Blank Discussion Topic

ikiT

What are his plans for North Korea?

Jason P

Trump can say just about anything, and his supporters will believe it and defend it.

ikiT

Or bonecrushing student loan debt?

ikiT

Or Nuclear waste?

josevolution

It's laughable that the bafoon supporters here still believe that he will all of a sudden turn out to be this American hero , how about he just releases the evidence that only he possesses of the wire tap please Orange bafoon just release it because we all know your so honorable ..

ikiT

Or repairing relationships with the Mexican government?

Halifax2TheMax

josevolution said:

It's laughable that the bafoon supporters here still believe that he will all of a sudden turn out to be this American hero , how about he just releases the evidence that only he possesses of the wire tap please Orange bafoon just release it because we all know your so honorable ..

How about just release his tax returns? I mean as a good will gesture to exhibit his honesty. Obama released his birth certicate eventually.

ikiT

His closest advisor Steve Bannon's deconstruction of the state (or as I call it "recklessly fucking everything up to watch it burn") is grounds for impeachment.
It's a dereliction of duty.

ikiT

This is what YOU VOTED for

Trump University
Trump Casinos
Trump Vodka
Trump Steaks
Trump Airlines
Trump Apparel (made in Vietnam and China)
Trump Mortgage "I think it's a great time to start a mortgage company," Trump famously predicted to CNBC in April 2006. "Who knows more about financing than me?"

He's a fraud and a straight to your face liar. I'm convinced he doesn't really know what he's doing at any time.

ikiT

Merkin Baller

Obama is SPYING - Trump sez so

my2hands

BS44325 said:

mrussel1 said:

BS44325 said:

mrussel1 said:

BS44325 said:

Bentleyspop said:

The president's pick for HUD secretary. ......

Carson says slaves were ‘immigrants’ with dreams for their children
http://www.politico.com/story/2017/03/ben-carson-slaves-immigrants-235730

“There were other immigrants who came here in the bottom of slave ships, worked even longer, even harder for less,” he said. “But they too had a dream that one day their sons, daughters, grandsons, granddaughters, great-grandsons, great-granddaughters might pursue prosperity and happiness in this land.”

Sorry. Please explain to me why this is offensive? It is not immigration by choice obviously but it was deemed that those forced into slavery should be granted all the rights of a citizen who did immigrate. It is a fact that these slaves did want full rights for themselves and their children. I could be wrong but I don't believe many chose to return to their country of origin post-emancipation? What part of this is so off base?

The slave trade was abolished in 1807. That means the vast majority of slaves freed in 1865 were not born in Africa. So it's kind of a silly statement. However they did have the option to go to Liberia which was established for that reason. However that country was even more foreign than the US.

This is not in dispute. Carson is discussing the initial slaves brought over as "immigrants" followed by their children and grandchildren. People want to go crazy over the use of the word "immigrant" because slaves didn't come by choice. Well no shit. Do people think Ben Carson doesn't know that? The point is that even if they were brought over against their will nobody should argue against their rights and wants to live a better life. This is Kellyanne Conway feet on the couch level bullshit. I don't care if Samuel L Jackson has a wallet that says "Bad Muthafucka" on it...it doesn't make him anymore correct. Tomorrow he'll be arguing that DACA kids who were brought to the US against their will should have full legal status.

It's a little tone deaf. It's sort of like how Devos called the advent of HBCUs a victory of school,choice rather than a necessity of segregation. It's strange spin.

Only tone deaf when you read it. If you actually watch the clip Carson is speaking about the greatness of immigrants and then segways into slaves who dreamed of a better life. Major Marquis Warren is off base.

Slaves dreamed of a better life, because THEY WERE FUCKING SLAVES

They didn't view America as some shining beacon on a hill... America was their hell on earth...

To try an explain away Carson's MORONIC statement, which I've seen and is even worse when you watch it, is totally and absolutely ridiculous. For real.

mrussel1

mfc2006 said:

All you'll get is deflection & distraction, Halifax.

Easy now boys... BS is the only conservative here that actually has formulated an intellectual argument, whether you agree or not. All of our other ones have been basically banned for various reasons. We can't all just agree with each other. There's no challenge in that.

mrussel1

BS44325 said:

Halifax2TheMax said:

BS44325 said:

Halifax2TheMax said:

BS44325 said:

Halifax2TheMax said:

BS44325 said:

mrussel1 said:

BS44325 said:

Bentleyspop said:

The president's pick for HUD secretary. ......

