Current Affairs Donald Trump POS: Judgement cometh and that right soon

[Gouldy]

I've literally just seen that and was about to post , very interesting news.

I've said before I thought Russia might end up being a big pile of nothing but as time has gone on more and more and then more and more has been revealed that makes that unlikely.

I still think there won't be a huge smoking gun. I think the MSM and Democrats have catapulted into this issue as a reason to excuse their loss. However, I'm not denying there are clear financial ties and perhaps some Russian 'interference' in the election - I think if Trump does get eventually impeached it'll be for perjury: see Bill Clinton (although Clinton never ultimately got impeached)

 

[Gouldy]

The only semi-coherent foreign policy debate on that lamentable and generally policy free GE campaign was the one over how to deal with the second largest nuclear power in the world: Trump was quite obviously taking a less hawkish line than Clinton on it - a woman who sabre rattled right the way through that GE.

Sorry, but your attempt to make this latest turn of events look predictable wont wash.

I mean how many times do we have to read about Trump making ill-informed, rash remarks before you actually think oh yeah, this guys temperament is fairly predictable in his reaction to events?

 

[Gouldy]

I mean how many times do we have to read about Trump making ill-informed, rash remarks before you actually think oh yeah, this guys temperament is fairly predictable in his reaction to events?

Millions upon millions of people foresaw this coming. Don't be so naive @davek

 

[Harryflashman]

I still think there won't be a huge smoking gun. I think the MSM and Democrats have catapulted into this issue as a reason to excuse their loss. However, I'm not denying there are clear financial ties and perhaps some Russian 'interference' in the election - I think if Trump does get eventually impeached it'll be for perjury: see Bill Clinton (although Clinton never ultimately got impeached)

Like so many things it can be the cover up that kills you rather than the initial act . I think there could certainly be some fallout there .

I do also think it's interesting how keen trump was to have mueller stay away from his earlier business and financial practices , once they get their teeth into it who knows what they'll find .

 

[Rook]

...hopefully he'll be impeached.

Heard enough from this feller to believe he's dangerously out of whack. The U.S. political class and judiciary need to act fast to stand this man down.

If Mueller released a tape showing Putin hand delivering suitcases of money and gold to Trump personally, Trump would not get impeached. Its all tribal politics now. Sure we are still a democracy, but its democracy closer to what you call democracy in the Phillippines (at least we aren't Brasil!!!!!!.....yet).

As a country we've had our troubles before. The south in the 60s, a couple of red scares not to mention more than a few uber-wealthy men putting a major stamp on US politics (Carnegie, Stanford, Rockefeller etc). However usually the govt. (and to a lesser extent the press) has done the right thing, eventually. I just don't see it right now. The 2 other branches of government are all too happy to give up power to the executive branch these days, whether its on a local level (police) or a national level (president). Sure congress is all we have to stop Obama or have to stop Trump, but what you don't see anyone really standing up to say we have to curb executive power.

I doubt anything catalysmic is going to happen under Trump. The problem is the millions behind him that will support him no matter what. The question is how do you change this? After all how do you convince millions of people who want to be lied too and be blackslapped with empty promises to change? With facts?? The real scary part is if they don't change (luckily history says they eventually will, usually that happens when they need govt to bail out their behinds) someone even worse and who has a brain in his head will get in.

 

[verreauxi]

I'm genuinly baffled by the idea that pops up here every so often: the easily refuted fantasy of "Well Trump is no worse than Hilary" or its laughable sibling "Hilary would have been worse." These sentiments only exist because folks have too much pride to admit they're wrong. Hilary certainly is not an ideal candidate, far from it in fact, but trying to suggest Hilary is cut from the cloth as Donald only exposes the perverse reluctance of Trump supporters to yell out that the emperor has no clothes. But if you continue to believe that fantasy, then I have a duck to sell you; it sh1ts out crow-flavored @ss-twinkies. For the small price of a nuclear holocaust and unprecedented levels of corruption, xenophobia, racism, and sexism, you can buy my duck and eat crow every day of the week.

 

[bobbydigital]

I mean how many times do we have to read about Trump making ill-informed, rash remarks before you actually think oh yeah, this guys temperament is fairly predictable in his reaction to events?

Blind Freddy would of seen this coming. No idea what he is on about.

 

[davek]

I think it was absolutely predictable that N.Korea would at some point be a future issue . I think it was also predictable that Trump's reaction would be brash and ridiculous. I think your inability to either understand this or foresee such issues would be down to the fact that you effectively endorsed Trump.

Do you think Clinton wouldn't be right here in this position if she'd have had to face up to the North Koreans? Stripped of the colourful language she most certainly would. She condemned only a fortnight ago Trump's offer to negotiate with the North Koreans.

