• Welcome to BellGab.com Archive.
 

President Donald J. Trump

Started by The General, February 11, 2011, 01:33:34 AM

Dr. MD MD

Quote from: Evil Twin Of Zen on December 04, 2017, 07:48:52 PM
are videos of Muslims killing other Muslims anti-Muslim? ???

According to the gaslighting CIA/MSM who are trying to brainwash the nation, yes.


Quote from: ACE of CLUBS on December 04, 2017, 08:02:25 PM
Donny boy couldn't pick that 'bad boy' up ........ hands are too small.  8)

Lol

Dr. MD MD

Quote from: PB the Deplorable on December 04, 2017, 08:25:56 PM
Lol

You know Manson's "family" members continued to believe in him (the way that you believe in the establishment) long after he'd been convicted and sent to prison. It's because they had to be deprogrammed.  ;)

albrecht

Quote from: Evil Twin Of Zen on December 04, 2017, 08:06:58 PM
.....and it makes purging fast and neat!  ;)
Good for the "miss" whatever pageants and Hollywood reality show appearances. Ladies, I'm kidding. Carlin aside, "eating issues" are not a joke.

ACE of CLUBS

Quote from: Dr. MD MD on December 04, 2017, 08:30:09 PM
You know Donny boy's 'family' members continued to believe in him (the way that you believe in the establishment) long after he'd been convicted and sent to prison. It's because they had to be deprogrammed.  ;)

Fixed it for you ....
Schedule for your de-programming yet ?
Court ordered ?
Get well soon ....

Quote from: albrecht on December 04, 2017, 08:34:04 PM
Good for the "miss" whatever pageants and Hollywood reality show appearances. Ladies, I'm kidding. Carlin aside, "eating issues" are not a joke.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zANvYB93u2g

8)

Dr. MD MD

Quote from: ACE of CLUBS on December 04, 2017, 08:38:43 PM
Fixed it for you ....
Schedule for your de-programming yet ?
Court ordered ?
Get well soon ....

It's not very clever but then again you're an idiot.

Quote from: Dr. MD MD on December 04, 2017, 08:30:09 PM
You know Manson's "family" members continued to believe in him (the way that you believe in the establishment) long after he'd been convicted and sent to prison. It's because they had to be deprogrammed.  ;)

I realize MV accuses me of being a shill for the Establishment - because he realizes everything I post about Trump is true, doesn't want to admit it, and has to say something, however absurd.  Now you're just repeating what he's said.

I'm a conservative, and the Republican Establishment is not.  Please show me the posts where I've supported the Establishment in conflict with conservatism, because if I have I'd like to correct the record.

Dr. MD MD

Quote from: PB the Deplorable on December 04, 2017, 08:45:12 PM
I realize MV accuses me of being a shill for the Establishment - because he realizes everything I post about Trump is true, doesn't want to admit it, and has to say something, however absurd.  Now you're just repeating what he's said.

I'm a conservative, and the Republican Establishment is not.  Please show me the posts where I've supported the Establishment in conflict with conservatism, because if I have I'd like to correct the record.

Your entire basis of criticizing him is that he's not behaving like past presidents. It's almost like you weren't paying attention during the election or something.  ::)


Quote from: Dr. MD MD on December 04, 2017, 09:20:00 PM
Your entire basis of criticizing him is that he's not behaving like past presidents. It's almost like you weren't paying attention during the election or something.  ::)

Do you have trouble with reading comprehension? 

Go back and read what I said - my ''entire basis of criticizing him'' is that he's a) not leading and getting anything accomplished outside the specific powers of his office, i.e., with the Congress, and b) his dumb comments and tweets are alienating people he needs support from and is going to need support from instead of drawing them in. 

You are correct other presidents didn't act this way.  Not because they were ''The Establishment'' and that's how ''The Establishment'' does things - it's because it's ineffective and would have been destructive to their agendas. 

