Trump's Policies Part 6

[92tide]

but not to worry, they'll take care of it

The State Department guts its office combating human trafficking

The cuts come as Trump reels from MAGA anger over sex trafficker Jeffrey Epstein.

www.motherjones.com

 

[92tide]

referring to himself in the third person gives it extra heft

 

[JDCrimson]

Its amazing how far we have fallen as a nation...

 

[selmaborntidefan]

I have constantly equated the Democrats with Wile E. Coyote. Since before the start of the election season, their carefully laid traps have done nothing to help them. The so-called NY felonies? Even Bill Maher and Andrew Cuomo admitted they were horse *#^& charges and this would turn Trump into a martyr. (Spoiler alert: it did.)

This journey into advocating for Trump this way once was reserved only for his attorneys. But then again, many of them were disbarred so....

I openly laugh at anyone who believes E. Jean Carroll.

Trump went to court and was tried before a jury of his peers and was - and is - a LOSER.

Judge Engoron valuing MAL at a mere $18 million? There are only two types of people who claim to agree: liars and stupid people.

Now - do the idea Trump is ACTUALLY a "billionaire"........

The documents case was going great until the revelation that Biden did the same thing

Biden took classified documents to his house after being told not to do so, signed an affidavit he didn't have any and then was proven to be a liar?

That's news to me.

(as a senator and VP, not a president) and thus the great double standard was created and it doomed the state's case; perhaps not directly, but it contributed. Well, that and Jack Smith's evidence tampering. Don't even get me started on that ridiculous J6 Committee. And the hell of it is, literally none of this was necessary. Trump gave them all the ammunition they needed, but they just couldn't leave well enough alone and take what the defense gave them.

Just cut to the chase and spell out what crimes exactly you think Trump committed.

For some reason, you fire out specific language when it's anyone else, but what precise crime that "they could get" Trump on will you actually say the words he did?

Toss in not one, but two assassination attempts and the American people did rally to the guy, as distasteful as you find the idea.

Well, I like Presidents who don't engage in overt criminal behavior that serves only their purposes. And no, none of this "but Dubya invaded Iraq" misdirection.

Personally I saw this coming a mile away and I predicted that Trump would win convincingly and it would be the Democrats who made it happen. Now, for better or for worse, he's president again and the question remains: Have the Dems learning anything from all this? Considering that they continue to double-down on the wrong side of every 80/20 issue, I'm going to say no. All this copium I'm hearing from the media about how the mid-terms are going to be a blood-bath for the Reps? I don't see how it's possible.

Well, the election isn't for another 16 months or so. Landslides usually happen gradually and then suddenly at the end. I have people who try to tell me they lost faith in the media "when the press told us the Reagan-Carter race was close and then Reagan clobbered him." The part they always leave out is: a) there was a HUGE "undecided" vote; b) there was a third party candidacy (John Anderson) who had polled well right up until the one debate Carter and Reagan had, which occurred just one week before the election.

The overall approval rating for the (D) party is still in the crapper last I checked. Their only hope is for the Reps in general (and Trump in particular) to crap the bed in Chernobyl-like fashion.

Fortunately, Donald Trump is precise, disciplined person who would never say something stupid or do something to blow up the candidates in his own party (like the Georgia Senate runoffs).

I'm sure you've noticed that I don't hold Trump in contempt at the level you do

That your wisdom is less than mine has been well-established...

(Folks, you know I'm kidding....)

and there's a reason for that. In my opinion, Trump isn't the problem, he's the symptom of a much larger problem which is a system that produces politicians like Trump, Biden, Obama and Dubya.

What's your proposed alternative?

I ask this because just like when Democrats pull their Monday morning QB of "Biden should have announced he wasn't running sooner," there's a difference between how the world works on paper and how the real world works.

Look, I don't care much for the primary system that has produced candidates (and in some cases nominees) whose seemingly sole virtue is "I'm related to another famous politician", whether we're talking Kennedy, Hillary, Dubya, the Long dynasty in LA, the Bayhs in Indiana, or the Rockefellers all over the country. However, the fact voters have a choice is seen in the fact that other nepo candidates like Ben Quayle or Jeb Bush or Chip Carter have LOST races despite famous names.

I mean, I'm not exactly sure how Obama fits into the scheme of "I move to the front because my name is Bush/Clinton/Kennedy." He competed against the establishment candidate and cleaned her clock.

Feel free to pick any of them apart, but at the end of the day, they didn't damage this once-proud republic by themselves. The very fact that a MTG or a Jasmine Crockett are even in Congress at all should tell us that something has gone horribly wrong here.