Carson says slaves were ‘immigrants’ with dreams for their children
http://www.politico.com/story/2017/03/ben-carson-slaves-immigrants-235730

“There were other immigrants who came here in the bottom of slave ships, worked even longer, even harder for less,” he said. “But they too had a dream that one day their sons, daughters, grandsons, granddaughters, great-grandsons, great-granddaughters might pursue prosperity and happiness in this land.”

Sorry. Please explain to me why this is offensive? It is not immigration by choice obviously but it was deemed that those forced into slavery should be granted all the rights of a citizen who did immigrate. It is a fact that these slaves did want full rights for themselves and their children. I could be wrong but I don't believe many chose to return to their country of origin post-emancipation? What part of this is so off base?

The slave trade was abolished in 1807. That means the vast majority of slaves freed in 1865 were not born in Africa. So it's kind of a silly statement. However they did have the option to go to Liberia which was established for that reason. However that country was even more foreign than the US.

This is not in dispute. Carson is discussing the initial slaves brought over as "immigrants" followed by their children and grandchildren. People want to go crazy over the use of the word "immigrant" because slaves didn't come by choice. Well no shit. Do people think Ben Carson doesn't know that? The point is that even if they were brought over against their will nobody should argue against their rights and wants to live a better life. This is Kellyanne Conway feet on the couch level bullshit. I don't care if Samuel L Jackson has a wallet that says "Bad Muthafucka" on it...it doesn't make him anymore correct. Tomorrow he'll be arguing that DACA kids who were brought to the US against their will should have full legal status.

So why are you giving it so much explanation? Triggered? Why don't we discuss the facts thus far of Trump's campaign ilk and their ties to Putin's ilk? Or Trump's complete fabrication that Obama tapped his ever prescious Trump Tower? Would you like to discuss facts, professor? Or continue your supposition and distractions? Professor?

https://youtu.be/PI1fvJmF1UU

So, professor? What are Trump's reasons? Time for Trump to show his cards. But typical of your response, more distraction and factless deflection. You do realize that the POTUS can't order a FISA on his own, right? And if it's the FBI who sought and was granted a wire tap, Trump could direct the Justice Department to make public the evidence. You know this right? So why is Trump hiding behind a lie? Care to discuss facts, professor?

Correct the President can't order a FISA on his own. That is not in dispute. He would likely be made aware of it however. We also don't know if it was the FBI who ordered the tap but "if" there even was a tap the President could not simply direct the Justice Department to make public the evidence. There are "sources and methods" issues that could be exposed especially if transcripts involve conversations with foreign governments. Cards will be put on the table in the coming weeks. Every newspaper and democratic politician who insinuated that there is evidence and/or recordings demonstrating Trump campaign collusion with Russia will either have to double down on the existence of this evidence through spying or admit they have nothing at all. On the flip side Trump will have to reveal what spying was conducted, who ordered it, and how was that info handeled. Based on the democratic walk backs by the media, people like Sen Chris Coons, Jon Favreau and others it appears that Trump has the upper hand. Democratic obsession with a possible loss to Trump triggered watergate level spying on a candidate. Those are the facts that you should be scared of.

I'm afraid, really, really afraid. Now, about that asparagus and meatloaf? You're relying on a brietbart propagated defense of Trump's Saturday morning shit storm? The serial liar is finally going to speak the truth to power. Are you kidding me? And what if the "evidence" is foreign sourced intelligence, professor? That was vetted and found to be plausible? You ever stop to wonder why Treasury's financial crimes unit has an ongoing investigation? Spin baby spin. Lay those cards on the table Trump, show us what you got. I'm all in for his impeachment.

Does Treasurey financial crimes unit have an ongoing investigation? Are you sure about this? You seem to want to have it both ways. For months you have linked to sources detailing evidence against Trump that would only come from spying. Breitbart via Levin used these same sources to make their case. Now you want to flip it and say all these same sources are garbage. You also assume Trump only has this information and nothing else. Trump is the only one with access to everything. He knows what all the cards show and they will soon be put on the table.

Well the difference is credibility. Breitbart has pushed made up scandals since its inception. Could they get one right? Sure. Maybe. But their batting average so far isn't very good. Oh and neither is Trump's (Birther, voting fraud, etc.).