Kidnostad3

Quote from: ItsOver on December 04, 2017, 07:21:55 PM
http://www.cnn.com/2017/12/04/politics/peter-strzok-james-comey/index.html

A former top counterintelligence expert at the FBI, now at the center of a political uproar for exchanging private messages that appeared to mock President Donald Trump, changed a key phrase in former FBI Director James Comey's description of how former secretary of state Hillary Clinton handled classified information, according to US officials familiar with the matter.

Electronic records show Peter Strzok, who led the investigation of Hillary Clinton's private email server as the No. 2 official in the counterintelligence division, changed Comey's earlier draft language describing Clinton's actions as "grossly negligent" to "extremely careless," the sources said.

The drafting process was a team effort, CNN is told, with a handful of people reviewing the language as edits were made, according to another US official familiar with the matter.

The shift from "grossly negligent" to "extremely careless," which may appear pedestrian at first glance, reflected a decision by the FBI that could have had potentially significant legal implications, as the federal law governing the mishandling of classified material establishes criminal penalties for "gross negligence...

Typical fucking legal weasel.  First, decide what outcome you want, then screw around with everything until you get what you want.  THIS is obstruction of justice.  Bastards.

What’s amazing is that CNN is actually reporting this.  Someone on their editorial staff must have fucked up.  Expect a firing.



Quote from: Dr. MD MD on December 04, 2017, 09:20:00 PM
Your entire basis of criticizing him is that he's not behaving like past presidents. It's almost like you weren't paying attention during the election or something.  ::)

Oh, I was paying attention.  I watched him trash members of his own party, and watched the pretend media gleefully report on him and not give the others any attention or air time.  I watched him run on a Tea Party agenda and get a pluralty of votes even from those who didn't care for him personally, because of that agenda.  I watched him appoint a White House staff and a Cabinet with very few people who support that agenda.  I watched him keep dozens if not hundreds of Obama appointees in top positions just below the Cabinent Secretary level.  One of them appointed a special prosecutor first chance he got.

I watched him fumble with the media, show weakness and lack of ability in deflecting ridiculous charges - an ongoing continuous mess, including a special prosecutor, right up to today.  I watched him sitting on his ass not doing a thing to push repeal of ObamaCare through, and not even ask for an immigration bill, and border control bill, or any of the rest of it.  I'm not seeing any reduction at all in spending, or a rebuild of the military.  Sll of which is to say, a year wasted.

He's apparently mostly listening to liberal nobodies like Jared and Ivanka.  Who have the same amount of governing experience and ability he does.  None.  He thrashes around, undoing Obama policies and rules, even those that are beneficial and should be kept - just because Obama implemented them.

This guy is the same idiot, the same jerk, he has been for decades.  None of it is a surprise, except maybe the extent of it.  I guess the question is, were you paying attention?

So the Supreme Court voted 7-2 that the president is responsible for national security, and that extends to who we allow into the country - and not hand-picked fake judges who are more than happy to rule according to their own preferences. 

Regardless of who agrees and who disagrees, the country chooses one person to make those decisions.  He gets a daily briefing on security matters and has access to much more information than these fake judges do.

The trend has been for courts to accept cases they have no Constitutional role in ruling on.  These cases should have been tossed out of court.  How is it no one seemed to have standing when Obama's lawless actions were challenged, but now everyone apparently has standing when it comes to challenging Trump's perfectly legal actions?

Next step should be to remove these judges.

https://www.politico.com/story/2017/12/04/supreme-court-trump-travel-ban-278782 

Kidnostad3

Quote from: PB the Deplorable on December 04, 2017, 08:45:12 PM
I realize MV accuses me of being a shill for the Establishment - because he realizes everything I post about Trump is true, doesn't want to admit it, and has to say something, however absurd.  Now you're just repeating what he's said.

I'm a conservative, and the Republican Establishment is not.  Please show me the posts where I've supported the Establishment in conflict with conservatism, because if I have I'd like to correct the record.

There’s a difference between what’s true and what matters.  Seems to me that he’s getting shit done  notwithstanding his tweets and keeping Dems and RINOs off balance.    I’ll be satisfied with that until someone better comes along.

Dr. MD MD

But all the corruption and crime of the establishment doesn't phase you? You don't see that as the fundamental reason his agenda stalling? No obstruction?  ???

Dr. MD MD

Ask yourselves who wants him to stop tweeting? The same people who want to crack down on free speech and regain control of "the narrative." I refuse to believe you're all this slow.  :D

Kidnostad3

Quote from: PB the Deplorable on December 04, 2017, 10:26:57 PM
So the Supreme Court voted 7-2 that the president is responsible for national security, and that extends to who we allow into the country - and not hand-picked fake judges who are more than happy to rule according to their own preferences. 

Regardless of who agrees and who disagrees, the country chooses one person to make those decisions.  He gets a daily briefing on security matters and has access to much more information than these fake judges do.

The trend has been for courts to accept cases they have no Constitutional role in ruling on.  These cases should have been tossed out of court.  How is it no one seemed to have standing when Obama's lawless actions were challenged, but now everyone apparently has standing when it comes to challenging Trump's perfectly legal actions?

Next step should be to remove these judges.

https://www.politico.com/story/2017/12/04/supreme-court-trump-travel-ban-278782 

Ginsburg and Sodamayor dissenting tells me that the decision was in keeping with the spirit and intent of the constitution.

This is gnawing at me.  Seems like Mueller can find little evidence of collusion with the Russians by Trump and he's trying to make a play for obstruction of justice AFTER Trump was elected.  That is not what he was hired to do.  Methinks he should be fired if he can find no evidence of collusion during the campaign.  He is operating outside of the scope of his investigation.

Quote from: Dr. MD MD on December 04, 2017, 10:37:23 PM
Ask yourselves who wants him to stop tweeting? The same people who want to crack down on free speech and regain control of "the narrative." I refuse to believe you're all this slow.  :D

That's not why I want to stop tweeting.  I just want him to stop acting like a jackass.

Dr. MD MD

Quote from: 21st Century Man on December 04, 2017, 10:50:23 PM
That's not why I want to stop tweeting.  I just want him to stop acting like a jackass.

The bar was lowered long ago. Your definition of jackass has been defined by jackasses. Worse, really. These are people guilty of breaking many of the commandments (the bad ones  ;)) and who show no remorse or signs of stopping or even slowing down.

Quote from: Dr. MD MD on December 04, 2017, 10:33:18 PM
But all the corruption and crime of the establishment doesn't phase you?...

Again, where do you see me supporting that?


Quote from: Dr. MD MD on December 04, 2017, 10:33:18 PM
... You don't see that as the fundamental reason his agenda stalling? No obstruction?  ???

I see him not leading.  That is what is in his control.  The obstructionists are going to obstruct, and every administration deals with that to one degree or another, which is why full and complete agandas don't get done.  To a certain extent, it's why we have separation of powers in the first place. 

So why does he keep the Obama holdovers?  Why did he appoint people who are against his agenda?  Some, if not most of the obstruction is his own doing.

He ran on the understanding that he knew what to do and would do it.  Was he lying?  When did he say he'd rather poke people in the eye with insults than work on his campaign promises, because I don't recall hearing that? 

Please tell me what benefit there was to stating he preferred his heros not be captured - a clear slap at McCain.  I'd really like to know how that benefited him.  I'm sure he enjoyed it at the time.  Oh right, not sending that tweet would have been ''doing what The establishment would have done'', so it was the smart move.  Right?

Most Republicans are voting for the bills when they come up, there are a handful who don't and no Democrats do.  So please just stop with the whiny ''everyone is against Trump'' crap.  Where is Trump in getting these bills over the finish line?  He has the bully pulpit.  He has the ability to threaten specific programs and policies the holdouts hold dear.  He has the ability to reward or punish.  He isn't doing any of it.  Why not?

GravitySucks

Quote from: Kidnostad3 on December 04, 2017, 10:41:31 PM
Ginsburg and Sodamayor dissenting tells me that the decision was in keeping with the spirit and intent of the constitution.

Why didn’t Ginsberg recuse herself? After her comments about Trump, the candidate, she has no business deciding any cases related to him.

