User Tag List

Page 494 of 494 FirstFirst ... 394444484492493494
Results 4,931 to 4,936 of 4936

Thread: Trump Thread...

  1. #4931
    Senior Member BipolarFan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Location
    Up my ass
    Posts
    7,747

  2. #4932
    “He’s not a war hero. He’s a war hero because he was captured. I like people who weren’t captured.” - Donald Trump on John McCain, July 18 2015

    I can't imagine what he thinks of the people who gave their life for their country.

  3. #4933
    Senior Member L.T. Fan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Posts
    15,057
    Quote Originally Posted by Irving Cowboy View Post
    “He’s not a war hero. He’s a war hero because he was captured. I like people who weren’t captured.” - Donald Trump on John McCain, July 18 2015

    I can't imagine what he thinks of the people who gave their life for their country.
    I don’t condone what he said but as a technical matter being a prisoner doesn’t in and of itself make anyone a hero. It clearly is a sacrifice however.

    That said Trump should have just left it alone.
    Since Day One

  4. #4934
    Senior Member BipolarFan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Location
    Up my ass
    Posts
    7,747

    Donald Trump just suggested the FBI, Democrats and Russia might all be co-conspirators

    President Donald Trump sent this tweet on Thursday morning: "Workers of firm involved with the discredited and Fake Dossier take the 5th. Who paid for it, Russia, the FBI or the Dems (or all)?"

    This is, of course, somewhat common fare by this point in the arc of Trump's presidency. Faced this week with storylines he doesn't like -- questions about the Niger attack, controversy over a phone call he placed to the widow of one of the soldiers lost in that attack, Attorney General Jeff Sessions on Capitol Hill facing questions about Russian meddling in the election -- he aims to change the subject via his Twitter feed. And he often does so by lobbing out a conspiracy theory with only the loosest ties to the factual world.

    But even by Trump standards, this morning's tweet is somewhat remarkable. He is suggesting that a dossier prepared by a former member of British intelligence has not only been totally discredited (it hasn't -- more on that in a minute) but that it might have been funded by some combination of Russia, the Democratic Party and, wait for it, the FBI!

    Let's start with the facts.

    At issue is a dossier prepared by Christopher Steele, a former British spy, which details explosive allegations about potential ties between Trump's campaign and Russia. The dossier's more salacious elements regarding Trump have drawn most of the attention -- and remain totally unproven. But it appears as though US intelligence officials do take some chunk of what Steele found quite seriously.

    "Its broad assertion that Russia waged a campaign to interfere in the election is now accepted as fact by the US intelligence community. CNN also reported earlier this year that US investigators have corroborated some aspects of the dossier, specifically that some of the communications among foreign nationals mentioned in the memos did actually take place."

    Investigators tied to special counsel Bob Mueller's investigation into Russian involvement in the 2016 election have also sat down with Steele to discuss the dossier and his findings, according to CNN reporting. The firm hired to produce the dossier -- Fusion GPS -- is refusing to testify before Congress about its involvement. (Fusion GPS founder Glenn Simpson spent 10 hours meeting with Senate Judiciary Committee staff back in August.)

    Trump has the fact of that refusal basically right. But his assertions that the dossier is fake news, "totally made-up stuff" or, as was the case in Thursday's tweet, "discredited" are not born out by the facts as we know them. "Not corroborated" is not the same thing as "not true." Some (many?) of the allegations in the Steele dossier may be untrue. But we simply don't have enough information to conclude that they are at the moment.

    So Trump is wrong about the dossier being "discredited and Fake." (He is also wrong about capitalizing "fake" in that sentence. But, I digress.)

    The bigger issue -- at least to me -- is that Trump is suggesting that the dossier itself was funded by some combination of a foreign power, the opposition political party and a federal law enforcement agency.

    It's easy to roll your eyes at the very suggestion and dismiss that idea as just Trump being Trump. "You guys always take him literally," Trump's supporters will say. "You shouldn't!"

    OK. But here's the thing: President Trump is, um, the President. Which means he is held to the same standard every past president is held to. And by that standard, this tweet is crazy.

    Port yourself six years back in time. It's 2011. President Barack Obama takes to Twitter to say that the stories over his place of birth are the result of a joint China-Republicans-CIA operation designed to discredit him.
    How do you think that one would sit with the average American?

    The point here is that it is deeply irresponsible for a president of the United States to even flirt with this sort of conspiracy talk. You can love Donald Trump and still believe that the idea that the Russians, the Democrats and the FBI co-funded a dossier designed to discredit Trump's 2016 campaign is totally bonkers.