You are explicitly wrong on two fronts of your statements above though:

1. Trump is not the only person with all the information. Comey knows what the FBI did and Clapper knows what the intelligence agencies did. There's really no one left after that. If Trump "knew", then why would these two professionals refute him so quickly?
2. No, the cards will not be on the table. In fact Spicer headed that off for what should be obvious reasons when he said "There will be no further comment until the investigation is complete". Really? Are we all that naive on the tactic being used here?

mrussel1

my2hands said:

BS44325 said:

mrussel1 said:

BS44325 said:

mrussel1 said:

BS44325 said:

Bentleyspop said:

The president's pick for HUD secretary. ......

Carson says slaves were ‘immigrants’ with dreams for their children
http://www.politico.com/story/2017/03/ben-carson-slaves-immigrants-235730

“There were other immigrants who came here in the bottom of slave ships, worked even longer, even harder for less,” he said. “But they too had a dream that one day their sons, daughters, grandsons, granddaughters, great-grandsons, great-granddaughters might pursue prosperity and happiness in this land.”

Sorry. Please explain to me why this is offensive? It is not immigration by choice obviously but it was deemed that those forced into slavery should be granted all the rights of a citizen who did immigrate. It is a fact that these slaves did want full rights for themselves and their children. I could be wrong but I don't believe many chose to return to their country of origin post-emancipation? What part of this is so off base?

The slave trade was abolished in 1807. That means the vast majority of slaves freed in 1865 were not born in Africa. So it's kind of a silly statement. However they did have the option to go to Liberia which was established for that reason. However that country was even more foreign than the US.

This is not in dispute. Carson is discussing the initial slaves brought over as "immigrants" followed by their children and grandchildren. People want to go crazy over the use of the word "immigrant" because slaves didn't come by choice. Well no shit. Do people think Ben Carson doesn't know that? The point is that even if they were brought over against their will nobody should argue against their rights and wants to live a better life. This is Kellyanne Conway feet on the couch level bullshit. I don't care if Samuel L Jackson has a wallet that says "Bad Muthafucka" on it...it doesn't make him anymore correct. Tomorrow he'll be arguing that DACA kids who were brought to the US against their will should have full legal status.

It's a little tone deaf. It's sort of like how Devos called the advent of HBCUs a victory of school,choice rather than a necessity of segregation. It's strange spin.

Only tone deaf when you read it. If you actually watch the clip Carson is speaking about the greatness of immigrants and then segways into slaves who dreamed of a better life. Major Marquis Warren is off base.

Slaves dreamed of a better life, because THEY WERE FUCKING SLAVES

They didn't view America as some shining beacon on a hill... America was their hell on earth...

To try an explain away Carson's MORONIC statement, which I've seen and is even worse when you watch it, is totally and absolutely ridiculous. For real.

He's right.. it was a dumb statement. It was a dumb statement like Devos's statement was dumb.

Halifax2TheMax

BS44325 said:

Halifax2TheMax said:

BS44325 said:

Halifax2TheMax said:

BS44325 said:

Halifax2TheMax said:

BS44325 said:

mrussel1 said:

BS44325 said:

Bentleyspop said:

The president's pick for HUD secretary. ......

Carson says slaves were ‘immigrants’ with dreams for their children
http://www.politico.com/story/2017/03/ben-carson-slaves-immigrants-235730

“There were other immigrants who came here in the bottom of slave ships, worked even longer, even harder for less,” he said. “But they too had a dream that one day their sons, daughters, grandsons, granddaughters, great-grandsons, great-granddaughters might pursue prosperity and happiness in this land.”

Sorry. Please explain to me why this is offensive? It is not immigration by choice obviously but it was deemed that those forced into slavery should be granted all the rights of a citizen who did immigrate. It is a fact that these slaves did want full rights for themselves and their children. I could be wrong but I don't believe many chose to return to their country of origin post-emancipation? What part of this is so off base?

The slave trade was abolished in 1807. That means the vast majority of slaves freed in 1865 were not born in Africa. So it's kind of a silly statement. However they did have the option to go to Liberia which was established for that reason. However that country was even more foreign than the US.

This is not in dispute. Carson is discussing the initial slaves brought over as "immigrants" followed by their children and grandchildren. People want to go crazy over the use of the word "immigrant" because slaves didn't come by choice. Well no shit. Do people think Ben Carson doesn't know that? The point is that even if they were brought over against their will nobody should argue against their rights and wants to live a better life. This is Kellyanne Conway feet on the couch level bullshit. I don't care if Samuel L Jackson has a wallet that says "Bad Muthafucka" on it...it doesn't make him anymore correct. Tomorrow he'll be arguing that DACA kids who were brought to the US against their will should have full legal status.

