Jump to content

The Trump Presidency Thread


Recommended Posts

  • Replies 1.9k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

He misses me so he's trying to fill the void with a sugar substitute ( that's you suited )

I've had it.   He did not ****ing dispute the story   He made a statement about things that weren't in the ****ing story which means he confirmed the ****ing story.   Jesus Jumping Jimmeny Chris

he should throw a gay person off a building while he's there or kill someone for drawing a cartoon. really get into the spirit of being a muslim.

Better bet is how long before Dubey breaks his promise and posts in this thread again?

 

So you are very confident in Trump getting another term, but not confident enough to wager anything on it?

 

Mmmk.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Sharyl Attkisson‏Verified account

@SharylAttkisson

 

Seems strange that Comey wd give his memo to friend to give to NYT but not give to Congress; now says he has no copy

 

"https://www.judiciary.senate.gov/imo/media/doc/2017-06-08%20CEG%20DF%20LG%20SW%20to%20Richman%20(Comey%20Memos)_Redacted.pdf"

 

 

 

Julian Assange‏

 

@JulianAssange

 

Comey's a lousy leaker:

 

1. No leak that Trump wasn't under investigation or Lynch

 

2. No leak of memo FULL TEXT

 

3. Delayed until after fired

Link to post
Share on other sites

Content dictates whether or not it is classified. If the content of the memo is detailing discussions of classified information, then the memo would be classified.

 

Nothing contained in the memos have been deemed classified therefore the memos aren't classified.

 

Try to keep up Brvy.

 

You of course are right, the memos have not been deemed classified. But not for the reasons you stated. As Jonathan Turley pointed out in the below listed article....

 

"Of course, Comey did not know if there was a privilege or classification claim by either the Justice Department or the White House because he never asked for review".

 

So if you and Dubey read this excellent article you will be all caught up and up to speed.

 

http://thehill.com/blogs/pundits-blog/the-administration/337160-opinion-the-damaging-case-against-james-comey

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Going on vacation.

Here are my responses to all posts til I return.

 

A. Fake News alert

 

2. Projection much?

 

Lastly. Who's president?

 

 

Please insert correct response to all Lefty attempts to mislead the general public.

 

 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Trump only hires the best more qualified people.

 

New York Daily News‏Verified account

@NYDailyNews

EXCLUSIVE: Trump chooses inexperienced woman who planned his son Eric's wedding to run N.Y. federal housing programs http://nydn.us/2rxlFX7

Link to post
Share on other sites

Trump only hires the best more qualified people.

 

New York Daily News‏Verified account

@NYDailyNews

EXCLUSIVE: Trump chooses inexperienced woman who planned his son Eric's wedding to run N.Y. federal housing programs http://nydn.us/2rxlFX7

 

Lynne Patton.

 

lynne-patton.jpg

 

Also turns out she claims to have a 'law degree' that is a hoax as well.

Link to post
Share on other sites

A reminder that trade protectionism often (usually) harms you more than it benefits.

 

Scott Lincicome‏Verified account @scottlincicome 7m7 minutes ago

In which @dandrezner summarizes *some* of the "idiocy" re any Trump admin "Section 232" action on steel imports

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/posteverything/wp/2017/06/20/this-generations-idiotic-trade-policy-is-about-to-be-born/?tid=ss_tw&utm_term=.71d898595549

 

DCxApA5UQAEDIY9.jpg

Link to post
Share on other sites

A reminder that trade protectionism often (usually) harms you more than it benefits.

 

That's completely not what that says, though.

It says that in certain instances, specific protectionism causes specific imbalances and that is true.

 

It does not say that protectionism often (usually) harms more than benefits, because that is not true.

Link to post
Share on other sites

That's completely not what that says, though.

It says that in certain instances, specific protectionism causes specific imbalances and that is true.

 

It does not say that protectionism often (usually) harms more than benefits, because that is not true.

 

of course it's true, trade is not a zero sum game and usually both sides in International Trade benefit in the aggregate but you are myopic in how you view trade just like Trump is.

Link to post
Share on other sites

If its true, then why does what we can observe empirically about trade (the erosion of the middle class job base that directly corresponds with the rise of that same job base in China, and directly corresponds with the radical rise of Chinese wealth and the Chinese economy) indicate it isn't true, whereas the only thing that indicates your beliefs are true are 'theories' and 'experts'?

 

Here, I'll even save you the time.

Ask the Harvard MBA: Is global econonmics a zero sum game? OF COURSE NOT, he says!

http://www.askthehar...-zero-sum-game/

 

This guy at Columbia Business School likewise agrees that trade is not zero sum!

 

As an aside, after the re-crash in 09, Nassem Taleb talked at length about people who persist with theoretical mantras in the face of empirical evidence that indicates their theories have problems. The video seems to have been deleted from that page but I'll go find it. Its a worthwhile watch.

https://thecriticalt...cal-empiricism/

 

If you demand a pure and absolute definition of zero sum, I suppose the idea that Zero Sum trade isn't true can be compellingly rationalized (since there are instances where it's mutually beneficial), but between the idea that trade is absolute zero sum versus the opposite end of the spectrum, where you are, that free trade is mutually beneficial' by some kind of default, exists a nuanced position (my position) that holds trade policy can be strategized, managed and that free trade suicide pacts are just as damaging and economically detrimental as reflexive and mindless trade protectionism... and on the matter of managing national interests, getting the better end of a trade deal is just fine, even if it comes at the direct expense of our trading partner. You seem willfully naive to the idea that there is even such a thing as a 'better end' to a trade deal, since you're operating on the ideological mantra that "free trade is mutually beneficial", actual facts be damned.

Link to post
Share on other sites

That's because you two share a losers mentality about obeying petulant rules so you don't offend the other losers who maintain the greens.

 

A winner worries about owning the golf course so he can drive his cart whatever the **** he wants in spite of angry losers who resent his empowered discretion.

Link to post
Share on other sites

CNN Producer, Exposed.

 

https://streamable.com/4j78e

 

It's all fake news. No idea why he was talking like that to the other guy. Must've been a Grindr date.

But he does speak totally openly about the nature of media narration and how if a media entity hates someone, they can just scrutinize everything he does, whereas if they like him, they don't scrutinize anything he does and how CNN is basically a wing-mouthpiece and a hoax media entity (and yes, yes, whiners, Fox is the same on the other side, yet Whataboutisms don't change the facts about CNN).

 

Its the old "How I Made A Crime Wave"

 

Also, as someone who has known people who've been subject to investigations where rats were wearing wires, couldn't help but cringe at that canary spilling the bean like that without realizing that he was being recorded, in an era where literally everyone has a personal recording device in their pockets. The awkward, leading, pointed questions into details that are otherwise professionally confidential, it's kind amazing- in a "this isn't hindsight, you're just THAT naive" sort of way- that the guy didn't realize what was happening.

Link to post
Share on other sites

The lack of comments is interesting, CNN lies to surprise of nobody and no comments yet? 3 executives get fired for lack of journalist integrity....if this happened at Fox what do you think the story would be?

 

O well at least the Fake News is confirmed!

 

Now lets get on top of Russian lies story...still waiting for someone to post the transcript from yesterday.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

Announcements


×
×
  • Create New...