Jump to content

**President Trump 2018 Thread**


Brian

Recommended Posts

President Trump weighed in Monday on the story that dominated America’s social media feeds over the weekend: White House press secretary Sarah Sanders being asked to leave a small restaurant in rural Virginia because its staff disagreed with her defense of the administration’s policies.

And the commander in chief used the bully pulpit of the presidency to disparage the restaurant’s appearance.

“The Red Hen Restaurant should focus more on cleaning its filthy canopies, doors and windows (badly needs a paint job) rather than refusing to serve a fine person like Sarah Huckabee Sanders,” Trump tweeted. “I always had a rule, if a restaurant is dirty on the outside, it is dirty on the inside!”

 

https://www.yahoo.com/news/needs-paint-job-trump-blasts-virginia-restaurant-asking-sarah-sanders-leave-130000156.html

Now the president is breaking the ethics rules, too.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, GoSox05 said:

Not just from Never Trumpers, but how many articles did Chris Cillizza write when Steve King was retweeting a neo-nazi and tweeting about keeping his heritage in tact.

 

She’s an easy target, or sometimes makes herself one.  That said, Kelly and Trump don’t get called out (like ever) for insulting her IQ, but if she took a shot at the intelligence of one of the Trump clan, there would be holy hell to pay on Fox for the next 72 hours.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

42 minutes ago, caulfield12 said:

She’s an easy target, or sometimes makes herself one.  That said, Kelly and Trump don’t get called out (like ever) for insulting her IQ, but if she took a shot at the intelligence of one of the Trump clan, there would be holy hell to pay on Fox for the next 72 hours.

No, not one Republican will call for Trump to apologize or anything like that for saying she was low IQ and pretty much telling her to watch her back. 

Trump has been calling a sitting senator a racial slur for years and no one in his party gives a shit. 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 6/24/2018 at 11:52 AM, Dick Allen said:

Just like everything else in his life, Trump is in it for Trump. Nothing else. Hugging the flag, calling himself a patriot,  all part of the show. His campaign had a ton of contact with Russian operatives. They definitely hacked the election , Trump is soft on Putin. It all adds up. Whether there will be enough to impeach him or not is the question,  and with spineless republicans the answer is almost a lock no. Any vote for a republican senator or congressman in the midterms, or write in or independent that has no chance, is a vote for Trump to go unchecked the rest of his term. If the right is really as much about the constitution as their 2nd amendment cries, they will do the right thing. I understand for a republican,  having a dem house and Senate isn't ideal, but they bought the Trump snake oil, they have to make a sacrifice to bring common sense and civility back to this country. 

You're asking for Republicans to make a sacrifice for the betterment of anything that isn't their personal short term situation? That's less realistic than the 2018 White Sox winning the World Series.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

https://www.cnn.com/2018/06/26/us/woman-berates-man-viral-rant-don-lemon-cnntv/index.html

White woman berates Mexican-American man using Trump’s exact words...as much as I (have) heard that Obama turned white and black against each other and further divided the country, somehow I don’t ever recall a black person attacking a white person with words from Obama’s supposedly inflammatory Trayvon Martin (“he could be my son”) speech

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 hours ago, GoSox05 said:

No, not one Republican will call for Trump to apologize or anything like that for saying she was low IQ and pretty much telling her to watch her back. 

Trump has been calling a sitting senator a racial slur for years and no one in his party gives a shit. 

 

 

He just dusted off Pocahontas yet again this week to attack Warren, fwiw.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Trump attacking Jimmy Fallon of all people. Said Jimmy called him and said "monster ratings" when he appeared on his show. Jimmy says he doesn't have his number, doesn't want his number, and has never called him.  And mentioned since he had Trump on the show, his ratings have plummeted.  More Trump lies. 

Gets some balls republicans, and stand up to all this nonsense. I'm not sticking up for Jimmy per se, but for the love of God, this has to stop. 

Edited by Dick Allen
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Dick Allen said:

Trump attacking Jimmy Fallon of all people. Said Jimmy called him and said "monster ratings" when he appeared on his show. Jimmy says he doesn't have his number, doesn't want his number, and has never called him.  And mentioned since he had Trump on the show, his ratings have plummeted.  More Trump lies. 

Gets some balls republicans, and stand up to all this nonsense. I'm not sticking up for Jimmy per se, but for the love of God, this has to stop. 

Frankly I think all of that is true, that show did pull monster ratings, and since then his ratings have plummeted because he tussled the hair of a fascist on television.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

51 minutes ago, BigSqwert said:

Trump's fascist travel ban was upheld by the Supreme Court.  

Haven't read the opinion, but it seems really inconsistent to rely on statements by government officials about religion as persuasive evidence of unconstitutional government action in one case (Masterpiece - the gay wedding cake case), and to ignore Trump's statements regarding the ban - relying on the neutral language of the text alone - in another case.

Interestingly enough, it appears the dissent did force Roberts to state for the first time that the 1944 decision okaying the internment of Japanese-Americans was wrongly decided.  So there's that... ?

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, illinilaw08 said:

Haven't read the opinion, but it seems really inconsistent to rely on statements by government officials about religion as persuasive evidence of unconstitutional government action in one case (Masterpiece - the gay wedding cake case), and to ignore Trump's statements regarding the ban - relying on the neutral language of the text alone - in another case.

Interestingly enough, it appears the dissent did force Roberts to state for the first time that the 1944 decision okaying the internment of Japanese-Americans was wrongly decided.  So there's that... ?

 

 

Reading through it now. He doesn't ignore it, but says it's not persuasive as other Muslim-majority countries (92% of the Muslim world) are not affected by the ban. Edit: he also points out that there are exceptions to the ban for the countries on the list, e.g. for nonimmigrant visas and permanent residents and those granted asylum. 

So far I think the decision is a good one, despite my opinion that the ban is dumb and unnecessary. The law needs to be changed if we don't want the President to have this kind of power.

Edited by Jenksismyhero
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Jenksismyhero said:

R

So far I think the decision is a good one, despite my opinion that the ban is dumb and unnecessary. The law needs to be changed if we don't want the President to have this kind of power.

We need far more checks. I actually think that people should start to float the idea that the Supreme Court Justice is not nominated by the President at all. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Quote

Muller and Schwarz analyzed the relationship between Trump’s tweets and anti-Muslim hate crimes by drawing upon a number of data sources, including the FBI’s hate crime data between the years 1990 and 2016 as well as Twitter usage across the country. First, they documented that the number of anti-Muslim hate crimes recorded by the FBI increased during Trump’s presidency. In fact, anti-Muslim crimes have been more prevalent under Trump compared to any other previous president, including George W. Bush following 9/11. Second, the researchers found strong statistical correlations between the number of Islam-related tweets made by Trump in a single week and the number of anti-Muslim hate crimes that took place in the days and weeks that followed. Trump’s anti-Islam tweets were only correlated with anti-Muslim crimes and not other types of hate crimes. Therefore, it seems likely that it was the specific content of Trump’s tweets, and not growing anti-minority sentiment in general, that were linked to the uptick in anti-Muslim hate crimes.

Although suggestive, these connections do not prove that Trump’s social media messages caused the spike in crimes. Perhaps Trump’s tweets simply reflected an already growing anti-Muslim sentiment from the public. So Muller and Schwarz analyzed the geographic connection between Trump’s tweets and hate crimes. Since Twitter usage tends to vary by county, they looked at whether Trump’s Islam-related tweets were related to spikes in anti-Muslim crimes where more people used Twitter. They found that the spike in hate crimes did occur mainly in U.S. counties that had high Twitter usage, and this link only showed up after the start of Donald Trump’s presidential campaign.

But still one might wonder if Twitter usage itself may have something to do with the prevalence of hate crimes in a particular geographic area. Maybe places with more Twitter users are more prone to hate-driven violence. Or maybe Twitter users themselves are more likely to be Republican or hold anti-Muslim sentiments. In fact, the data suggests the opposite is likely true. Counties with higher Twitter usage tend to be more Democratic and more ethnically diverse than counties with lower usage. They also have more citizens who prefer to get their news from MSNBC and CNN rather than Fox News. The researchers also looked at whether the areas showing a stronger pattern linking Trump’s tweets and hate crimes were characterized by greater poverty or more crime in general; they were not. There was also no evidence that areas with higher Twitter usage are more prone to hate crimes in general.

Link

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Can't believe more people aren't talking about this:

 

Quote

 

But they had a connection, one Mr. Trump was quick to note in the moments after his first address to Congress in February 2017. As he made his way out of the chamber, Mr. Trump paused to chat with the justice.

“Say hello to your boy,” Mr. Trump said. “Special guy.”

Mr. Trump was apparently referring to Justice Kennedy’s son, Justin. The younger Mr. Kennedy spent more than a decade at Deutsche Bank, eventually rising to become the bank’s global head of real estate capital markets, and he worked closely with Mr. Trump when he was a real estate developer, according to two people with knowledge of his role.

During Mr. Kennedy’s tenure, Deutsche Bank became Mr. Trump’s most important lender, dispensing well over $1 billion in loans to him for the renovation and construction of skyscrapers in New York and Chicago at a time other mainstream banks were wary of doing business with him because of his troubled business history.

 

 

 

Does everything Trump touch have to reek of corruption?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So, I'm reading In the Garden of Beasts right now, Erik Larson's (Devil in the White City) book about the American ambassador to Germany from 1933-1937.  I haven't ever really touched the subject of how Hitler came to power, and how he was able to obtain popular support in Germany for objectively inhumane and horrible policies.

In any event, as I'm reading, I note similarities between the events that Larson depicts (Nazi's attacking the "other" - in their case the Jews, their attacks on the press, and perhaps most startlingly, the number of instances of foreigners getting assaulted for not giving the Nazi salute during parades) and some of the things this administration has done (verbal attacks on immigrants - legal or illegal, attacks on the mainstream media as "fake news," and demonizing people for not standing during the National Anthem).

Note, I'm obviously not saying that Donald Trump is Hitler.  I don't bring these comparisons up to say that Donald Trump is about to start gas chambers for immigrants, or to invade the world.  Rather, I think it's important to note some of the similarities between Hitler's rise to power, and the authoritarian nature of President Trump's behavior in office. 

The flag stuff, the military parade, the demonizing immigrants, the attacks on the press.  The fact that he cozies up to Putin, and expresses admiration for Kim Jong Un and Duterte of the Philippines while attacking NATO and our allies.  This is really authoritarian stuff.  And this is the stuff that shouldn't be normalized, and that both sides of the aisle should be pushing back against hard.  This is the stuff that transcends my team vs. your team.  And we should be taking lessons from the rise of authoritarian leaders of the past (even, gasps, Adolf Hitler) to recognize the signs and push back against it.

 

  • Like 3
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...