Page 96 of 171 FirstFirst ... 46869495969798106146 ... LastLast
Results 2,851 to 2,880 of 5128

Thread: TRUMP 2016

  1. #2851
    Quote Originally Posted by wiggin View Post
    The Republican Party and Hillary Clinton did far more than any other person to get Trump elected. Regardless, I disagree with some of the choices that Comey has made - notably his letter shortly before the election regarding the Clinton email thing - but I think you'd have trouble finding people who seriously doubt his commitment to his job and his professionalism. People were complaining about Comey being anti-Trump back when cleared Clinton on the email scandal and recently when he has very clearly contradicted statements made by the president, but others lambasted him for a pro-Trump bias based on his handling of the late Clinton emails and some issues regarding Trump's own behavior that was under investigation. I think he was trying to walk a fine line between appearing to withhold information and appearing to interfere with an election by releasing information. I don't think he struck the right balance, but he was in a difficult position and likely would have gotten it wrong no matter how he juggled things. People who have worked with him have pretty high praise for his professionalism and skill, even when they might disagree with some of his actions. I find this encouraging. Just because you don't like him doesn't mean he can't do the job, and do it reasonably well.
    The same Republican officials who either didn't endorse Trump or endorsed him and then stuck their head in the sand for most of the election cycle? Or the same Republican voters would have voted for Bin Laden as long as he had an R next to his name?

    FYI, you will have no problem finding people who question Comey's professionalism. Undermining the fairness of an election by leaking information about the investigation of one candidate but not another is the height of unprofessionalism. This is a standard corrupt law enforcement tool in local politics: imply one of the candidates might be up to no good right before an election. Then claim you were just doing due diligence once that candidate inevitably loses.

    Loki, I'm honestly curious: do you think matters would be better if we had real bozos (like some of our current cabinet members) in high civil service positions instead of the current crop? If, say, DJT had decided to let the US Attorneys stay in their jobs indefinitely, do you think they should have resigned en masse and let themselves be replaced by whatever street sweepings the administration could find? Should ambassadors and other high ranking civil servants resign and let DJT put in whatever unqualified hacks he wants? How will this make our faith in democratic norms and institutions any stronger?
    Have you seen what happened to his travel ban? And his healthcare plan? And ISIS plan? And wall plan? His bozos don't know how to either create or implement policy. So yes, instead of amending his insane policies just enough to get them passed, we'd be better off if he only employed complete idiots who'd keep on pushing things that had no chance of ever getting implemented. More importantly, this will send a signal to everyone what a terrible mistake this election was. Kind of like it took the economic collapse of several communist countries for people to wake up to the idiocy behind that ideology. Normalizing Trump means no one learns a lesson. And we get a more competent populist/nativist next time around.

    I think there is a clear distinction between people in high civil service positions continuing to do their jobs - inasmuch as they believe their tasks to be legal and constitutional - and people actively joining the administration, such as current cabinet picks and other nominated positions. I have nothing but contempt for those GOP congressmen and senators who are burying their heads in the sand and actively assisting the Trump administration in deflecting attention from important issues like the Russia mess in order to achieve their legislative agenda (and grudging respect for those who are refusing to do so). But people like the current Director of the NSA weren't put there by Trump, and they have every reason to try to keep the government functioning - and providing important advice to the executive branch. I think the continued functioning and professionalism of our bureaucracy is one of the ways to safeguard our institutions from the kind of patronage and authoritarian behavior Trump seems to exhibit.
    I thought we were talking about political appointments? I'm fine with people doing their job to keep the country from disintegrating. I'm not ok with people coming in to implement any kind of changes.
    Hope is the denial of reality

  2. #2852
    Quote Originally Posted by Loki View Post
    The same Republican officials who either didn't endorse Trump or endorsed him and then stuck their head in the sand for most of the election cycle? Or the same Republican voters would have voted for Bin Laden as long as he had an R next to his name?