Quote from: Dr. MD MD on December 04, 2017, 10:37:23 PM
Ask yourselves who wants him to stop tweeting? The same people who want to crack down on free speech and regain control of "the narrative." I refuse to believe you're all this slow.  :D

I'm fine with tweeting.  If it advances his administration.  I'm obviously talking about the things he does that have no benefit and that are harmful to what he says he wants done.

I get that you don't want to understand this.  And it's fine.  I look forward to your explanations of why he lost the House and/or Senate next year, and re-election in 2020

Dr. MD MD

Quote from: PB the Deplorable on December 04, 2017, 10:59:22 PM
That is what is in his control.

Keep pretending to be naive in service of your narrative.  ::)

Lt.Uhura

Quote from: 21st Century Man on December 04, 2017, 10:49:06 PM
This is gnawing at me.  Seems like Mueller can find little evidence of collusion with the Russians by Trump and he's trying to make a play for obstruction of justice AFTER Trump was elected.  That is not what he was hired to do.  Methinks he should be fired if he can find no evidence of collusion during the campaign.  He is operating outside of the scope of his investigation.

FYI ~

Stop using “collusion” as a short-hand for criminality’

...Collusion is not a federal crime (except in the unique case of antitrust law), so we should all just stop using “collusion” as a short-hand for criminality. But that doesn’t mean that the alleged cooperation between the Trump campaign and Russia is of no criminal interest. To the contrary, if true, it may have violated any number of criminal prohibitions...

Of course, none of this excuses the apparent cover-up, which is often as bad as the original crime. Lying to the federal government in your registration forms or your security application is a false statement. Using the wires to perpetrate your crime is often wire fraud. In short, let’s stop talking about “collusion” and instead talk about real crimes...


http://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2017/07/12/what-is-collusion-215366

Why would they all lie if there were no crimes, nothing to hide?

You seem like a decent guy, 21st. If you were part of a legal investigation, would you lie--under oath?

...I didn't think so :-)

Quote from: Dr. MD MD on December 04, 2017, 10:37:23 PM
Ask yourselves who wants him to stop tweeting?...

By the way, what does that have to do with anything? 

Who cares who thinks what or whatever - focus on whether individual comments and tweets are helpful or harmful.  Just that.  Try to focus on.  Just.  That.  And actually think about it, not just a knee-jerk reaction because you enjoy seeing McCain or Elizabeth Warren or whoever get insulted.

Dr. MD MD

Quote from: PB the Deplorable on December 04, 2017, 11:03:45 PM
I'm fine with tweeting.  If it advances his administration.  I'm obviously talking about the things he does that have no benefit and that are harmful to what he says he wants done.

I get that you don't want to understand this.  And it's fine.  I look forward to your explanations of why he lost the House and/or Senate next year, and re-election in 2020

I just know that any example you provide will be easily countered. Often they seem like they'll be damaging to him but within a matter of day or two it's usually all turned around again and what Trump said is confirmed.

Dr. MD MD

Quote from: Lt.Uhura on December 04, 2017, 11:06:46 PM
FYI ~

Stop using “collusion” as a short-hand for criminality’

...Collusion is not a federal crime (except in the unique case of antitrust law), so we should all just stop using “collusion” as a short-hand for criminality. But that doesn’t mean that the alleged cooperation between the Trump campaign and Russia is of no criminal interest. To the contrary, if true, it may have violated any number of criminal prohibitions...

Of course, none of this excuses the apparent cover-up, which is often as bad as the original crime. Lying to the federal government in your registration forms or your security application is a false statement. Using the wires to perpetrate your crime is often wire fraud. In short, let’s stop talking about “collusion” and instead talk about real crimes...


http://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2017/07/12/what-is-collusion-215366

Why would they all lie if there were no crimes, nothing to hide?

You seem like a decent guy, 21st. If you were part of a legal investigation, would you lie--under oath?

...I didn't think so :-)

You probably lie 3 times before breakfast everyday of your life.  ;D

Powered by SMFPacks Menu Editor Mod