[Discussion] The Donald Trump Administration

Let's follow and discuss what our newest presidential administration gets up to, the good, the bad, the lawsuits.

DSGamer wrote:

IMAGE(https://im-01.gifer.com/6yZ.gif)

He thinks he's a tough guy when he'd be whimpering in the corner. What a joke.

V for Vendetta kinda nailed this one. Start at 43 seconds, youtube link botched the start.

I tell you what, I wish I would have been there, one chance to be face to face....

Sure Donny... sure...

thrawn82 wrote:
Paleocon wrote:
thrawn82 wrote:
cheeze_pavilion wrote:
DSGamer wrote:
Hockosi wrote:

I saw violent movies as a child. I'm feeling some tendencies, ya know.

I honestly feel like this is something where liberals have to give. If I'm asking conservatives to consider limits on guns then it at least has to be studied if unrelenting violent media has an effect on people.

Why? Do you think it'll get conservatives to listen? Don't mistake a rhetorical tactic like this sort of distraction for an honest sentiment.

Besides, there are no liberals anymore. I'm not sure there ever were. Now we're all 'progressives' or something. I honestly think for most on the left, they'd be happy to make this trade. I don't even think they'd care about waiting for the 'studies' to conclude anything solid.

Of course they won;t wait for the studies. The studies have been done already, unfortunately they routinely fail to find any correlations which ends up being a serious problem for the violent media causes violent actions.

I mean lets me serious, do you really think Punisher has a more substantial effect on behavior than cat-baiting did?

Or public lynching for that matter.

The most recent Breaking on the Wheel was in 1841 (if you don't already know what that is... probably don't look it up, trust me its bad). The last official public hanging was in 1936; 20,000 people showed up to watch it.

Someone has been listening to Hardcore History.

IMAGE(https://i.imgur.com/EFyvlFb.jpg)

Nimcosi wrote:
thrawn82 wrote:
Paleocon wrote:
thrawn82 wrote:
cheeze_pavilion wrote:
DSGamer wrote:
Hockosi wrote:

I saw violent movies as a child. I'm feeling some tendencies, ya know.

I honestly feel like this is something where liberals have to give. If I'm asking conservatives to consider limits on guns then it at least has to be studied if unrelenting violent media has an effect on people.

Why? Do you think it'll get conservatives to listen? Don't mistake a rhetorical tactic like this sort of distraction for an honest sentiment.

Besides, there are no liberals anymore. I'm not sure there ever were. Now we're all 'progressives' or something. I honestly think for most on the left, they'd be happy to make this trade. I don't even think they'd care about waiting for the 'studies' to conclude anything solid.

Of course they won;t wait for the studies. The studies have been done already, unfortunately they routinely fail to find any correlations which ends up being a serious problem for the violent media causes violent actions.

I mean lets me serious, do you really think Punisher has a more substantial effect on behavior than cat-baiting did?

Or public lynching for that matter.

The most recent Breaking on the Wheel was in 1841 (if you don't already know what that is... probably don't look it up, trust me its bad). The last official public hanging was in 1936; 20,000 people showed up to watch it.

Someone has been listening to Hardcore History. :)

Indeed! Thats what brought it to the front of my mind anyway, but i think the bulk of my knowledge of the subject came from The Better Angels of Our Nature: Why Violence Has Declined by Stephen Pinker et al

Sarah Huckabee Sanders wrote:

He was just stating that as a leader he would have stepped in and hopefully been able to help.

No he f*cking wasn't. That's not what he said in any way, shape, or form. He said, "You don’t know until you’re tested, but I think I really believe I’d run in there even if I didn’t have a weapon." He used different words because he said something different. That's kinda how language works.

Holy crap that's infuriating!

Chumpy_McChump wrote:
Sarah Huckabee Sanders wrote:

He was just stating that as a leader he would have stepped in and hopefully been able to help.