    FYI, you will have no problem finding people who question Comey's professionalism. Undermining the fairness of an election by leaking information about the investigation of one candidate but not another is the height of unprofessionalism. This is a standard corrupt law enforcement tool in local politics: imply one of the candidates might be up to no good right before an election. Then claim you were just doing due diligence once that candidate inevitably loses.
    I didn't say people didn't doubt his professionalism. I said people who worked with him - including a bevy of Obama administration officials - seemed to think he was on the up and up. I found this fairly convincing - even during the height of criticism of his actions immediately prior to the election, you were able to find Democrats who worked with him who continued to have good things to say about him. They might have disagreed with his choice to send that letter, but they didn't think he was a partisan hack. I am sure that I could be wrong, but everything I have read indicates to me that he was trying to manage a difficult situation and messed up rather than was intentionally trying to throw the election. There is some context to his letter that IMO explains why he sent it; I don't agree he made the right choice, but I understand his reasoning.

    Have you seen what happened to his travel ban? And his healthcare plan? And ISIS plan? And wall plan? His bozos don't know how to either create or implement policy. So yes, instead of amending his insane policies just enough to get them passed, we'd be better off if he only employed complete idiots who'd keep on pushing things that had no chance of ever getting implemented. More importantly, this will send a signal to everyone what a terrible mistake this election was. Kind of like it took the economic collapse of several communist countries for people to wake up to the idiocy behind that ideology. Normalizing Trump means no one learns a lesson. And we get a more competent populist/nativist next time around.
    I think you are dreaming if you think the administration won't be able to fix some of their mistakes moving forward. They can learn (even the bozos), and they can recruit people who agree with them but aren't quite as stupid. I am not willing to bet the future of our country on the assumption that the administration will be universally incompetent. Furthermore, the incompetence in leading major bureaucracies certainly makes it tough to craft new policies (which may be a good thing) but it also makes it hard to administer our current policies - which can be a very bad thing. I would like, say, the DOJ and DOE and DHHS to continue functioning relatively smoothly. I am not convinced that sending the country into the shitter for four to eight years is a useful response to populism; the damage to our professionalized bureaucracy could be permanent, especially if patronage becomes the norm over that time period.

    I do not discount your concerns - it is indeed a difficult path to tread for senior civil servants who are aghast at the sheer ineptitude, dishonesty, and flagrant illegality of elements of the administration's policies. And they need to be transparent, absolutely clear in communicating their data-driven position on whatever may be the latest outrage. They also much refuse to carry out illegal orders. But I think a semi-competent set of government agencies will still do a better job resisting the tide of populism than en masse resignations that leave every major position in the hands of a Trump crony. And I think our citizenry is intelligent enough to distinguish between people doing their jobs and people agreeing with the President.

    I thought we were talking about political appointments? I'm fine with people doing their job to keep the country from disintegrating. I'm not ok with people coming in to implement any kind of changes.
    Yes, I just wanted to be clear that active participation in the administration (sort of a 'I'll join them in order to influence from within') is not something I support. But more passive participation - by remaining in appointed positions so long as one is not fired or asked to do something illegal - IMO may be worthwhile.
    "When I meet God, I am going to ask him two questions: Why relativity? And why turbulence? I really believe he will have an answer for the first." - Werner Heisenberg (maybe)

  3. #2853
    Quote Originally Posted by wiggin View Post
    I didn't say people didn't doubt his professionalism. I said people who worked with him - including a bevy of Obama administration officials - seemed to think he was on the up and up. I found this fairly convincing - even during the height of criticism of his actions immediately prior to the election, you were able to find Democrats who worked with him who continued to have good things to say about him. They might have disagreed with his choice to send that letter, but they didn't think he was a partisan hack. I am sure that I could be wrong, but everything I have read indicates to me that he was trying to manage a difficult situation and messed up rather than was intentionally trying to throw the election. There is some context to his letter that IMO explains why he sent it; I don't agree he made the right choice, but I understand his reasoning.
    That was before anyone knew he was simultaneously running an investigation on Trump, but keeping it on the DL.
    When the sky above us fell
    We descended into hell
    Into kingdom come