She'd be worse than shredded wheat head.

Unreal binary opposition being erected here: Clinton a cool headed rationalist versus Trump the only lunatic in the asylum.

 

[davek]

Millions upon millions of people foresaw this coming. Don't be so naive @davek

You have a very quaint view of what the alternative outcome to the last US election would have been.

 

[Gouldy]

Do you think Clinton wouldn't be right here in this position if she'd have had to face up to the North Koreans? Stripped of the colourful language she most certainly would. She condemned only a fortnight ago Trump's offer to negotiate with the North Koreans.

She'd be worse than shredded wheat head.

Unreal binary opposition being erected here: Clinton a cool headed rationalist versus Trump the only lunatic in the asylum.

You're view is based on a wrong assumption: that people arguing against Trump's actions believe that Hillary Clinton would have been a 'better' option. We note your deflection on this issue to Hillary Clinton. However it is effectively irrelevant as she is not POTUS so stop leaning on a false dichotomy to make your points.

 

[Gouldy]

You have a very quaint view of what the alternative outcome to the last US election would have been.

That's cute. But again wrong - I'm not impervious to the very valid criticisms and reservations of HRC. However, as stated previously that line of argument is irrelevant to the issue at hand

 

[davek]

If Mueller released a tape showing Putin hand delivering suitcases of money and gold to Trump personally, Trump would not get impeached. Its all tribal politics now. Sure we are still a democracy, but its democracy closer to what you call democracy in the Phillippines (at least we aren't Brasil!!!!!!.....yet).

As a country we've had our troubles before. The south in the 60s, a couple of red scares not to mention more than a few uber-wealthy men putting a major stamp on US politics (Carnegie, Stanford, Rockefeller etc). However usually the govt. (and to a lesser extent the press) has done the right thing, eventually. I just don't see it right now. The 2 other branches of government are all too happy to give up power to the executive branch these days, whether its on a local level (police) or a national level (president). Sure congress is all we have to stop Obama or have to stop Trump, but what you don't see anyone really standing up to say we have to curb executive power.

I doubt anything catalysmic is going to happen under Trump. The problem is the millions behind him that will support him no matter what. The question is how do you change this? After all how do you convince millions of people who want to be lied too and be blackslapped with empty promises to change? With facts?? The real scary part is if they don't change (luckily history says they eventually will, usually that happens when they need govt to bail out their behinds) someone even worse and who has a brain in his head will get in.

But the fact that Trump is mired in controversy after controversy and barely able to function underlines that the old system is still pretty much in tact and effectively calling the shots...and with the support of the vast majority of media outlets?

Looking from the outside this looks like a presidency placed in quarantine and the only thing to be decided is exactly how long he should get before he's seen off the premises with the most convincing narrative that it was the only acton to take. The less than hard core supporters who got him over the line seem to be deserting him if the personal poll rating trend is anything to go by.

 

[Rook]

I'm genuinly baffled by the idea that pops up here every so often: the easily refuted fantasy of "Well Trump is no worse than Hilary" or its laughable sibling "Hilary would have been worse." These sentiments only exist because folks have too much pride to admit they're wrong. Hilary certainly is not an ideal candidate, far from it in fact, but trying to suggest Hilary is cut from the cloth as Donald only exposes the perverse reluctance of Trump supporters to yell out that the emperor has no clothes. But if you continue to believe that fantasy, then I have a duck to sell you; it sh1ts out crow-flavored @ss-twinkies. For the small price of a nuclear holocaust and unprecedented levels of corruption, xenophobia, racism, and sexism, you can buy my duck and eat crow every day of the week.

Hillary was just Obama without the charm. They are both Rockefeller Republicians (for you Brits, a Rockefeller Republician is George Bush I) would have been Republicans if the GOP didn't cast almost every single one of them out. There would have been very little change.

 

[davek]

You're view is based on a wrong assumption: that people arguing against Trump's actions believe that Hillary Clinton would have been a 'better' option. We note your deflection on this issue to Hillary Clinton. However it is effectively irrelevant as she is not POTUS so stop leaning on a false dichotomy to make your points.

There's no deflection: the original statement of 'support' in the GE campaign from me was a Clinton/Trump comparison of likely warmongering.

Your inability to go back to source is duly noted.

 

[verreauxi]

Hillary was just Obama without the charm. They are both Rockefeller Republicians (for you Brits, a Rockefeller Republician is George Bush I) would have been Republicans if the GOP didn't cast almost every single one of them out. There would have been very little change.

I'm fine with little change, as opposed to this massive downward spiral of lunacy, irrationality, and destruction of government on various levels.