    Unfortunately, lots and lots of Trump backers will believe this stuff solely by dint of the fact that Trump tweeted it. And that, of course, is Trump's goal. Muddy the waters and discredit the ongoing investigations into what Russia did in the 2016 election. Make the whole thing into a partisan witch hunt.

    But, there is no plausible scenario by which what Trump suggested this morning -- a wide-scale conspiracy involving three separate actors across federal agencies and continents -- actually happened. That we can't (won't?) agree on that seemingly obvious fact is troubling.

  5. #4935
    Senior Member BipolarFan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Location
    Up my ass
    Posts
    7,747

    Democrats aren't doing themselves or the country any favors by demonizing the wealthy

    I watched parts of a junior squash tournament on the Dartmouth campus over the weekend. My children do not play; I was purely an observer. This is what the 0.1 percent do on the weekends. As I looked around at the wealthy, well-dressed, athletic families, I felt a hint of disapproval. But then the rational part of my brain took over: Disapproval of what?

    The problem with America right now is not that we have too many highly educated, two-parent families investing heavily in the future of their children. It's the opposite. I had an epiphany in the squash gallery: I was making the same mistake the Democrats routinely make.

    I was on the brink of demonizing wealth and success for no obvious reason. In that spirit, here is my challenge for the Democratic leadership: Go to a junior squash tournament (or some other elite gathering) and take note of all the good things. When you look past the fancy cars with Connecticut license plates, and even the occasional private plane, here are some things you'll see:

    People who are more highly educated than the population at large.

    A higher proportion of two-parent families than the national average.

    Families who are investing huge amounts of time and money in the future well-being of their children.

    Adults who are less likely to smoke, less likely to be obese, more likely to vote, and more likely to be in the labor market than their fellow Americans.

    People who pay a huge amount in taxes. We can quibble over whether the wealthy are "paying their fair share;" in any event, rich people are sending very large checks to the IRS.

    In the particular case of squash, you will see adolescents who are working really hard at a tough sport the kind of perseverance that predicts future life success.

    Sure, you might meet the occasional Biff or Chip who inherited millions from grandma; maybe there is an investment banker in the crowd who designed the toxic assets that nearly brought down the global financial system. Those are the exceptions. Mostly what you'll see are the attributes of success: education, grit, stable families and sensible life decisions. Is that really so bad?

    As I sat there (with the pounding of squash balls all around me), I recognized the Democrats' Achilles' heel: They are making enemies out of those who should be their most important allies. Trump's base consists of America's losers, literally. The Democrats ought therefore to be the home of the winners. So stop beating up on them.

    Donald Trump mocks science; he is withdrawing from the global economy; he has little respect for the media; he is threatening to drown the country in more debt; he has antagonized our international allies and provoked our enemies. The Republicans are unable or unwilling to confront a man who may become the worst president in American history.

    Rational, educated people should be flocking to the Democratic Party. But they're not. Why? Because the Democrats too often project an image of taking from people who are working hard and following the rules and giving to people who are doing neither.

    Compassion is not the same thing as punishing success. Making the system fairer is not the same as demonizing those who succeed in the system we have.

    Do many CEOs make an obscene amount of money? Yes but that is not why unskilled men are dropping out of the workforce in unprecedented numbers.

    Is it fair that our school funding system lavishes the most money on the students who begin with the most privilege? Definitely not.

    There are scores of policy changes necessary to broaden access to opportunity in this country. Richard Reeves of the Brookings Institute has written a book called "Dream Hoarders" that describes policies designed by successful Americans that effectively pull up the ladder for those still trying to climb it: zoning laws that exclude affordable housing; college admissions preferences for children of alumni; unpaid internships (which provide great experience, but only for those who can afford not to be paid); and so on.

    We should fix those things. But to make society fairer in a lasting way, we need the acquiescence of the successful, not their resentment. Try this script out: Thank you for working hard, creating wealth and preparing your children to succeed. Now please help us offer that opportunity to the many Americans who are struggling. Or, as John F. Kennedy said, "To whom much is given, much is expected."

    That is a long way from a Bernie Sanders or Elizabeth Warren speech, which always seem to intimate that if Wall Street were poorer, Main Street would be richer. It doesn't work that way. Wealth is not the problem in America. It's the solution.

    Here is my challenge for the Democrats: Go to a squash tournament, or someplace like it, and figure out how to win over those voters. Because if you cannot appreciate America's most productive and highly educated citizens, and if they do not eagerly embrace the Democratic vision for a fairer society, you will never achieve anything approximating that vision.

  6. #4936
    Senior Member L.T. Fan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Posts
    15,057
    How could you possibly bring yourself to post this. It is such an opposing position from your drill. This is something that guys like me believe namely that the wealthy is the answer to a great deal of the problems. Have you gone soft?

    Since Day One

Posting Permissions

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