  4. #2854
    Quote Originally Posted by Steely Glint View Post
    That was before anyone knew he was simultaneously running an investigation on Trump, but keeping it on the DL.
    I think there's a substantive difference, though. The initial findings from his Clinton email investigation were already public, and there were several leaks in the days leading up to his disclosure that were already muddying the waters, suggesting that there were new emails that could implicate HRC in wrongdoing. Refusing to say anything could easily have been construed as an attempt to manipulate the election as well. My guess is that Comey felt that in this circumstance, it was important to set the record straight: essentially, 'yes, there are some new emails, yes we are looking at them, no, we have no evidence of wrongdoing at this time'. In contrast, the Trump investigation was not yet public (and they still have yet to release any findings that would implicate the Trump campaign in coordinating with Russian interference in the election), so any change in the status of that investigation was not going to excite comment (though the existence of it most certainly would). He would 100% have been accused of meddling if he had done either of the two options he didn't take: 1. tell everyone about the Trump investigation as well or 2. refuse to say anything about the reopened HRC investigation even in the face of leaks.

    I personally think he erred, badly. It probably made sense for him just to keep his mouth shut and hide behind DOJ rules as a justification. But I understand his misplaced desire to appear transparent on this case given the context in which it was placed. After all, I'm far more willing to believe someone does something stupid than someone is involved in a conspiracy to throw the US election.
    "When I meet God, I am going to ask him two questions: Why relativity? And why turbulence? I really believe he will have an answer for the first." - Werner Heisenberg (maybe)

  5. #2855
    "In a field where an overlooked bug could cost millions, you want people who will speak their minds, even if they’re sometimes obnoxious about it."

  6. #2856
    RT vehemently denied links to Russia?
    "One day, we shall die. All the other days, we shall live."

  7. #2857
    Hope is the denial of reality

  8. #2858
    Wonder if ISPs will give Big Brother a discount
    "One day, we shall die. All the other days, we shall live."

  9. #2859
    We need to crowdsource the funds to purchase this customer data then datamine the shit out of it and release everything we can find from the politicians.

    Watch how fast the law gets changed again.
    "In a field where an overlooked bug could cost millions, you want people who will speak their minds, even if they’re sometimes obnoxious about it."

  10. #2860
    Twitter link is gone. Fake news?
    Faith is Hope (see Loki's sig for details)
    If hindsight is 20-20, why is it so often ignored?

  11. #2861
    The last two tweets and their sources still load...
    "In a field where an overlooked bug could cost millions, you want people who will speak their minds, even if they’re sometimes obnoxious about it."

  12. #2862
    Quote Originally Posted by wiggin View Post
    I think there's a substantive difference, though. The initial findings from his Clinton email investigation were already public, and there were several leaks in the days leading up to his disclosure that were already muddying the waters, suggesting that there were new emails that could implicate HRC in wrongdoing. Refusing to say anything could easily have been construed as an attempt to manipulate the election as well. My guess is that Comey felt that in this circumstance, it was important to set the record straight: essentially, 'yes, there are some new emails, yes we are looking at them, no, we have no evidence of wrongdoing at this time'. In contrast, the Trump investigation was not yet public (and they still have yet to release any findings that would implicate the Trump campaign in coordinating with Russian interference in the election), so any change in the status of that investigation was not going to excite comment (though the existence of it most certainly would). He would 100% have been accused of meddling if he had done either of the two options he didn't take: 1. tell everyone about the Trump investigation as well or 2. refuse to say anything about the reopened HRC investigation even in the face of leaks.

    I personally think he erred, badly. It probably made sense for him just to keep his mouth shut and hide behind DOJ rules as a justification. But I understand his misplaced desire to appear transparent on this case given the context in which it was placed. After all, I'm far more willing to believe someone does something stupid than someone is involved in a conspiracy to throw the US election.
    What I meant was, Democratic senators who previously looked at him as a stand up dude who made a wrong call might start to give him the side eye now that this new information about the Trump investigation has come to light.

