trump's intention to intimidate- or in his own words "rattle" Comey & "keep him honest".

    Was Comey intimidated? Doubt it. According to dated, contemporaneous notes of the meetings/calls- his testimony lined up.

    What some aren't taking into consideration is the tweet came from someone that is a habitual liar, who says whatever suits him at the time and so assumes everyone else does the same. He has difficulty imagining someone wouldn't embellish to improve their situation.

    Had the situation been reversed, that tweet directed at him might have given him pause- though I doubt it- so he just assumed it would be effective tactics on Comey.

    Being truthful & honorable are just so far outside of his nature, he can't imagine them or recognize them in others. It's just not the filter with which he views the world.
  9. by   Avid reader
    Three-quarters of world has little or no confidence in Trump, Pew study finds | US news | The Guardian


    I hope people can understand the significance of this. We live in an increasingly international world. Almost everything that happens coincides with world markets and international investments etc. Their impressions of us parallels the goods or services we sell. I think Chucky has probably the worst appeal of any President in history and that directly reflects upon us. Don't think that the healthcare industry is unaffected by this derision. I personally know for a fact that many European, Chinese and Japanese antennas have been raised re technology and medical advancement sharing. GSK is now experiencing ripples in these markets because of Trump's lack of integrity which is wrongly being associated with trumpism. It doesn't help that we are conditioned to not discuss politics unlike many other open cultures.
  10. by   Lil Nel
    Oh, but Avid Reader, you missed the point of the story! RUSSIA is the exception. It is the one bright spot in the report for Donnie-boy. Yep. There's Trump, making America Great Again! LMAO.
    Last edit by Lil Nel on 8:01 am : Reason: Spelling

close