No he f*cking wasn't. That's not what he said in any way, shape, or form. He said, "You don’t know until you’re tested, but I think I really believe I’d run in there even if I didn’t have a weapon." He used different words because he said something different. That's kinda how language works.

Holy crap that's infuriating!

It has to be exhausting having to clean up after the moral vortex that is Donald Trump. It's like a 300 pound baby that can't stop sh*tting itself. Everywhere.

Kelly yanked Kushner's access to Top Security information.

Now I honestly have to wonder how Kushner's going to pay off all his family loans if he's not able to send his debtor's a copy of the Presidential Daily Briefing.

OG_slinger wrote:

Kelly yanked Kushner's access to Top Security information.

Now I honestly have to wonder how Kushner's going to pay off all his family loans if he's not able to send his debtor's a copy of the Presidential Daily Briefing.

Tomorrows head: Jared Kushner has fall down stairs, both legs broken, is quoted as saying "I fell down that stairs because I am a clumsy dumb-guy what does that sort of thing"

So, this means Kelly’s exit is basically guaranteed and it’s just a matter of when, right?

Paleocon wrote:

It has to be exhausting having to clean up after the moral vortex that is Donald Trump. It's like a 300 pound baby that can't stop sh*tting itself. Everywhere.

It was for Spicer. But she seems to revel in it. Like father like daughter I guess.

gewy wrote:

So, this means Kelly’s exit is basically guaranteed and it’s just a matter of when, right?

He's crossed the family so... probably.

Demosthenes wrote:
gewy wrote:

So, this means Kelly’s exit is basically guaranteed and it’s just a matter of when, right?

He's crossed the family so... probably.

How’s he going to commit crimes without security clearance?

DSGamer wrote:
Demosthenes wrote:
gewy wrote:

So, this means Kelly’s exit is basically guaranteed and it’s just a matter of when, right?

He's crossed the family so... probably.

How’s he going to commit crimes without security clearance?

Life Jared finds a way.

Hmm, I almost wonder if Kelly has had enough and did this knowing, either consciously or subconsciously, that it would hasten the inevitable.

Why do you think Trump will stand up for his family. He probably doesn't even know Kushner anymore.

Never met the guy. Just a low level aide. Coffee boy.

Chumpy_McChump wrote:
Sarah Huckabee Sanders wrote:

He was just stating that as a leader he would have stepped in and hopefully been able to help.

No he f*cking wasn't. That's not what he said in any way, shape, or form. He said, "You don’t know until you’re tested, but I think I really believe I’d run in there even if I didn’t have a weapon." He used different words because he said something different. That's kinda how language works.

Holy crap that's infuriating!

I bet he wasn't happy about the way Sarah spun it either. He meant what he said. He likes to think he's a tough guy.

Quintin_Stone wrote:
Chumpy_McChump wrote:
Sarah Huckabee Sanders wrote:

He was just stating that as a leader he would have stepped in and hopefully been able to help.

No he f*cking wasn't. That's not what he said in any way, shape, or form. He said, "You don’t know until you’re tested, but I think I really believe I’d run in there even if I didn’t have a weapon." He used different words because he said something different. That's kinda how language works.

Holy crap that's infuriating!

I bet he wasn't happy about the way Sarah spun it either. He meant what he said. He likes to think he's a tough guy.

It's guaranteed Trump was upset that Sanders didn't fully validate the 80s action movie that was running in his head when he said that bullsh*t.

The only greater offense a presidential aide could commit is getting more media coverage than Trump.

Ohhh Sanders is so great and Trump is so boring. I would way rather watch Sanders.

OG_slinger wrote:
Quintin_Stone wrote:
Chumpy_McChump wrote:
Sarah Huckabee Sanders wrote:

He was just stating that as a leader he would have stepped in and hopefully been able to help.

No he f*cking wasn't. That's not what he said in any way, shape, or form. He said, "You don’t know until you’re tested, but I think I really believe I’d run in there even if I didn’t have a weapon." He used different words because he said something different. That's kinda how language works.

Holy crap that's infuriating!

I bet he wasn't happy about the way Sarah spun it either. He meant what he said. He likes to think he's a tough guy.

It's guaranteed Trump was upset that Sanders didn't fully validate the 80s action movie that was running in his head when he said that bullsh*t.

The only greater offense a presidential aide could commit is getting more media coverage than Trump.

I remember Mooch talking up Trump’s athletic prowess like he was some sort of god like combination of Michael Jordan and Joe Montana. Meanwhile Trump bailed so fast on the annual tradition of throwing out the first pitch because there was no shot he was going to actual throw the ball anywhere near the plate and shattering that “image”.

I guess I understand that the NSA has to follow orders but I am surprised there isn't a prime directive or a general underlying order of keep spies & other national powers from boinking with the election.

Hobear wrote:

I guess I understand that the NSA has to follow orders but I am surprised there isn't a prime directive or a general underlying order of keep spies & other national powers from boinking with the election.

In all fairness to the NSA there is a difference between no orders and having been ordered not to do something.

Garrcia wrote:
Hobear wrote:

I guess I understand that the NSA has to follow orders but I am surprised there isn't a prime directive or a general underlying order of keep spies & other national powers from boinking with the election.

In all fairness to the NSA there is a difference between no orders and having been ordered not to do something.

Seeing that scares me more as they see another national power futzing with the US and that is reported up to deaf ears and no one else can order the NSA to counter it?

On the one hand, yeah. On the other hand, I'm not super comfortable with the NSA adhering to the "nobody told me not to" rule in conducting things. For those instances where taking action is the obvious thing to do, I'd prefer it if they stuck to waiting for the executive to give the order to do something, as any executive with a pulse and a brain would do.

Of course, we're not dealing with that, and we're finding out that having a President who is potentially compromised really is a big, giant deal.

It's the lack of action on good Intel and awaiting orders form the potentially compressed president that bothers me. Thank you Chaz for helping my Brain. I agree entirely.

Kushner, Russia bombshells rock the White House

A volley of stunning revelations over Jared Kushner and the Russia probe are rocking Donald Trump's inner circle and suggest a pivotal moment is at hand in the West Wing personnel wars that have raged throughout his presidency.

This part was posted earlier

First, it emerged Tuesday that chief of staff John Kelly downgraded the top secret security clearance for the President's son-in-law in a bid to clear up a scandal over whether top administration players are qualified to access the most sensitive intelligence.

But this I hadn't heard or read before.

Then, The Washington Post published a bombshell report that at least four countries had discussed how to use Kushner's sparse experience, financial troubles and intricate business arrangements to manipulate him.

Nor this.

Hours later, CNN reported that special counsel Robert Mueller is asking questions about Trump's business dealings with Russia before the President's campaign, a potentially significant development in the investigation.

My take is that McMaster knows his influence is waning if not on his way out and this is his shot across the bow to Trump to leave him alone. Kushner is already vulnerable so he was a safe target.

farley3k wrote:

Kushner, Russia bombshells rock the White House

A volley of stunning revelations over Jared Kushner and the Russia probe are rocking Donald Trump's inner circle and suggest a pivotal moment is at hand in the West Wing personnel wars that have raged throughout his presidency.

This part was posted earlier

First, it emerged Tuesday that chief of staff John Kelly downgraded the top secret security clearance for the President's son-in-law in a bid to clear up a scandal over whether top administration players are qualified to access the most sensitive intelligence.

But this I hadn't heard or read before.

Then, The Washington Post published a bombshell report that at least four countries had discussed how to use Kushner's sparse experience, financial troubles and intricate business arrangements to manipulate him.

Nor this.

Hours later, CNN reported that special counsel Robert Mueller is asking questions about Trump's business dealings with Russia before the President's campaign, a potentially significant development in the investigation.

This article is full of hyped up language that I'd expect to see on Gawker. CNN really is desperate for eyes, aren't they?