Miscellaneous Trump (1 Viewer)

Users who are viewing this thread

    Huntn

    Misty Mountains Envoy
    Joined
    Mar 8, 2023
    Messages
    642
    Reaction score
    663
    Location
    Rivendell
    Offline

    Anxiety surges as Donald Trump may be indicted soon: Why 2024 is 'the final battle' and 'the big one'​


    WASHINGTON – It looks like American politics is entering a new age of anxiety, triggered by an unprecedented legal development: The potential indictment of a former president and current presidential candidate.

    Donald Trump's many legal problems – and calls for protests by his followers – have generated new fears of political violence and anxiety about the unknowable impact all this will have on the already-tense 2024 presidential election


    I’ll reframe this is a more accurate way, Are Presidents above the law? This new age was spurred into existence when home grown dummies elected a corrupt, mentally ill, anti-democratic, would be dictator as President and don’t bother to hold him responsible for his crimes, don’t want to because in the ensuing mayhem and destruction, they think they will be better off. The man is actually advocating violence (not the first time). And btw, screw democracy too. If this feeling spreads, we are In deep shirt.

    This goes beyond one treasonous Peice of work and out to all his minions. This is on you or should we be sympathetic to the idea of they can’t help being selfish suckers to the Nation’s detriment? Donald Trump is the single largest individual threat to our democracy and it‘s all going to boil down to will the majority of the GOP return to his embrace and start slinging his excrement to support him?
     
    Donald Trump is “the single most dangerous threat” the US faces as he seeks a return to the Oval Office, according to Liz Cheney, the moderate Republican whose opposition to her party leader’s presidency had cost her a congressional seat she held for six years.

    “He cannot be the next president because if he is, all of the things that he attempted to do but was stopped from doing by responsible people … he will do,” Cheney – the daughter of former congressman, defense secretary and vice-president Dick Cheney – said on CNN’s State of the Union on Sunday. “There will be no guardrails. And everyone has been left warned.”…..

    “After January 6 … there can be no question that he will unravel the institutions of our democracy,” Cheney said, alluding to Trump supporters’ desperate but unsuccessful attack to prevent the certification of Biden’s victory over Trump in the 2020 race. “So we are facing a moment in American politics where we have to set aside partisanship, and we have to make sure that people who believe in the constitution are willing to come together to prevent him from ever again setting foot anywhere near the Oval Office.”

    The House Capitol attack committee’s recommendation was one of Cheney’s last congressional acts before she left office in January. She lost her bid to be re-elected to a Wyoming’s sole House seat she had held since 2017 after Trump successfully supported Harriet Hageman’s run against her in a Republican primary.……

    Additionally, Cheney on Sunday suggested to both State of the Union and CBS’s Face the Nation that she was mulling joining the crowded field of presidential hopefuls signing up to challenge Biden in 2024.…….

    I don't trust Liz Cheney for a second. She may be sincere in what's she saying and I agree with most of what she has said. I disagree that Trump is the single most dangerous threat. Trump is nothing without the dark PAC's and corporate power brokers inconspicuously supporting him to create disruption to the rule of government and law so they can seize more power and authoritarian gains. No matter what happens to Trump, those cats will find a new face man to do their bidding.

    Liz is too closely aligned to her father and Dick knows how to successfully overthrow a democracy. He's had a lot of experience at it. If Liz runs for president as anything other than the elected Republican candidate, that will indicate to me that everything she has said about Trump is a BS angle that she's running to gain power for herself. Like I said, I don't trust Liz Cheney for a second. If she's up to no good, she's a much bigger threat to our democracy than Trump could ever dream of being.

    The Cheney clan is the master of creating or allowing a crisis that they then use to sell the public on accepting their freedom and liberty limiting solutions to the very crisis that they created or allowed.
     
    Last edited:
    I don't trust Liz Cheney for a second. She may be sincere in what's she saying and I agree with most of what she has said. I disagree that Trump is the single most dangerous threat. Trump is nothing without the dark PAC's and corporate power brokers inconspicuously supporting him to create disruption to the rule of government and law so they can seize more power and authoritarian gains. No matter what happens to Trump, those cats will find a new face man to do their bidding.

    Liz is too closely aligned to her father and Dick knows how to successfully overthrow a democracy. He's had a lot of experience at it. If Liz runs for president as anything other than the elected Republican candidate, that will indicate to me that everything she has said about Trump is a BS angle that she's running to gain power for herself. Like I said, I don't trust Liz Cheney for a second. If she's up to no good, she's a much bigger threat to our democracy than Trump could ever dream of being.

    The Cheney clan is the master of creating or allowing a crisis that they then use to sell the public on accepting their freedom and liberty limiting solutions to the very crisis that they created or allowed.

    Not sure she is the same/similar to her father, despite the fact I disagree with her on policy positions about 90% of the time, she recognizes that Trump is a danger......

    The question is does she really believe he is a danger to democracy as a whole or a danger to the future of the Republican party.....I don't think for a minute she is more concerned with the the nation as a whole more than the R party...
     
    If she's up to no good, she's a much bigger threat to our democracy than Trump could ever dream of being.
    Liz Cheney more dangerous than Trump? I don't think so. I would agree that her father was dangerous, but while I'm diametrically opposed to her politics I'm not afraid of her and I respect her take on Trump. In that regard, she's one of only a few on the right who is not afraid to speak the truth.
     
    Last edited:
    What a clown.


    CONCORD, N.H. (AP) — Former President Donald Trump compared himself to anti-apartheid activist Nelson Mandela on Monday as he cast himself as the victim of federal and state prosecutors he alleges are targeting him and his businesses for political reasons.

    Returning to New Hampshire to register for its presidential primary, Trump held a rally where he railed against President Joe Biden’s response to the Hamas attack on Israeland vowed to build an Iron Dome-style missile defense shield over the U.S.

    But he focused much of his dark and at times profane speech on the criminal and civil cases against him, at one point suggesting he would go to prison like the former South African president who spent 27 years in prison for opposing South Africa’s apartheid system and was awarded a Nobel Peace Prize.
     
    Donald Trump is not understood to be a particularly religious person.

    When he launched his candidacy for the 2016 Republican nomination, he would insist that the Bible was his favorite book (edging out “The Art of the Deal”), although he was unable to identify a favorite passage or, at times, demonstrate much familiarity with it.

    As president, he rarely went to church — one exception being when, on June 1, 2020, he strode across a newly cleared Lafayette Square to pose outside St. John’s Episcopal Church holding a Bible.


    This is most obviously how Trump’s life intersects with religion: He understands that it is a motivation for Americans, particularly Americans who are inclined to support him politically.

    During a speech in Iowa in January 2016, he lamented that “Christianity is under tremendous siege” and pledged to be the religious right’s champion in office. Which, for the most part, he very much was.


    There was a flip side to this, too. It wasn’t just that Christians were imperiled, it was that people of other religions were inherently dangerous. He leveraged the existence of the Islamic State and terrorist attacks in France and San Bernardino, Calif., to cast Muslim immigrants as dangerous; in December 2015, he proposed a ban on Muslim migrants.

    It was typical of the moment: sparking a huge outcry (including from his eventual vice-presidential pick) and seeming as though he’d crossed an uncrossable line. But the Republican electorate drew no such line, and Trump, as president, tried to figure out how to make his promise a reality……

    Then Trump again expanded his rhetoric.


    “I will implement strong ideological screening of all immigrants,” he said, reading from the teleprompter. “If you hate America, if you want to abolish Israel,” he continued, apparently ad-libbing, “if you don’t like our religion — which a lot of them don’t — if you sympathize with the jihadists, then we don’t want you in our country and you are not getting in. Right?”


    The crowd cheered enthusiastically. Trump vamped: “We don’t want you! Get out of here! You’re fired!”


    This is not sophisticated political rhetoric; quite the opposite. It’s demagoguery. But it is also revealing.

    After all, what is “our religion” in this nation built by people seeking freedom of religious expression? We all know the answer, but let’s explore the question as if we don’t know……

     
    Last edited:
    So, today he evidently admitted that he threatened our NATO allies with not defending them from Russia during his presidency, forgot what city in Iowa he was in (thats really not a huge deal), targeted Bill Barr and Christy with numerous “fat” insults (to great laughter from his audience) and he wants us to believe Melania calls him “sir” - which I don’t think she’s on the same continent as him, last I read.

     
    So, today he evidently admitted that he threatened our NATO allies with not defending them from Russia during his presidency, forgot what city in Iowa he was in (thats really not a huge deal), targeted Bill Barr and Christy with numerous “fat” insults (to great laughter from his audience) and he wants us to believe Melania calls him “sir” - which I don’t think she’s on the same continent as him, last I read.


    well I know she never said she loved him since she admitted she only married him for the money.
     
    So, today he evidently admitted that he threatened our NATO allies with not defending them from Russia during his presidency, forgot what city in Iowa he was in (thats really not a huge deal), targeted Bill Barr and Christy with numerous “fat” insults (to great laughter from his audience) and he wants us to believe Melania calls him “sir” - which I don’t think she’s on the same continent as him, last I read.



    It's harder to belive that she says to him "Darling, I love you so much" than that she calls him "Sir".
     
    During Donald Trump’s presidency, Immigration and Customs Enforcement (Ice) considered the implications of expelling foreign nationals from the US for their political beliefs, newly unsealed documents have revealed.

    The two memos were written and revised by the US immigration enforcement agency and top White House lawyers in the Trump administration and recently obtained by Columbia University’s Knight First Amendment Institute via a Freedom of Information Act (Foia) lawsuit filed in 2017.

    The memos examined intentions to perform ideological screenings on foreign nationals in the US, but ultimately concluded such a plan would be illegal to implement.

    The first memo addresses constitutional constraints on what the former US president in 2016 called the “extreme vetting” of noncitizens through the use of ideological “screenings tests”.

    “It seems likely that at least a large fraction of those aliens located in the United States who would be the subject of the vetting would be able to assert various constitutional rights. We therefore recommend assessing proposals being considered on the assumption that the aliens within the United States are generally protected by the constitution,” it read.…..

     
    So, this is the first explanation I’ve read about why Kushner would be given $2B dollars by the Saudis to inves, even though he has zero experience in this type of investing, and over the objections of the professionals, and at the insistence of MBS. It also explains why he was denied a security clearance. Obviously this is anonymously sourced, for good reason. Makes a lot of sense, though.

     
    Just caught the tail end of it but CNN played a clip of Trump saying he’d consider Tucker Carlson for VP saying that he “makes good sense”
     

    Create an account or login to comment

    You must be a member in order to leave a comment

    Create account

    Create an account on our community. It's easy!

    Log in

    Already have an account? Log in here.

    General News Feed

    Fact Checkers News Feed

    Back
    Top Bottom