So why are you giving it so much explanation? Triggered? Why don't we discuss the facts thus far of Trump's campaign ilk and their ties to Putin's ilk? Or Trump's complete fabrication that Obama tapped his ever prescious Trump Tower? Would you like to discuss facts, professor? Or continue your supposition and distractions? Professor?

https://youtu.be/PI1fvJmF1UU

So, professor? What are Trump's reasons? Time for Trump to show his cards. But typical of your response, more distraction and factless deflection. You do realize that the POTUS can't order a FISA on his own, right? And if it's the FBI who sought and was granted a wire tap, Trump could direct the Justice Department to make public the evidence. You know this right? So why is Trump hiding behind a lie? Care to discuss facts, professor?

Correct the President can't order a FISA on his own. That is not in dispute. He would likely be made aware of it however. We also don't know if it was the FBI who ordered the tap but "if" there even was a tap the President could not simply direct the Justice Department to make public the evidence. There are "sources and methods" issues that could be exposed especially if transcripts involve conversations with foreign governments. Cards will be put on the table in the coming weeks. Every newspaper and democratic politician who insinuated that there is evidence and/or recordings demonstrating Trump campaign collusion with Russia will either have to double down on the existence of this evidence through spying or admit they have nothing at all. On the flip side Trump will have to reveal what spying was conducted, who ordered it, and how was that info handeled. Based on the democratic walk backs by the media, people like Sen Chris Coons, Jon Favreau and others it appears that Trump has the upper hand. Democratic obsession with a possible loss to Trump triggered watergate level spying on a candidate. Those are the facts that you should be scared of.

I'm afraid, really, really afraid. Now, about that asparagus and meatloaf? You're relying on a brietbart propagated defense of Trump's Saturday morning shit storm? The serial liar is finally going to speak the truth to power. Are you kidding me? And what if the "evidence" is foreign sourced intelligence, professor? That was vetted and found to be plausible? You ever stop to wonder why Treasury's financial crimes unit has an ongoing investigation? Spin baby spin. Lay those cards on the table Trump, show us what you got. I'm all in for his impeachment.

Does Treasurey financial crimes unit have an ongoing investigation? Are you sure about this? You seem to want to have it both ways. For months you have linked to sources detailing evidence against Trump that would only come from spying. Breitbart via Levin used these same sources to make their case. Now you want to flip it and say all these same sources are garbage. You also assume Trump only has this information and nothing else. Trump is the only one with access to everything. He knows what all the cards show and they will soon be put on the table.

The old "you seem to want to have it both ways" come back. No, I don't. I want trump impeached and removed from office. Period. End of my argument. You, on the other hand, want to continue to believe he's "brilliant." Keep hanging onto that BS.

ikiT

That's part of Bannon's deconstruction theory.

DeVos
Perry
Scott Pruitt
Tillerson
Price
Mnuchin
Sessions
and that Brain Surgeon are ALL so remarkably unqualified and have positions that are totally opposite what their departments are supposed to stand for.

Not to mention the false statements made by the bolded nominees made while being confirmed,

Go Beavers

BS44325 said:

Tiki said:

Merkin Baller said:

Tiki said:

Is flat out lying to the American people an impeachable offense? It should be.

I'm pretty sure it's illegal to lie in any official document, court, police investigation or any kind of government inquiry.

This takes a while to load in but it's totally worth it.
LIES!

This Bloomberg article is pretty interesting:

https://www.bloomberg.com/view/articles/2017-03-06/trump-s-wiretap-tweets-raise-risk-of-impeachment

I like it.

Do you like where it says it would be "watergate" if Trump is correct? Details of spying will come out and the only question after that will be who ordered it and based on what legal authority.

And the answer to who ordered it and why won't be a scandal for anyone in Obama's camp.

Merkin Baller

Go Beavers said:

BS44325 said:

Tiki said:

Merkin Baller said:

Tiki said:

Is flat out lying to the American people an impeachable offense? It should be.

I'm pretty sure it's illegal to lie in any official document, court, police investigation or any kind of government inquiry.

This takes a while to load in but it's totally worth it.
LIES!

This Bloomberg article is pretty interesting:

https://www.bloomberg.com/view/articles/2017-03-06/trump-s-wiretap-tweets-raise-risk-of-impeachment

I like it.

Do you like where it says it would be "watergate" if Trump is correct? Details of spying will come out and the only question after that will be who ordered it and based on what legal authority.

And the answer to who ordered it and why won't be a scandal for anyone in Obama's camp.

This....... to entertain otherwise is to entertain the ramblings of a paranoid sociopath.

ikiT

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mUtT0b0EnSw