I don't think mixing together local congressional races, where a quack can win in a limited universe of voters, has any relevance to the Presidential race that pretty much requires a candidate AT A MINIMUM win a majority of the states. A candidate who wins solely by the Electoral College HAS to win - at an absolute minimum - 13 states with the biggest populations. And wouldn't you know it, in the beauty of America, that's 6 blue, 3 red, and 4 purple (2 of which lean red, 2 of which lean blue).

But local Congresscritters, well, there are districts dumb enough to elect those people.

It's a shame this country doesn't have a backup we can use to restore the republic back to when it was most stable.

I have my own issues with the primary system as it has been given to us by the fallout from the 1968 Democratic Convention. The thought behind it, though, was the notion of "small d democracy," and the loosening of the notion of party bosses picking the nominee.

But party bosses would never have chosen Donald Trump as nominee, either. I can't say - not for sure - that that would be true of Dubya or even Obama. Dubya would fall into a nepo category such as Benjamin Harrison while Obama would fall into the "fresh face" category of JFK, where they combined the primary results with party boss input.

Even with that, the only candidate I can say for certain would never be chosen at this point is Trump.

 

[92tide]

Ron Filipkowski (@ronfilipkowski.bsky.social)

You know it’s going bad for Trump when they start rolling out Chappaquiddick posts.

bsky.app

 

[selmaborntidefan]

Ron Filipkowski (@ronfilipkowski.bsky.social)

You know it’s going bad for Trump when they start rolling out Chappaquiddick posts.

bsky.app

If Teddy ran today, this would enhance his chances of winning.

 

[Its On A Slab]

If Teddy ran today, this would enhance his chances of winning.

Dating myself, but I remember the National Lampoon ad with the floating VW bug on the water.

"If Ted Kennedy drove a Volkswagen, he'd be President today."

https://www.reddit.com/r/PropagandaPosters/comments/153504u

 

[CrimsonJazz]

This journey into advocating for Trump this way once was reserved only for his attorneys. But then again, many of them were disbarred so....

The hell of it is, I'm not advocating for Trump. I'm just calling balls and strikes as I see them. In fact, I'm a bit resentful that I'm even doing this since I didn't vote for the guy and never would

Trump went to court and was tried before a jury of his peers and was - and is - a LOSER.

Jury of his peers, my ass. And for the record, I can totally believe he put the shoes to some gross porn star. But this? LOL, no. Her story from start to finish was pulled directly from an episode of Law & Order SVU right down to the name of the department store where the events allegedly happened. The judge did not allow this information to be used in court.

Now - do the idea Trump is ACTUALLY a "billionaire"........

Wut? For all I know, his net worth is a stale box of Saltine crackers. That has nothing to do with what Judge Engoron did. It was funny when he went to the press and begged them to stop saying he did what he did.

Biden took classified documents to his house after being told not to do so, signed an affidavit he didn't have any and then was proven to be a liar?

That's news to me.

Nah, he only had his lawyers go to his house and scrub the place before the feds showed up and took these documents into possession. Look, we can pick nits all day long, but at the end of the day, either they both were guilty or they weren't. And unlike Hur, I'm still struggling with how someone's mental capacity NOW somehow changes the past.

Just cut to the chase and spell out what crimes exactly you think Trump committed. For some reason, you fire out specific language when it's anyone else, but what precise crime that "they could get" Trump on will you actually say the words he did?

I'm not an accuser; I'm only reacting to the tricks and traps I see as they happen. I certainly don't have time to sit around and think of ways to "get Trump." Has Trump broken the law somewhere? Well sure, we all have. Has he ever done something mind-bogglingly unethical on an estate deal? Without even looking it up, I'm going to say yes. I maintain that Operation Warpspeed was an obscenity and IF it's ever proven that mRNA injections are, in fact, very dangerous, I would not only be okay with criminal charges of negligence against Trump, I would openly advocate for it.

Well, I like Presidents who don't engage in overt criminal behavior that serves only their purposes. And no, none of this "but Dubya invaded Iraq" misdirection.

And I like political parties that don't engage in Banana Republic politics, but we don't always get what we want. I don't defend Trump because I like or support the guy. I defend him because the tactics being used by his enemies set a HORRIBLE precedent that truly is a "threat to our demoooocracy." Bringing up Iraq would just be pointless whataboutism (an old Soviet tactic.)

Well, the election isn't for another 16 months or so. Landslides usually happen gradually and then suddenly at the end. I have people who try to tell me they lost faith in the media "when the press told us the Reagan-Carter race was close and then Reagan clobbered him." The part they always leave out is: a) there was a HUGE "undecided" vote; b) there was a third party candidacy (John Anderson) who had polled well right up until the one debate Carter and Reagan had, which occurred just one week before the election.

Well, admittedly that was a different time. The corporate press was a little more dependable then (although they've never really been as trustworthy as we like to remember.) Nowadays it's overt attempt to influence the election rather than hedging numbers. That is just a night and day difference. I'm glad these companies are paying the piper now. I do wish Trump would take these wins and turn them into something productive like children's care of veteran's services instead of some stupid library I'll never see.

Fortunately, Donald Trump is precise, disciplined person who would never say something stupid or do something to blow up the candidates in his own party (like the Georgia Senate runoffs).

I think we're all sitting around and just sort of waiting for it to happen. However, stupid gaffes are not going to be enough for Dems to make up the kind of ground they have lost. It could possibly take something that would wind up in the history books.

That your wisdom is less than mine has been well-established...

(Folks, you know I'm kidding....)

Speaking frankly, I agree with you. The longer I live, the more I realize how much I don't know. But just to be clear, it's not that I don't have contempt for Trump, it's just less than yours. I hate all politicians ....almost. I still give Paul and Massie a pass if for no other reason, they actually READ the legislation they know they are going to be voting on at some point.

What's your proposed alternative?

I ask this because just like when Democrats pull their Monday morning QB of "Biden should have announced he wasn't running sooner," there's a difference between how the world works on paper and how the real world works.

Look, I don't care much for the primary system that has produced candidates (and in some cases nominees) whose seemingly sole virtue is "I'm related to another famous politician", whether we're talking Kennedy, Hillary, Dubya, the Long dynasty in LA, the Bayhs in Indiana, or the Rockefellers all over the country. However, the fact voters have a choice is seen in the fact that other nepo candidates like Ben Quayle or Jeb Bush or Chip Carter have LOST races despite famous names.

The proposed alternative? Hell, I don't know. I'm in favor of withholding gun rights from people until they demonstrate competency and responsibility. Why can't we do that with voting?

I mean, I'm not exactly sure how Obama fits into the scheme of "I move to the front because my name is Bush/Clinton/Kennedy." He competed against the establishment candidate and cleaned her clock.

You know, I never did figure this out. There were a lot of conspiracy theories floating around out there and Democrat primaries are demonstrably corrupt. How did some nobody that 90% of the country had never heard of beat one of the most recognizable people in the entire world? It didn't make sense then and it doesn't make sense now. Sure, she's an unlikable hag, but "2008 Hillary" seemed to be more likable than "2016 Hillary." If you have thoughts on that, I'd love to hear them

I don't think mixing together local congressional races, where a quack can win in a limited universe of voters, has any relevance to the Presidential race that pretty much requires a candidate AT A MINIMUM win a majority of the states. A candidate who wins solely by the Electoral College HAS to win - at an absolute minimum - 13 states with the biggest populations. And wouldn't you know it, in the beauty of America, that's 6 blue, 3 red, and 4 purple (2 of which lean red, 2 of which lean blue).

But local Congresscritters, well, there are districts dumb enough to elect those people.

Fair enough, but the lack of safety rails on either local or national elections continue to concern me. I don't have an answer for it and I suspect no one does.

I have my own issues with the primary system as it has been given to us by the fallout from the 1968 Democratic Convention. The thought behind it, though, was the notion of "small d democracy," and the loosening of the notion of party bosses picking the nominee.

But party bosses would never have chosen Donald Trump as nominee, either. I can't say - not for sure - that that would be true of Dubya or even Obama. Dubya would fall into a nepo category such as Benjamin Harrison while Obama would fall into the "fresh face" category of JFK, where they combined the primary results with party boss input.

Even with that, the only candidate I can say for certain would never be chosen at this point is Trump.

I also agree with this. Trump isn't exactly the anti-establishment candidate a lot of indies and libertarians hoped he was, but he clearly cannot be counted on to maintain the status quo both parties have come to expect from the White House. His will, whether one likes it or not, is very strong. For Christsakes, our last president was basically a muppet.

That should tell you what these assclowns who run DC want in a president. They can't have that with Trump around. And people wonder why Trump got little help from his party during the lawfare BS leading up to the election season. This sort of thing can't happen unless at least some (if not most) Republicans (Liz "Miss Piggy" Cheney, cough, cough) were in on it.

And I know what you're thinking: "here we go, more conspiracy-minded takes." All I can say to the DC elites is this: stop acting like you're conspiring and people will likely stop thinking you're conspiring (ideally.) Besides, it's not like Trump is incorruptible. There are better ways to win him over than trying to throw him in jail.

 

[Its On A Slab]

Dating myself, but I remember the National Lampoon ad with the floating VW bug on the water.

"If Ted Kennedy drove a Volkswagen, he'd be President today."

https://www.reddit.com/r/PropagandaPosters/comments/153504u

Side note: Those pre-fuel-injection VW Bugs were amazing vehicles.

Working on them was almost as simple as working on a lawn mower engine. Very easy to work on.

Almost indestructible bumpers. I got drunk one night and ran thru a stop sign and took out a huge wooden fence across the road. Backed up out of the ditch and drove home. Just a few scratches on the bumper.

I never droke it in the lake, though, to test the floatation characteristics. VW advertised that the Bug would float.

 

[jthomas666]

The hell of it is, I'm not advocating for Trump. I'm just calling balls and strikes as I see them.

Hey everybody--Angel Hernandez is on Tidefans!!

 

[jthomas666]

Trump claims his uncle taught the Unabomber, offers no evidence to support claim

President Donald Trump raised eyebrows Tuesday night when he made false claims about a family connection to one of the most deadly American terrorists.

abcnews.go.com

 

[CrimsonJazz]

Trump claims his uncle taught the Unabomber, offers no evidence to support claim

President Donald Trump raised eyebrows Tuesday night when he made false claims about a family connection to one of the most deadly American terrorists.

abcnews.go.com

Oh come now, don't we all have an uncle who taught the Unabomber? Personally, I had three. (And not one of them offered to help me with my dissertation of the correlation between raggedly shacks and nail bombs....the jerks.)

 

[TIDE-HSV]

Literally never heard of the woman until she was appointed. But hey, anybody else notice Trump's infatuation with obviously bleached blondes?



Not an issue for me.

How often has Donald Trump promised a "big reveal?"
Many, including claiming to have stuff on Obama's birth certificate, claiming to have proof of election fraud, etc.

How often has he delivered on his big reveals?
Never.

I always think of her as "Blondi"...

 

[CrimsonJazz]

I always think of her as "Blondi"...

Oh good; it's not just me then.

 

[Bamaro]

Trump claims his uncle taught the Unabomber, offers no evidence to support claim

President Donald Trump raised eyebrows Tuesday night when he made false claims about a family connection to one of the most deadly American terrorists.

abcnews.go.com

A pathological liar is defined as an individual who chronically tells grandiose lies that may stretch or exceed the limits of believability. They often lie incessantly to get their way and do so with little awareness or control over their behavior. This behavior is sometimes referred to as pseudologia fantastica, indicating a compulsive tendency to lie.

 

[CrimsonJazz]

A pathological liar is defined as an individual who chronically tells grandiose lies that may stretch or exceed the limits of believability. They often lie incessantly to get their way and do so with little awareness or control over their behavior. This behavior is sometimes referred to as pseudologia fantastica, indicating a compulsive tendency to lie.

Pointless whataboutism warning: prepare your knickers accordingly:

Would Biden's claim he was arrested in South Africa on his way to see Nelson Mandela count? Or was that just the dementia talking? And let's be honest, neither Trump nor Biden can hold a candle to George Santos when it comes to made-up BS.

 

[Bamaro]

Pointless whataboutism warning: prepare your knickers accordingly:

Would Biden's claim he was arrested in South Africa on his way to see Nelson Mandela count? Or was that just the dementia talking? And let's be honest, neither Trump nor Biden can hold a candle to George Santos when it comes to made-up BS.

Biden and Santos are gone so it makes little difference. We still have 3 1/2 years of the orange liar to deal with.

 

[CrimsonJazz]

Biden and Santos are gone so it makes little difference. We still have 3 1/2 years of the orange liar to deal with.

Fine, but being a pathological liar seems to be in the job description, doesn't it? At least it has seemed that way for some time now.

And for the record, I hope Santos runs again when he gets out of prison. I bet his campaign will be a fun watch.

 

[jthomas666]

Would Biden's claim he was arrested in South Africa on his way to see Nelson Mandela count? Or was that just the dementia talking? And let's be honest, neither Trump nor Biden can hold a candle to George Santos when it comes to made-up BS.

1. You should give Trump more credit.
2. I don't think Biden can suffer from dementia AND be a pathological liar. Dude, you've gotta make up your mind.

 

[Bamaro]

Fine, but being a pathological liar seems to be in the job description, doesn't it? At least it has seemed that way for some time now.

And for the record, I hope Santos runs again when he gets out of prison. I bet his campaign will be a fun watch.

Liar is one thing and goes with the territory but patholigical is something else.