    I don't necessarily disagree with your interpretation of his behavior, though I think it's something he needs to make an account of.
    When the sky above us fell
    We descended into hell
    Into kingdom come

  13. #2863
    Quote Originally Posted by Loki View Post
    Explains their war on education.
    When the sky above us fell
    We descended into hell
    Into kingdom come

  14. #2864
    Trump voter giving Florida man a run for his money: https://www.yahoo.com/news/trump-sup...193439132.html
    Hope is the denial of reality

  15. #2865
    For the anti-Trump folks, don't let this be you:

    Hope is the denial of reality

  16. #2866
    Quote Originally Posted by Loki View Post
    For the anti-Trump folks, don't let this be you:

    . . .

    Loki that IS you. Just a couple of pages ago. Or was it one of the other threads when you declared Hannity a traitor in service to a foreign power?
    Last night as I lay in bed, looking up at the stars, I thought, “Where the hell is my ceiling?"

  17. #2867
    Quote Originally Posted by Loki View Post
    For the anti-Trump folks, don't let this be you:

    Garland or the guy in the video?
    "One day, we shall die. All the other days, we shall live."

  18. #2868
    'Here’s the picture of the leaders negotiating away birth control, maternity care and abortion. Notice anything?'
    http://www.independent.co.uk/news/wo...-a7647426.html

    Click to view the full version
    "In a field where an overlooked bug could cost millions, you want people who will speak their minds, even if they’re sometimes obnoxious about it."

  19. #2869
    https://broadly.vice.com/en_us/artic...ource=vicefbus

    Yeah, no funny reaction gifs for this one. These people are unalloyed scum.

    (these people = republicans)

    Y'all can stick that in your 'both sides' and smoke it.

    Also

    http://edition.cnn.com/2017/03/22/po...ans/index.html

    Left between / a tyrant's temper mean / and treason and betrayal / cold and stale
    When the sky above us fell
    We descended into hell
    Into kingdom come

  20. #2870
    Quote Originally Posted by Steely Glint View Post
    https://broadly.vice.com/en_us/artic...ource=vicefbus

    Yeah, no funny reaction gifs for this one. These people are unalloyed scum.

    (these people = republicans)

    GOP Politician Says Pregnancy from Rape or Incest Is Like 'Beauty from Ashes'

    Invoking God, the Oklahoma House of Representatives just passed a bill outlawing abortion in cases of fetal abnormality—with no exception for rape or incest.

    Republican politicians frequently have to say dumb and vile things to justify abortion bans that don't allow exceptions under any circumstances—including pregnancies resulting from rape or incest, or if the woman's life is in danger. The latest example comes from an Oklahoma state representative, George Faught, who introduced a bill that would ban abortions due to fetal genetic abnormalities or Down syndrome. The bill would make it illegal for doctors to perform abortions under that criteria; those who refuse to comply could have their licenses suspended or revoked and face fines of up to $100,000.

    Defending the fact that the ban would have no exceptions, Faught suggested that "rape and incest could be part of God's will," according to the Huffington Post. And when Democratic members of the state's House challenged him, asking him directly if rape was the will of God, he seemed to imply that, since rape was in the Bible, it's just a natural part of life that women have to deal with.



    He sounds like quite a guy
    Quote Originally Posted by Steely Glint View Post
    It's actually the original French billion, which is bi-million, which is a million to the power of 2. We adopted the word, and then they changed it, presumably as revenge for Crecy and Agincourt, and then the treasonous Americans adopted the new French usage and spread it all over the world. And now we have to use it.

    And that's Why I'm Voting Leave.

  21. #2871
    How do these people get elected FFS.
    Quote Originally Posted by Ominous Gamer View Post
    ℬeing upset is understandable, but be upset at yourself for poor planning, not at the world by acting like a spoiled bitch during an interview.

  22. #2872
    Quote Originally Posted by RandBlade View Post
    How do these people get elected FFS.
    Quote Originally Posted by Timbuk2 View Post
    Oklahoma
    The bible belt is real, morally and socially backwards, and very dangerous.
    "In a field where an overlooked bug could cost millions, you want people who will speak their minds, even if they’re sometimes obnoxious about it."

  23. #2873
    Quote Originally Posted by RandBlade View Post
    How do these people get elected FFS.
    Apparently it's the cost of promoting business or something.
    "One day, we shall die. All the other days, we shall live."

  24. #2874
    House Intelligence Committee open hearing into Russia links 'cancelled', says furious Democrat leader

    Adam Schiff tweeted that Devin Nunes had "cancelled open Intelligence Committee hearing with Clapper, Brennan and Yates in attempt to choke off public info", referring to former Deputy Attorney General Sally Yates, Director of the CIA John Brennan, and Director of National Intelligence James Clapper, all former Obama administration officials.
    "In a field where an overlooked bug could cost millions, you want people who will speak their minds, even if they’re sometimes obnoxious about it."

  25. #2875
    Quelle surprise. They'd all have much more leeway to speak fully. I read through the complete transcript for the earlier hearing and it was fairly pointless since almost anything that actually mattered was something they declined to comment on "to preserve the integrity of the investigation or the intelligence process," and the Committee couldn't have compelled them to answer, at least not in open session, since the administration would certainly invoke Executive Privilege. These three aren't bound as tightly, particularly not Yates.
    Last night as I lay in bed, looking up at the stars, I thought, “Where the hell is my ceiling?"

  26. #2876
    Trump, GOP leaders pull health care bill in 'humiliating' loss

    7 years and they have nothing to show for it.
    "In a field where an overlooked bug could cost millions, you want people who will speak their minds, even if they’re sometimes obnoxious about it."

  27. #2877
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Amsterdam/Istanbul
    Posts
    12,312
    Quote Originally Posted by Ominous Gamer View Post
    Trump, GOP leaders pull health care bill in 'humiliating' loss

    7 years and they have nothing to show for it.
    After all these repeal votes they balk at an actual repeal?
    Congratulations America

  28. #2878
    Quote Originally Posted by Timbuk2 View Post

    GOP Politician Says Pregnancy from Rape or Incest Is Like 'Beauty from Ashes'

    Invoking God, the Oklahoma House of Representatives just passed a bill outlawing abortion in cases of fetal abnormality—with no exception for rape or incest.

    Republican politicians frequently have to say dumb and vile things to justify abortion bans that don't allow exceptions under any circumstances—including pregnancies resulting from rape or incest, or if the woman's life is in danger. The latest example comes from an Oklahoma state representative, George Faught, who introduced a bill that would ban abortions due to fetal genetic abnormalities or Down syndrome. The bill would make it illegal for doctors to perform abortions under that criteria; those who refuse to comply could have their licenses suspended or revoked and face fines of up to $100,000.

    Defending the fact that the ban would have no exceptions, Faught suggested that "rape and incest could be part of God's will," according to the Huffington Post. And when Democratic members of the state's House challenged him, asking him directly if rape was the will of God, he seemed to imply that, since rape was in the Bible, it's just a natural part of life that women have to deal with.



    He sounds like quite a guy
    Look, if you believe abortion is the taking of human life akin to murder than there exists a reason to protect the life even in the event of rape or incest. Politically speaking that isn't palatable to most voters so comprises are made and the 'exceptions for rape and incest' position are held by moderate conservatives.

  29. #2879
    Quote Originally Posted by Ominous Gamer View Post
    Trump, GOP leaders pull health care bill in 'humiliating' loss

    7 years and they have nothing to show for it.
    Yeah, this is pretty pathetic.

  30. #2880
    Senior Member Flixy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    The Netherlands
    Posts
    6,435
    http://time.com/4710456/donald-trump...me-amp-fbshare

    The guy really is disconnected from reality.

    The article about the interview had this gem about the national enquirer:
    tabloid famous for its unconventional editorial standards.
    That's a very nice way if saying they publish bullshit
    Keep on keepin' the beat alive!

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •