# Fusion GPS testimony released, parts of Trump-Russia dossier confirmed by a Trump campaign source



## Xzi (Jan 11, 2018)

http://www.newsweek.com/fusion-gps-testimony-steele-pee-tape-dossier-russia-776223

This gets more juicy almost by the day.  IMO the dossier is 100% accurate, it was put together by a former MI6 agent and funded first by Trump's Republican opponents then by the Democrats later.  Now we're just waiting for it to be verified bit by bit.

This comes hot on the heels of the release of Michael Wolff's book 'Fire and Fury,' which reveals this administration as almost entirely incompetent.  The White House is not having a strong showing so far in 2018.


----------



## Costello (Jan 11, 2018)

if it turns out to be proven true what impact will it have on anything? 
I'd say probably none... if you already support Trump this isn't the kind of thing thats going to put you off, right?


----------



## Xzi (Jan 11, 2018)

Costello said:


> if it turns out to be proven true what impact will it have on anything?
> I'd say probably none... if you already support Trump this isn't the kind of thing thats going to put you off, right?


If it's all proven true then there are certainly solid grounds to impeach at that point.  Not that I'm expecting the current congress/senate to move on that, but if just a few seats swing Democrat in the mid-term election, the likelihood of impeachment skyrockets.  Mueller's investigation will probably complete this year and add fuel to the fire as well.

The loyalty and fervor around Trump remains bewildering to me.  Those born in the 70s/80s mostly remember him as a failed infomercial salesman.  On top of that, he's now clearly slipping into dementia.  Older clips show Trump as much more coherent and focused than he is now.


----------



## chrisrlink (Jan 11, 2018)

all this will cause is those racist neo nazi's try to overthrow the US government if trump is infact thrown out next year


----------



## Xzi (Jan 11, 2018)

chrisrlink said:


> all this will cause is those racist neo nazi's try to overthrow the US government if trump is infact thrown out next year


Let's be honest: none of them even has the balls to try it, Trump or no.  That's suicide by cop/military.  Or just cops with military gear.  All the alt-right has done is march in the dumbest outfit possible with tiki torches.  The one that committed a murder is being made example of.


----------



## chrisrlink (Jan 11, 2018)

yeah true


----------



## Xzi (Jan 11, 2018)

Reminds me of way back when that right-wing fringe group took over what was basically a nature center.  Pissed me off so much, like those parks employees were part of "big government" or something.  The one bright spot was that several people sent them boxes full of dildos after they requested food and other supplies, that made me laugh a lot even though they stayed there a long time and wrecked the place.


----------



## hoist20032002 (Jan 11, 2018)

left wing nuts or right wing nuts... they're all the same conspiracy quacks.


----------



## Lacius (Jan 11, 2018)

In my opinion, there's already enough evidence of Trump personally obstructing justice to impeach him, but that's not going to happen anytime soon without a Democratic congress since politics are apparently above justice.

With regard to the Mueller investigation, the standards of evidence are going to be unreasonably high with a Republican congress for Trump to get impeached for anything it turns up.


----------



## Tigran (Jan 11, 2018)

What the difference between a Republican and Isis?


Not a damn thing.

Both want to force their religion on you. Both want to kill millions and both want to alter history to fit their world views.


----------



## gman666 (Jan 11, 2018)

I really don't understand partisanship... Why choose one side when there is so much to gain from the other? Trump's presidency proves that partisanship is an archaic concept that only causes sectionalism.


----------



## Tigran (Jan 11, 2018)

gman666 said:


> I really don't understand partisanship... Why choose one side when there is so much to gain from the other? Trump's presidency proves that partisanship is an archaic concept that only causes sectionalism.



Because one side LITTERALY wants to oppress, abuse, and kill thousands of people and then force the remaining people into their belief system.

Or are you saying we shouldn't have said "You know.. Those protesters against Nazi's are just as bad as Nazis."


----------



## 8BitWonder (Jan 11, 2018)

Tigran said:


> What the difference between a Republican and Isis?
> 
> 
> Not a damn thing.
> ...


Bit of an extreme take don't you think? The very vocal extremists don't define the entire party. That goes for the Democratic party as well.


----------



## Tigran (Jan 11, 2018)

No.. No it's not extremism. Right now it's simple fact.

https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-new...civil-rights-protection-gays-lesbians-n787261

https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/su...io-s-voter-rolls-navy-vet-has-his-day-n832536

http://www.wlwt.com/article/kentuck...g-to-bible-courses-in-public-schools/10236687 (You sure as hell won't find a school that'll teach the torah or the Qur'an)

And changing our history...

https://www.prindlepost.org/2016/05/removing-slavery-textbooks/

And Republicans are the ones going around with firearms and their "holy book!"


Another issue right here... https://www.nytimes.com/2018/01/09/us/teacher-arrested-louisiana.html stopping free speach.


----------



## 8BitWonder (Jan 11, 2018)

Tigran said:


> No.. No it's not extremism. Right now it's simple fact...


I think you've misunderstood what I said. I'm not saying there are no loonies or crazy republicans. I'm simply saying the extremists (like in any group) are vocal and don't represent the entire party. Labeling everyone in that group a monster because of a few extremes seems pretty unfair. Especially when comparing them to a group like ISIS.
Also (mayhaps I've missed it) I don't see the correlation between your last article and republicans. Care to point it out?


----------



## Tigran (Jan 11, 2018)

Louisiana is republican territory.


And let me ask you a simple question... How is "Traditional Family Values" not racist or bigotry. 

And another simple reason is.. these people Support the ones that are doing this. This is like saying "All the people in Isis doesn't believe their idiology.... They just support it." When you activily support people that are doing things like this.. you agree with it. 

If you help a murderer -after- he commits a murder, your still an accessory after the fact. If you sit there and go, "Well sure... He killed that guy.. but that guy should have been a christian." that's nothing but supporting the murderer.

Hell, as much as I hate them, I argue that the neo nazi's DO have the right to hold rallies, but they DON'T have the right to hurt people. And I say the same damn thing to those extremes on the left.

However, I also wonder if there have been anything this bad from the left. (No.. This is a serious question and welcome any information).


----------



## 8BitWonder (Jan 11, 2018)

Tigran said:


> Louisiana is republican territory.


Right, but is the superintendent of the republican party? (I'm genuinely curious)



Tigran said:


> And let me ask you a simple question... How is "Traditional Family Values" not racist or bigotry.


Traditional family values can mean a lot of things, since they're not constant from family to family. I would figure at its worst it might imply old gender stereotyping. But that might also just be me looking too closely at it.



Tigran said:


> And another simple reason is.. these people Support the ones that are doing this. This is like saying "All the people in Isis doesn't believe their idiology.... They just support it." When you actively support people that are doing things like this.. you agree with it.


That's not true by any means. Several republicans don't wholeheartedly embrace everything their representatives stand for. In fact several are pretty split on abortion, gay marriage, and gun ownership rights. Just because you agree with general principles from a party does not mean you agree with all of them, and can freely choose to support another party because they better represent your beliefs.



Tigran said:


> If you help a murderer -after- he commits a murder, your still an accessory after the fact. If you sit there and go, "Well sure... He killed that guy.. but that guy should have been a christian." that's nothing but supporting the murderer.


You wouldn't help the murderer if he killed a guy, seeing as murder is against that religion's rules.



Tigran said:


> Hell, as much as I hate them, I argue that the neo nazi's DO have the right to hold rallies, but they DON'T have the right to hurt people. And I say the same damn thing to those extremes on the left.


On this, we agree.



Tigran said:


> However, I also wonder if there have been anything this bad from the left. (No.. This is a serious question and welcome any information).


To be quite honest, I'm not sure. The worst I can think of might be the frequent presidential bashing (though a lot of it is _very_ deserved).

EDIT: Also, I feel like we're clogging the thread at this point. If you'd like to continue feel free to shoot me a PM.


----------



## Joe88 (Jan 11, 2018)

Tigran said:


> However, I also wonder if there have been anything this bad from the left. (No.. This is a serious question and welcome any information).


The dallas killing of police officers by a blm sympthizer https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2016_shooting_of_Dallas_police_officers
The batton rouge killing of police officers by black extremist group member https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2016_shooting_of_Baton_Rouge_police_officers
The new york killing of police officers by a blm member https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2014_killings_of_NYPD_officers
The washington dc shotting of republican law makers by a democrat https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2017_Congressional_baseball_shooting

This is excluding all the voilence and property destruction caused by antifa


----------



## Xzi (Jan 11, 2018)

Evangelicals have become the extreme right-wing cult to watch out for in America.  They attached to Trump as soon as they could and they haven't let go.  Which naturally means their "morals" and "family values" are made out of wet paper, and they're willing to follow anyone who appeals to their sense of tribalism.

I was surprised the Mormons rejected Trump so fully, I usually equate their level of delusion to Scientologists.  Good on 'em for seeing through the game.



Joe88 said:


> The dallas killing of police officers by a blm sympthizer https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2016_shooting_of_Dallas_police_officers
> The batton rouge killing of police officers by black extremist group member https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2016_shooting_of_Baton_Rouge_police_officers
> The new york killing of police officers by a blm member https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2014_killings_of_NYPD_officers
> The washington dc shotting of republican law makers by a democrat https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2017_Congressional_baseball_shooting
> ...


This ignores the fact that BLM and Antifa aren't Democratic groups.  BLM has protested Dems, and Antifa are closer to anarchists than Democrats.  The alt-right are much more monolithic, and Trump is constantly egging them on.  They've been adapted into the Republican party as mainstream by now.  Rather, the alt-right might be all that remains of the Republican party after all this is over.


----------



## ThisIsDaAccount (Jan 11, 2018)

Just as a reminder, impeachment takes 2/3s of the Senate. Even if the Dems win the next election, Trump won't get impeached unless Mueller can prove that Trump personally called Putin and asked him to interfere. That is, unless you can find 20+ Republican senators willing to cross party lines for impeachment, but thsts rare for both sides.

Think about it, we can't even get net neutrality passed. Impeachment has no chance.

It's highly likely we'll have to just ride out Trump's term, and most likely the next one as well because most of Trump's voter base hasn't moved.

--------------------- MERGED ---------------------------



Joe88 said:


> The dallas killing of police officers by a blm sympthizer https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2016_shooting_of_Dallas_police_officers
> The batton rouge killing of police officers by black extremist group member https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2016_shooting_of_Baton_Rouge_police_officers
> The new york killing of police officers by a blm member https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2014_killings_of_NYPD_officers
> The washington dc shotting of republican law makers by a democrat https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2017_Congressional_baseball_shooting
> ...


Just as a sidenote, fuck those guys no matter which side they come from. Murder isn't a partisan issue


----------



## Xzi (Jan 11, 2018)

ThisIsDaAccount said:


> Just as a reminder, impeachment takes 2/3s of the Senate. Even if the Dems win the next election, Trump won't get impeached unless Mueller can prove that Trump personally called Putin and asked him to interfere. That is, unless you can find 20+ Republican senators willing to cross party lines for impeachment, but thsts rare for both sides.
> 
> Think about it, we can't even get net neutrality passed. Impeachment has no chance.
> 
> It's highly likely we'll have to just ride out Trump's term, and most likely the next one as well because most of Trump's voter base hasn't moved.


Trump is gonna keep getting worse.  He's almost entirely incoherent by now, within a year he'll be drooling on himself.  If Dems control the Senate and Congress after mid-terms, Republicans will be willing to cave for the simple reason that they don't want a lame duck with Alzheimer's embarrassing them for two more years.  Not to mention Mueller's indictments are going to be numerous, it's not just the one illegal act of conspiracy with Russia.


----------



## ThisIsDaAccount (Jan 11, 2018)

Xzi said:


> Trump is gonna keep getting worse.  He's almost entirely incoherent by now, within a year he'll be drooling on himself.  If Dems control the Senate and Congress after mid-terms, Republicans will be willing to cave for the simple reason that they don't want a lame duck with Alzheimer's embarrassing them for two more years.  Not to mention Mueller's indictments are going to be numerous, it's not just the one illegal act of conspiracy with Russia.


If Trump actually has demetia, which doesn't seem impossible, it's likely he'll leave office one way or another. But besides that, I think you're overestimating Republican Senators' ability to try to minimize whatever Mueller digs up.


----------



## Xzi (Jan 11, 2018)

ThisIsDaAccount said:


> If Trump actually has demetia, which doesn't seem impossible, it's likely he'll leave office one way or another. But besides that, I think you're overestimating Republican Senators' ability to try to minimize whatever Mueller digs up.


I mean, they can try, but everybody knows that international money laundering is an extremely serious charge, and that one is a given with Trump.  If we go by the other indictments (Manafort, Gates and etc), Trump has anywhere between seven at fifteen charges that are going to be levied at him, including several counts of obstruction of justice.


----------



## ThisIsDaAccount (Jan 11, 2018)

Xzi said:


> I mean, they can try, but everybody knows that international money laundering is an extremely serious charge, and that one is a given with Trump.  If we go by the other indictments (Manafort, Gates and etc), Trump has anywhere between seven at fifteen charges that are going to be levied at him, including several counts of obstruction of justice.


Even if all of that is true, I doubt Senate Republicans will budge. The most we'll get is 5-10 of them voting in favor, and the rest going on Fox to explain why the charges aren't so bad and Obama and Clinton did worse. 

I come from a country with a long history of all of what you just mentioned and more. I can tell you first hand how hard it is to get rid of Presidents with so much partisan infighting.


----------



## Xzi (Jan 11, 2018)

ThisIsDaAccount said:


> Even if all of that is true, I doubt Senate Republicans will budge. The most we'll get is 5-10 of them voting in favor, and the rest going on Fox to explain why the charges aren't so bad and Obama and Clinton did worse.
> 
> I come from a country with a long history of all of what you just mentioned and more. I can tell you first hand how hard it is to get rid of Presidents with so much partisan infighting.


We'll see.  I think if mid-terms are a massive win for Dems, the Republicans should realize that every election is gonna go blue until Trump is gone.  The party sold its soul to get a rich moron with no political experience elected, but it will be a while yet before they realize what a failed gamble that really was.


----------



## MaverickWellington (Jan 11, 2018)

Do people actually unironically believe that golden showers tape shit? That was literally just a dumb meme /pol/ did to fuck with buzzfeed.


----------



## Xzi (Jan 11, 2018)

MaverickWellington said:


> Do people actually unironically believe that golden showers tape shit? That was literally just a dumb meme /pol/ did to fuck with buzzfeed.


It's originally from the Trump dossier.  Though technically it's not a golden shower, he had some hookers piss on a bed that the Obamas had previously slept in.  In other words it wasn't sexual, just childish and petty, which is 100% Trump's MO.  So yeah, I believe it.


----------



## MaverickWellington (Jan 11, 2018)

Xzi said:


> It's originally from the Trump dossier.  Though technically it's not a golden shower, he had some hookers piss on a bed that the Obamas had previously slept in.  In other words it wasn't sexual, just childish and petty, which is 100% Trump's MO.  So yeah, I believe it.


Yeah but from your post history and the nature of your OP it's pretty damn clear you'll believe literally anything that has a negative story about trump.
https://www.zerohedge.com/news/2017...trump-golden-shower-story-entire-russian-hack
For crying out loud the "dossier" has quotes from the Dark Knight Rises, which was literally a huge 4chan meme. It makes references to "hentai," and other nonsense. This is exactly the kind of shit that was created to make gullible idiots get up in arms in a shitstorm about the most menial, stupid things, and to make websites like Buzzfeed look stupid since they ran the story with no verification or vetting.

And you fell for it.

--------------------- MERGED ---------------------------

Wait until I post my bombshell dossier where Trump and I smoke blunts and then he gets arrested for racism. It's totally real guys, a CIA guy verified it!


----------



## Xzi (Jan 11, 2018)

MaverickWellington said:


> Yeah but from your post history and the nature of your OP it's pretty damn clear you'll believe literally anything that has a negative story about trump.
> https://www.zerohedge.com/news/2017...trump-golden-shower-story-entire-russian-hack
> For crying out loud the "dossier" has quotes from the Dark Knight Rises, which was literally a huge 4chan meme. It makes references to "hentai," and other nonsense. This is exactly the kind of shit that was created to make gullible idiots get up in arms in a shitstorm about the most menial, stupid things, and to make websites like Buzzfeed look stupid since they ran the story with no verification or vetting.
> 
> ...


I honestly don't know wtf you're talking about.  The dossier contains opposition research and various illegal activities committed by the Trump campaign, it's not a 4chan post.  Your sources are bad.

Again, the dossier was put together by ex-MI6, and parts have already been confirmed by a source inside the Trump campaign.  I don't need to believe in it like it's some religious figure, these things are verifiable.


----------



## MaverickWellington (Jan 11, 2018)

Xzi said:


> I honestly don't know wtf you're talking about.  The dossier contains opposition research and various illegal activities committed by the Trump campaign, it's not a 4chan post.  Your sources are bad.
> 
> Again, the dossier was put together by ex-MI6, and parts have already been confirmed by a source inside the Trump campaign.  I don't need to believe in it like it's some religious figure, these things are verifiable.


Hilarious that you compare this to a religious figure when you've subscribed to the cult mentality of "everyone who says something bad about trump is right"
You also haven't read the source, as evidenced by your lack of rebuttal and cop-out of "it's just bad!"
Sorry mate but plugging your ears -- while probably your default strategy in arguments -- is not an argument and does not determine the factual nature of something. People can lie about literally anything, idiots who want something to be true will believe it despite clear evidence it isn't. Confirmed by "an anonymous source" is about as meaningful and valuable as "my dad works for Nintendo!"

When you're at the point where you're trusting some ex-intelligence agency guy like his word is infallible because he has "a source" you're basically at the same level as a sheep. Baa baa, mate.

--------------------- MERGED ---------------------------






"It's probably bullshit, but hey, the fact he believes this bullshit means there's probably truth to it!"
Remember parents, don't let your kids do drugs.


----------



## Xzi (Jan 11, 2018)

MaverickWellington said:


> Hilarious that you compare this to a religious figure when you've subscribed to the cult mentality of "everyone who says something bad about trump is right"


Well, insults are only really "wrong" based on one's perception.  We're not talking about simple insults here, though, we're talking about criminal activity and evidence of such.



MaverickWellington said:


> You also haven't read the source, as evidenced by your lack of rebuttal and cop-out of "it's just bad!"


On that you're correct.  I don't know what zerohedge.com is, but without even clicking on it I know it's not a real source of news or information.  Just as likely it's an alt-right source to muddy the waters with.



MaverickWellington said:


> Sorry mate but plugging your ears -- while probably your default strategy in arguments -- is not an argument and does not determine the factual nature of something. People can lie about literally anything, idiots who want something to be true will believe it despite clear evidence it isn't. Confirmed by "an anonymous source" is about as meaningful and valuable as "my dad works for Nintendo!"


The Trump campaign source is anonymous, but none of the individuals who worked on the dossier are.  Considering you're willing to take 4chan at face value, you'd think you'd be willing to listen to what US and British intelligence agencies tell us.



MaverickWellington said:


> When you're at the point where you're trusting some ex-intelligence agency guy like his word is infallible because he has "a source" you're basically at the same level as a sheep. Baa baa, mate.


Riiight.  So 4chan is reliable but no press source or intelligence source is.  This is why I'm glad schools are starting to teach journalistic literacy.


----------



## Kioku_Dreams (Jan 11, 2018)

Tigran said:


> What the difference between a Republican and Isis?
> 
> 
> Not a damn thing.
> ...


This kind of ignorant retardation is why politics shouldn't be discussed outside a closed area. I'm all for good debate, but if this is the kind of garbage that's allowed to be spoken, there's no point.

It's easy to take everything at face value.. Much like Xzi does every time there's a chance to be anti trump. Clearly nothing has been proven.. As even mentioned by the OP. Speculation is great, no?


----------



## MaverickWellington (Jan 11, 2018)

Xzi said:


> On that you're correct.  I don't know what zerohedge.com is, but without even clicking on it I know it's not a real source of news or information.  Just as likely it's an alt-right source to muddy the waters with.





Xzi said:


> Riiight.  So 4chan is reliable but no press source or intelligence source is.  This is why I'm glad I'm glad schools are starting to teach journalistic literacy.








So basically what you're telling me is that it's fine to disregard sources entirely based on nonsensical assumptions, which are based entirely upon the article in question disagreeing with you, and then are inversely insulting me for "taking something at face value" (despite the posts in question predating this ordeal) because I question the authenticity of a "dossier" by an anonymous """"source"""" that says ridiculous nonsense like Trump hired hookers to watch hentai with him, to piss on beds, and to call him a big guy while quoting the Dark Knight Rises, and that when even the liberal-as-fuck sites that spew this nonsense say that the dossier itself is about 70% factual, that must somehow mean anything questioning it is wrong?

Anything that agrees with you is suddenly infallible like it's a fucking religion but the moment an article even dares to question your cult mentality, it's only doing so because it's alt right and "muddying the waters." To me, mate, it sounds like you're obsessed with trump, and are desperate for some weak excuse to shit on the guy. You can find a myriad of things to complain about -- like how the new Tax Reform fucks the middle class, giving Jeff Sessions any sort of authority, and more -- but instead, you focus on a dossier filled with stupid shit, informed by a bunch of NEETs (like yourself probably) and preach it like it's some religious figure's divine word, refusing to hear anything even *questioning it.*

Going on your nonsensical logic, it's perfectly fine to disregard the liberal media sites -- anything owned by Gawker, Buzzfeed, and so on -- because they're muddying the waters in the debate based upon the suggestion Russia hacked the election, even though the most they probably did was get dirt on Hillary, which still didn't work since she still won the popular vote.

--------------------- MERGED ---------------------------



Memoir said:


> This kind of ignorant retardation is why politics shouldn't be discussed outside a closed area. I'm all for good debate, but if this is the kind of garbage that's allowed to be spoken, there's no point.
> 
> It's easy to take everything at face value.. Much like Xzi does every time there's a chance to be anti trump. Clearly nothing has been proven.. As even mentioned by the OP. Speculation is great, no?


Nail on the head. Glad I'm not the only one seeing this. Literally anything anti trump, no matter how inane, or clearly fake as fuck it is, Xzi hops on that shit. Yeesh. Politics really should just be banned here along with everyone who discusses it.

--------------------- MERGED ---------------------------

Also, the intelligence officer is _ex-MI6_, not currently MI6. I don't know about you but if I didn't represent some intelligence agency and I really disliked a guy, and I knew gullible dipshits would obey my nonsense, I'd totally "leak" stupid shit from my "anonymous sources" just to watch what happens.


----------



## Xzi (Jan 11, 2018)

Memoir said:


> It's easy to take everything at face value.. Much like Xzi does every time there's a chance to be anti trump. Clearly nothing has been proven.. As even mentioned by the OP. Speculation is great, no?


Sigh...yeah it's not like the title notes that anything has been confirmed.

You can't let the alt-right be successful in de-legitimizing any source that criticizes Trump just because it hurts their fee fees.


----------



## MaverickWellington (Jan 11, 2018)

Xzi said:


> You can't let the alt-right be successful in de-legitimizing any source that criticizes Trump just because it hurts their fee fees.





Xzi said:


> On that you're correct. I don't know what zerohedge.com is, but without even clicking on it I know it's not a real source of news or information. Just as likely it's an alt-right source to muddy the waters with.


----------



## Xzi (Jan 11, 2018)

MaverickWellington said:


> insulting me for "taking something at face value"


I insulted you for taking 4chan at face value, not information sourced and verified by the AP and intelligence sources.  Again, journalistic literacy is important, and I hope you eventually acquire some.  In the meantime it's really impossible to debate someone who doesn't view facts as factual.


----------



## MaverickWellington (Jan 11, 2018)

Xzi said:


> I insulted you for taking 4chan at face value, not information sourced and verified by the AP and intelligence sources.  Again, journalistic literacy is important, and I hope you eventually acquire some.


You put the world's most hilarious amount of faith in agencies notorious for putting stupid, fallacious shit out in the wild to delude the masses when they agree with you, and then suddenly they're all lying devils when they don't (see literally anything net neutrality related).

I think it's safe to say your opinion doesn't matter lol


----------



## Xzi (Jan 11, 2018)

MaverickWellington said:


> You put the world's most hilarious amount of faith in agencies notorious for putting stupid, fallacious shit out in the wild to delude the masses when they agree with you, and then suddenly they're all lying devils when they don't (see literally anything net neutrality related).


So far you haven't taken any stance that wasn't super defensive when it comes to Trump or the Trump administration.  Next you'll be telling me that Puerto Rico is happy they still don't have power.  It's really quite pathetic when somebody becomes that blinded to reality just because reality doesn't favor their preferred political figure.

Hell, you've straight up told me you're willing to accept shittier service at a higher price from your ISP just because the Trump FCC says it'll be a good thing.  You need to wake the fuck up man, or else just go ahead and get a bumper sticker that says "please tread on me."  You deify a man with Alzheimer's that eats McDonald's every day.


----------



## Kioku_Dreams (Jan 11, 2018)

All I've really got to say on this mess is that if you can't 100% prove it, don't post it as fact.


----------



## Xzi (Jan 11, 2018)

Memoir said:


> All I've really got to say on this mess is that if you can't 100% prove it, don't post it as fact.


I posted almost the exact text of the article title.  Do you want me to call Newsweek and have them double verify?

FYI Republicans were trying their best to keep the Fusion GPS testimony from releasing at all.  Diane Feinstein (D) released it unilaterally because she believed the people had a right to know.


----------



## MaverickWellington (Jan 11, 2018)

Xzi said:


> So far you haven't taken any stance that wasn't super defensive when it comes to Trump or the Trump administration.  Next you'll be telling me that Puerto Rico is happy they still don't have power.  It's really quite pathetic when somebody becomes that blinded to reality just because reality doesn't favor their preferred political candidate.
> 
> Hell, you've straight up told me you're willing to accept shittier service at a higher price from your ISP just because the Trump FCC says it'll be a good thing.  You need to wake the fuck up man, or else just go ahead and get a bumper sticker that says "please tread on me."


"So far you haven't taken any stance that wasn't super defensive when it comes to trump"
Yeah I'm gonna stop you there.





Mate I have directly listed two things that I am critical about regarding Trump and the administration. It really shows how immature you are when you assume the only reason someone tells you to quit being an extremist is because they're an extremist themselves of the opposite end of the spectrum.

You sound like those idiot stoners who smoke themselves into burnouts and believe the government are all reptiles out to enslave society or some nonsense. I'm not even gonna touch your hilariously false comment about internet, as it's irrelevant.

--------------------- MERGED ---------------------------



Memoir said:


> All I've really got to say on this mess is that if you can't 100% prove it, don't post it as fact.


this
this this this

The guy behind this even says it's like 70% accurate anyways. Numbers like that are numbers that let you put in stupid shit and have sheep like Xzi believe it as fact. It's undeniable, honestly; people want to hate Trump and come up with reasons to demonize him and demand his impeachment. These people have become deadset on the idea that everything negative about Trump is 100% infallible and true, and that no one who is critical of these allegations is correct. It's appalling and it's childish. These people need to grow up and quit muddying politics.


----------



## Xzi (Jan 11, 2018)

MaverickWellington said:


> "So far you haven't taken any stance that wasn't super defensive when it comes to trump"
> Yeah I'm gonna stop you there.


What, you mean tax reform fucking over the middle class isn't just some conspiracy theory like everything else negative about Trump?  Why is that information reliable but Fusion GPS testimony isn't?  I'm sure Newsweek reported on both.



MaverickWellington said:


> Mate I have directly listed two things that I am critical about regarding Trump and the administration.


Well I'm glad, just not in any discussion we've had.


----------



## MaverickWellington (Jan 11, 2018)

Xzi said:


> What, you mean tax reform fucking over the middle class isn't just some conspiracy theory like everything else negative about Trump?  Why is that information reliable but Fusion GPS testimony isn't?  I'm sure Newsweek reported on both.
> 
> 
> Well I'm glad, just not in any discussion we've had.


Yes because unlike you I actually have something resembling a personality, instead of "GUYS HOLY FUCK TRUMP IS HITLER??????????" being repeated every 20 seconds. As for the tax reform, because I've read it myself and have experienced it. I don't give a shit what the liberal media reports on something and if you base what you perceive to be true on what some news site says, you're a fucking idiot.


----------



## Xzi (Jan 11, 2018)

MaverickWellington said:


> Yes because unlike you I actually have something resembling a personality, instead of "GUYS HOLY FUCK TRUMP IS HITLER??????????" being repeated every 20 seconds. As for the tax reform, because I've read it myself and have experienced it. I don't give a shit what the liberal media reports on something and if you base what you perceive to be true on what some news site says, you're a fucking idiot.


Comparing Trump to Hitler is an insult to Hitler, at least that guy had his shit together in the beginning.  Trump passed one piece of legislation in his first year and it was a shitshow that he himself didn't have anything to do with.  You cannot deny that there would be immediate calls for impeachment for Obama or any other Democrat if they had been that inefficient in their presidency.  That's what gets at me the most: the hypocrisy of whole the situation.  In everything Trump says or does, everything his supporters say or do, there's a massive hanging air of hypocrisy and projection.


----------



## 8BitWonder (Jan 11, 2018)

Xzi said:


> Comparing Trump to Hitler is an insult to Hitler...


Come on dude.


----------



## MaverickWellington (Jan 11, 2018)

Xzi said:


> Comparing Trump to Hitler is an insult to Hitler, at least that guy had his shit together in the beginning.  Trump passed one piece of legislation in his first year and it was a shitshow that he himself didn't have anything to do with.  You cannot deny that there would be immediate calls for impeachment for Obama or any other Democrat if they had been that inefficient in their presidency.  That's what gets at me the most: the hypocrisy of whole the situation.  In everything Trump says or does, everything his supporters say or do, there's a massive hanging air of hypocrisy and projection.


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Efforts_to_impeach_Barack_Obama

The fuck is hypocritical here? There have been attempts and efforts to impeach both presidents multiple times. Just because you weren't old enough to vote back then doesn't mean it didn't happen.

--------------------- MERGED ---------------------------



8BitWonder said:


> Come on dude.


Yeah, saying Trump, a guy who at worst has done stupid things and made an ass of himself publically, is worse than the guy who _*literally tried to exterminate a race of people*_ is silly.


----------



## Xzi (Jan 11, 2018)

8BitWonder said:


> Come on dude.


I'm absolutely serious.  In his early days before the whole world war thing, Hitler implemented a lot of Socialist policies throughout Germany which greatly benefitted their economy and working class.  We'll see wars from Trump if he gets a full four years, but we won't see that kind of benefit to the middle/lower class.  If anything the economy will crash after Trump's massive tax cut to corporations and slashing of public assistance programs.  We've seen this all before with GWB.



MaverickWellington said:


> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Efforts_to_impeach_Barack_Obama
> 
> The fuck is hypocritical here? There have been attempts and efforts to impeach both presidents multiple times. Just because you weren't old enough to vote back then doesn't mean it didn't happen.


Of course there were attempts, I'm surprised they didn't try to impeach Obama over dijon mustard and a tan suit.  I'm saying there might have even been a successful attempt if Obama was as bad as Trump in governing, though.


----------



## MaverickWellington (Jan 11, 2018)

Xzi said:


> I'm absolutely serious.  In his early days before the whole world war thing, Hitler implemented a lot of Socialist policies throughout Germany which greatly benefitted their economy and working class.  We'll see wars from Trump if he gets a full four years, but we won't see that kind of benefit to the middle/lower class.  If anything the economy will crash after Trump's massive tax cut to corporations and slashing of public assistance programs.  We've seen this all before with GWB.


Oh, he likes him because he was socialist. I guess that wavers the whole "killing jews, gays, gypsies, and other non-whites" thing. Hahha.


----------



## dpad_5678 (Jan 11, 2018)




----------



## 8BitWonder (Jan 11, 2018)

Xzi said:


> I'm absolutely serious.  In his early days before the whole world war thing, Hitler implemented a lot of Socialist policies throughout Germany which greatly benefitted their economy and working class.  We'll see wars from Trump if he gets a full four years, but we won't see that kind of benefit to the middle/lower class.  If anything the economy will crash after Trump's massive tax cut to corporations and slashing of public assistance programs.  We've seen this all before with GWB.


Ok sure, even if he did that, that's still a pretty ridiculous statement. To claim a _Nazi dictator_, that put into motion one of the largest genocides in Human history looks bad compared to an upset orange.


----------



## StarTrekVoyager (Jan 11, 2018)

Xzi said:


> Comparing Trump to Hitler is an insult to Hitler, at least that guy had his shit together in the beginning.  Trump passed one piece of legislation in his first year and it was a shitshow that he himself didn't have anything to do with.  You cannot deny that there would be immediate calls for impeachment for Obama or any other Democrat if they had been that inefficient in their presidency.  That's what gets at me the most: the hypocrisy of whole the situation.  In everything Trump says or does, everything his supporters say or do, there's a massive hanging air of hypocrisy and projection.


I know this post is a provocation, but I like it. Hitler was a devilish being and an asshole, but at least was kinda consistent.
Trump is an idiotic, stupid, imbecile, mentally unstable primitive being. A gorilla, a horse or a 2-year old kid would be more coherent as a POTUS. The fact that any human being on this planet defend this guy, who convinced himself that the fake Renoir painting he has is true even though an Art Museum in Chicago has the real one, who claims he is behind the low number of deaths in airplane crashes, and who unironically calls himself a "genius" on Twitter, drives me nuts. I call it here and now. I do not care in the slightest if you're a nazi, an anarchist, a Rep, a Dem or a centrist. I do not care if you're Catholic, Muslim, Atheist, Buddhist or Illuminatist. I do not care if you think Earth is Flat. 
*If you support the thing called Donald J. Trump, you are an absolute idiot or do not have a functional brain.*


----------



## Xzi (Jan 11, 2018)

MaverickWellington said:


> Oh, he likes him because he was socialist. I guess that wavers the whole "killing jews, gays, gypsies, and other non-whites" thing. Hahha.


Obviously I don't like Hitler, but he still managed to be a better political leader than Trump.


----------



## MaverickWellington (Jan 11, 2018)

StarTrekVoyager said:


> I know this post is a provocation, but I like it. Hitler was a devilish being and an asshole, but at least was kinda consistent.
> Trump is an idiotic, stupid, imbecile, mentally unstable primitive being. A gorilla, a horse or a 2-year old kid would be more coherent as a POTUS. The fact that any human being on this planet defend this guy, who convinced himself that the fake Renoir painting he has is true even though an Art Museum in Chicago has the real one, who claims he is behind the low number of deaths in airplane crashes, and who unironically calls himself a "genius" on Twitter, drives me nuts. I call it here and now. I do not care in the slightest if you're a nazi, an anarchist, a Rep, a Dem or a centrist. I do not care if you're Catholic, Muslim, Atheist, Buddhist or Illuminatist. I do not care if you think Earth is Flat.
> *If you support the thing called Donald J. Trump, you are an absolute idiot or do not have a functional brain.*








No wonder your post is so extreme. Wait a couple years for the hormones to wear off and you won't get so worked up over shit that doesn't affect you.



Xzi said:


> Obviously I don't like Hitler, but he still managed to be a better political leader than Trump.


I didn't know you were a Nazi. Guess I know what the "zi" stands for now.


----------



## 8BitWonder (Jan 11, 2018)

Xzi said:


> Obviously I don't like Hitler, but he still managed to be a better political leader than Trump.


And with that, I'm out. Have fun fellas.


----------



## Xzi (Jan 11, 2018)

MaverickWellington said:


> I didn't know you were a Nazi. Guess I know what the "zi" stands for now.


Since you're apparently willing to admit I'm right on this point, I don't care how many stupid insults you want to hurl.



8BitWonder said:


> And with that, I'm out. Have fun fellas.


Besides the economy point, Hitler was charismatic and a strong speech writer.  Trump has neither of these qualities.


----------



## MaverickWellington (Jan 11, 2018)

Imagine drinking so much kool-aid that you loop over and praise Hitler for socialism and say he's better than Trump solely because Trump has said things that hurt your precious feelings and enacted policies that you disagreed with.

You know.

In comparison to the guy that killed 4.5 million jews.


----------



## StarTrekVoyager (Jan 11, 2018)

MaverickWellington said:


> No wonder your post is so extreme. Wait a couple years for the hormones to wear off and you won't get so worked up over shit that doesn't affect you.


Thanks, I'm good. I'm already a member of a political party and a college student, I don't need someone to throw me an argument like "you are young! so you say bullshit even though I didn't read your post!"

--------------------- MERGED ---------------------------



MaverickWellington said:


> Imagine drinking so much kool-aid that you loop over and praise Hitler for socialism and say he's better than Trump solely because Trump has said things that hurt your precious feelings and enacted policies that you disagreed with.
> 
> You know.
> 
> In comparison to the guy that killed 4.5 million jews.


It's more the fact that Hitler was evil and killed people, while Trump worries about the future of our species. That's the difference. tl;dr Hitler=very evil, Trump=very dumb


----------



## Xzi (Jan 11, 2018)

MaverickWellington said:


> Imagine drinking so much kool-aid that you loop over and praise Hitler for socialism and say he's better than Trump solely because Trump has said things that hurt your precious feelings and enacted policies that you disagreed with.
> 
> You know.
> 
> In comparison to the guy that killed 4.5 million jews.


Jesus fuck man you really have no reading comprehension.  I said "prior to the world war," prior to his invasions.  Guess I should've bolded it for you.  Regardless, you really are short-sighted if you don't think Trump wants to start his own wars, and he's already responsible for the deaths of over one thousand American citizens in Puerto Rico.


----------



## MaverickWellington (Jan 11, 2018)

Xzi said:


> Since you're apparently willing to admit I'm right on this point, I don't care how many stupid insults you want to hurl.


Oh no, you're not right at all. Praising Hitler is ironically praising Trump, because both aimed their propaganda (or campaigns as we'd call them in the US) at boogeymen (Jewish bankers/muh illegals) and riled up their passionate youth and workforce. Hitler commonly attacked his opponents during time of war, and openly attacked Jews. But we get it, X(na)zi. Trump is the world's most reprehensible human being solely because mean things and dumb policies, yet I'm pretty damn sure if anyone said that about Obama for doing similar stuff (unprofessional presentation at some speeches, dumb policies) you'd flip shit and rush to defend him.

Don't let the border collie bite you, sheep!

--------------------- MERGED ---------------------------



StarTrekVoyager said:


> Thanks, I'm good. I'm already a member of a political party and a college student, I don't need someone to throw me an argument like "you are young! so you say bullshit even though I didn't read your post!"
> 
> --------------------- MERGED ---------------------------
> 
> ...


Not only can you not vote due to your age but you literally can't even vote in US politics. Pretty safe to say your opinion on anything in US politics should be taken with an entire shaker of salt. It's a little hard to fully understand the political climate, and the parties themselves as well as their actual beliefs, when the majority (if not the entirety) of your political information comes from social media clowns or extremists.

No one cares what college you go to or what party you follow, neither of those prevent you from or absolve you of saying dumb shit.


----------



## Xzi (Jan 11, 2018)

MaverickWellington said:


> Obama for doing similar stuff (unprofessional presentation at some speeches)


Rofl, now you're really grasping at straws.  Somebody could smash Obama over the head with a rock several times and he could still go out and give a speech better than the best one we've gotten out of ol' Donny Alzheimer's.  Trump couldn't even manage to win a single debate against Hillary Clinton, and she's one of the worst campaigners I've ever seen in politics.


----------



## StarTrekVoyager (Jan 11, 2018)

He is not even praising Hitler, he's stating the fact that his speech qualities allowed him to get to the head of Weimar Republic and then fuck the entire Europe and cause the deaths of 80 million people. While Trump... Well, Trump's level in speeches has already be quantified; his vocabulary is that of a 4th-grader.


----------



## MaverickWellington (Jan 11, 2018)

Xzi said:


> Rofl, now you're really grasping at straws.  Somebody could smash Obama over the head with a rock several times and he could still go out and give a speech better than the best one we've gotten out of ol' Donny Alzheimer's.  Trump couldn't even manage to win a single debate against Hillary Clinton, and she's one of the worst campaigners I've ever seen in politics.


I'm referring more to Obama's frequent memes and jokes either in videos, or at some conferences, specifically the Lion King fox news thing. Had Trump done shit like that, dorks like you would go nuts about it.

Hell you probably lost your shit at Ajit Pai's video with fidget spinners and nerf guns.


----------



## StarTrekVoyager (Jan 11, 2018)

MaverickWellington said:


> Not only can you not vote due to your age but you literally can't even vote in US politics. Pretty safe to say your opinion on anything in US politics should be taken with an entire shaker of salt. It's a little hard to fully understand the political climate, and the parties themselves as well as their actual beliefs, when the majority (if not the entirety) of your political information comes from social media clowns or extremists.


Except it's not about politics. It's just about a dumb guy doing dumb things while he has a lot of power. And of course, him leaving the Paris agreements won't have an effect on my future life?


----------



## MaverickWellington (Jan 11, 2018)

StarTrekVoyager said:


> Except it's not about politics. It's just about a dumb guy doing dumb things while he has a lot of power. And of course, him leaving the Paris agreements won't have an effect on my future life?


That's correct, because the Paris agreements didn't even do anything. The media will tell you that, but in reality no one in the Paris agreements were really doing much of anything to help the environment to begin with. Your age is showing again.


----------



## StarTrekVoyager (Jan 11, 2018)

Also, I'd like to precise that I am actually a right-leaning centrist. If I hate to vote for someone in the US, it'd certainly be Rubio.


----------



## Xzi (Jan 11, 2018)

MaverickWellington said:


> I'm referring more to Obama's frequent memes and jokes either in videos, or at some conferences, specifically the Lion King fox news thing. Had Trump done shit like that, dorks like you would go nuts about it.


If Trump was intelligent enough to sprinkle pop culture references and memes in, that would benefit him in a lot of other areas as well.  I would not be mad.  In reality, however, Trump doesn't even know how to use the internet, Twitter is the only app on his phone.



MaverickWellington said:


> Hell you probably lost your shit at Ajit Pai's video with fidget spinners and nerf guns.


Ajit Pai has a very punchable face, but that's regardless of anything he says or does.



MaverickWellington said:


> That's correct, because the Paris agreements didn't even do anything. The media will tell you that, but in reality no one in the Paris agreements were really doing much of anything to help the environment to begin with. Your age is showing again.


Most of the US is still on track to meet the Paris agreement standards state-by-state, so I guess we'll find out if it makes any difference in the long run.


----------



## StarTrekVoyager (Jan 11, 2018)

MaverickWellington said:


> That's correct, because the Paris agreements didn't even do anything. The media will tell you that, but in reality no one in the Paris agreements were really doing much of anything to help the environment to begin with. Your age is showing again.


I know that, but him saying "Sorry, Climate change is bullshit and we are not going to help" isn't exactly going to lead to further actions. I know the 2015 agreements are just talk, but that talk was kinda needed if we wanna go anywhere with that. Also, what's that obsession with my age?


----------



## MaverickWellington (Jan 11, 2018)

MaverickWellington said:


> That's correct, because the Paris agreements didn't even do anything. The media will tell you that, but in reality no one in the Paris agreements were really doing much of anything to help the environment to begin with. Your age is showing again.


Also sources for this before you go off on some nonsense the media told you
http://reason.com/archives/2017/06/06/paris-climate-agreement-wasnt-going-to-s
https://news.nationalgeographic.com...-change-paris-agreement-california-emissions/
http://theweek.com/articles/702685/stop-freaking-about-paris-agreement

Even incredibly liberal sites that praise the agreement are critical of it.
https://www.theguardian.com/global-...te-deal-wont-work-our-future-depends-degrowth

https://www.cnsnews.com/news/articl...te-hype-paris-climate-accord-doesnt-really-do
Here's an actual climatologist discussing why it's basically pointless.

So yeah, keep worrying about what the media tells you, don't ever think for yourself.


----------



## Xzi (Jan 11, 2018)

StarTrekVoyager said:


> I know that, but him saying "Sorry, Climate change is bullshit and we are not going to help" isn't exactly going to lead to further actions. I know the 2015 agreements are just talk, but that talk was kinda needed if we wanna go anywhere with that. Also, what's that obsession with my age?


He thinks insulting your age will somehow improve his own arguments, which of course it doesn't.  I'm 31, probably older than Maverick.


----------



## brickmii82 (Jan 11, 2018)

I’ll take Mao Zedong for communism for 500$ Alex....

IJS, to compare or suggest President Trump(respect the ideal of the office not the man in it) is committing or has the potential to commit genocide is extremism. This is exactly why the American system of checks and balances were implemented. While I can’t stand the guy, and I think he’s a grade A tool, he hasn’t done anything even comparable to Mao, Stalin, or Hitler.


----------



## MaverickWellington (Jan 11, 2018)

StarTrekVoyager said:


> I know that, but him saying "Sorry, Climate change is bullshit and we are not going to help" isn't exactly going to lead to further actions. I know the 2015 agreements are just talk, but that talk was kinda needed if we wanna go anywhere with that. Also, what's that obsession with my age?


Also, you evidently don't understand the US political climate (or really anything about politics at all) if the president says something and backs out of it and that makes you think every company in the US and every movement for climate change is going to magically stop or be prevented from existing. 

There's no "obsession" with your age. I don't care how old you are. I just think it's funny that some kid is pretending he knows what he's talking about because he's afraid of what people have told him to be afraid of and hasn't questioned it.


----------



## Xzi (Jan 11, 2018)

brickmii82 said:


> I’ll take Mao Zedong for communism for 500$ Alex....
> 
> IJS, to compare or suggest President Trump(respect the ideal of the office not the man in it) is committing or has the potential to commit genocide is extremism. This is exactly why the American system of checks and balances were implemented. While I can’t stand the guy, and I think he’s a grade A tool, he hasn’t done anything even comparable to Mao, Stalin, or Hitler.


I'm sorry, but I've got more examples.  At least Hitler cared about the German people, where Trump let over a thousand American citizens die from a nearly non-existent relief effort in Puerto Rico.  The Trump administration continues to claim the number of deaths is closer to twenty.  Not only is Trump responsible for every one of those deaths, the lie about the actual number of casualties should be enough to impeach on its own.  Well, if Republicans had any integrity or conscience left it would be enough.


----------



## MaverickWellington (Jan 11, 2018)

Xzi said:


> I'm sorry, but I've got more examples.  At least Hitler cared about the German people, where Trump let over a thousand American citizens die from a nearly non-existent relief effort in Puerto Rico.  The Trump administration continues to claim the number of deaths is closer to twenty.  Not only is Trump responsible for every one of those deaths, the lie about the actual number of casualties should be enough to impeach on its own.


Hey what's your stance on Obama's drone strikes just curious


----------



## brickmii82 (Jan 11, 2018)

Xzi said:


> I'm sorry, but I've got more examples.  At least Hitler cared about the German people, where Trump let over a thousand American citizens die from a nearly non-existent relief effort in Puerto Rico.  The Trump administration continues to claim the number of deaths is closer to twenty.  Not only is Trump responsible for every one of those deaths, the lie about the actual number of casualties should be enough to impeach on its own.


He reeeeaaally cared about those Jewish citizens of Germany....

It’s scary that you’d say that dude. This is a perfect example of how the DNC lost independents. Even after a surefire election win was lost, you’re still trying to move people left instead of moving closer to the middle.

The only comparison I could honestly make is that both Hitlers and President Trumps campaigns were full of anger towards a specific people, particularly Muslims in Trumps case. They both galvanized a population into believing they were the largest threat to the populations survival.


----------



## Xzi (Jan 11, 2018)

MaverickWellington said:


> Hey what's your stance on Obama's drone strikes just curious


This is a complicated subject.  Given the option between potentially losing American lives on the ground vs using drones, I pick drones.  Unfortunately the technology isn't as accurate as it should be yet, and the potential for collateral damage is there in every operation, so unintended casualties will happen.  Obama will continue to take a lot of heat for the drone program, but every president will be using it from here on out anyway.

--------------------- MERGED ---------------------------



brickmii82 said:


> He reeeeaaally cared about those Jewish citizens of Germany....
> 
> It’s scary that you’d say that dude. This is a perfect example of how the DNC lost independents. Even after a surefire election win was lost, you’re still trying to move people left instead of moving closer to the middle.


Again we were discussing Hitler's actions prior to the war, and the only reason people keep bringing up the Holocaust is because it's the only point on which Hitler is obviously much worse than Trump.  Comparing them on a personal level you get much different results.

IMO the "center" moved too far to the right quite a while ago.  Around the same time corporations became people and money became the only form of speech that matters.  I'm just trying to move the center back to the center.


----------



## MaverickWellington (Jan 11, 2018)

Xzi said:


> This is a complicated subject.  Given the option between potentially losing American lives on the ground vs using drones, I pick drones.  Unfortunately the technology isn't as accurate as it should be yet, and the potential for collateral damage is there in every operation,* so unintended casualties will happen.*  Obama will continue to take a lot of heat for the drone program, but every president will be using it from here on out anyway.


Right, but Trump is to blame for the inevitable -- people dying in relief efforts.
Not only that but he should be impeached for it.

And to think you were complaining about hypocrisy.

--------------------- MERGED ---------------------------



Xzi said:


> IMO the "center" moved too far to the right quite a while ago.



bruh
look at this dood

When you are so far on any side of the political spectrum that you think the center isn't center because it doesn't agree with you, you have a legitimate problem.


----------



## Xzi (Jan 11, 2018)

MaverickWellington said:


> Right, but Trump is to blame for the inevitable -- people dying in relief efforts.
> Not only that but he should be impeached for it.
> 
> And to think you were complaining about hypocrisy.


These are two completely different scenarios you're trying to equate.  Puerto Rico wasn't a theater of war.  The Trump administration was simply too disorganized and the relief effort came too late.  If they were willing to own up to their mistakes and publish the real number of casualties, things would be different.  Obviously that's not this administration's SOP, though, when they're caught in a lie they just make up a new lie or double down.




MaverickWellington said:


> When you are so far on any side of the political spectrum that you think the center isn't center because it doesn't agree with you, you have a legitimate problem.


How about quoting the rest of what I said there and forming a decent argument against it, then?  Shouldn't be too hard.  Just remember: your political opinion only matters to the extent of the number in your bank account.


----------



## MaverickWellington (Jan 11, 2018)

Xzi said:


> These are two completely different scenarios you're trying to equate.  Puerto Rico wasn't a theater of war.  The Trump administration was simply too disorganized and the relief effort came too late.  If they were willing to own up to their mistakes and publish the real number of casualties, things would be different.  Obviously that's not this administration's SOP, though, when they're caught in a lie they just make up a new lie or double down.


Man I can't possibly imagine why a country that's at least a trillion of dollars in debt would possibly be disorganized, especially not in the same time frame as Harvey, Irma, Jose, Maria. Now that's silly. The fact you're implying it's somehow not inevitable (or even preventable) that someone will die after natural disasters is really just sad.


----------



## brickmii82 (Jan 11, 2018)

Xzi said:


> This is a complicated subject.  Given the option between potentially losing American lives on the ground vs using drones, I pick drones.  Unfortunately the technology isn't as accurate as it should be yet, and the potential for collateral damage is there in every operation, so unintended casualties will happen.  Obama will continue to take a lot of heat for the drone program, but every president will be using it from here on out anyway.
> 
> --------------------- MERGED ---------------------------
> 
> ...


I see what you’re saying, and admittedly it’s mostly correct imo. But, I believe around the 60’s and 70’s the population began embracing a more liberal mindset. I believe it stuck around and that’s a talking point in how President Obama was elected. But progress is typically like this. 5 steps forward, 3 steps back. Rinse and repeat.


----------



## Xzi (Jan 11, 2018)

MaverickWellington said:


> Man I can't possibly imagine why a country that's at least a trillion of dollars in debt would possibly be disorganized, especially not in the same time frame as Harvey, Irma, Jose, Maria. Now that's silly. The fact you're implying it's somehow not inevitable (or even preventable) that someone will die after natural disasters is really just sad.


The number of casualties would've been half, if not less, with an appropriate relief effort.  Here we go again with you getting real defensive over the worst actions someone else has taken.  You don't have to worry, I'm not going to blame you for Trump's failures.  Again, possibly the bigger issue is that the administration is lying about the total casualties.


----------



## chrisrlink (Jan 11, 2018)

Xzi said:


> I insulted you for taking 4chan at face value, not information sourced and verified by the AP and intelligence sources.  Again, journalistic literacy is important, and I hope you eventually acquire some.  In the meantime it's really impossible to debate someone who doesn't view facts as factual.


I have to agree with you on 4 chan it's the toilet of the internet durring the UM leak i saw "things" that made me want to gouge my eyes out with a saraded knife


----------



## MaverickWellington (Jan 11, 2018)

Xzi said:


> The number of casualties would've been half, if not less, with an appropriate relief effort.  Here we go again with you getting real defensive over the worst actions someone else has taken.  You don't have to worry, I'm not going to blame you for Trump's failures.


Who said I was defending it? I said it's to be expected and your expectations are unrealistic. Again, jumping to conclusions and assuming anyone who disagrees only does so because they're the polar opposite of you politically.


----------



## Kioku_Dreams (Jan 11, 2018)

chrisrlink said:


> I have to agree with you on 4 chan it's the toilet of the internet durring the UM leak i saw "things" that made me want to gouge my eyes out with a saraded knife



Should check out tumblr some time.


----------



## Xzi (Jan 11, 2018)

MaverickWellington said:


> Who said I was defending it? I said it's to be expected and your expectations are unrealistic. Again, jumping to conclusions and assuming anyone who disagrees only does so because they're the polar opposite of you politically.


My expectations are far from unrealistic.  Literally all Trump had to do was deploy the Naval medical ship immediately, followed up with some effort from other organizations (Red Cross, etc).  It took over a week for any major help to arrive, and that's not acceptable for a third-world country, let alone the US.  If those casualties were inevitable, over a thousand people would've died in Texas, too.  The casualties in PR were almost all from starvation or dehydration.  Entirely preventable.


----------



## brickmii82 (Jan 11, 2018)

Xzi said:


> Just remember: your political opinion only matters to the extent of the number in your bank account.


Which is why Secretary Clinton got the DNC nomination rather than Senator Sanders.


----------



## Xzi (Jan 11, 2018)

brickmii82 said:


> Which is why Secretary Clinton got the DNC nomination rather than Senator Sanders.


Well, Sanders was raking in a ton of money too, pretty much the biggest grassroots campaign in ever.  The DNC obviously did favor Clinton, though, and a lot of Southern states were stupid enough to believe she'd match up better against Trump than Sanders.

You have to have a ton of money to even consider running now, and that's a big problem.  Yes, the US has a left-wing, but even they're slaves to the almighty dollar if they want to win.  Which is why I say we've moved to the right as a country.


----------



## Futurdreamz (Jan 11, 2018)

*cough*


----------



## MaverickWellington (Jan 11, 2018)

Xzi said:


> My expectations are far from unrealistic.  Literally all Trump had to do was deploy the Naval medical ship immediately, followed up with some effort from other organizations (Red Cross, etc).  It took over a week for any major help to arrive, and that's not acceptable for a third-world country, let alone the US.  If those casualties were inevitable, over a thousand people would've died in Texas, too.


Thanks for confirming you have absolutely no idea what you're talking about.
https://thinkprogress.org/katrina-timeline-90ec8a71fb99/
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2005/sep/03/hurricanekatrina.usa1
Relief efforts can go wrong and have gone wrong. They're not some idealist, superhero bullshit. They're run by real people who make mistakes, and may not be staffed, funded, or supplied enough to be as effective as necessary. Relief efforts *mitigate* damages. They do not reverse them.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hurricane_Katrina_disaster_relief
It took five days for anything major like a boat to be shipped out there. Could more have been done? Sure. But to bitch about stuff taking 7 days when Katrina took 5 for anything besides evacuations to happen is just immature, especially considering the US would be way more organized in it's own country than in other ones.

Furthermore, when I said "casualties are inevitable," that does not mean "more people should die because of this" and how you came to such a ridiculous conclusion is beyond me. Shut your computer off, learn how to argue, and then come back.


----------



## brickmii82 (Jan 11, 2018)

Xzi said:


> Well, Sanders was raking in a ton of money too, pretty much the biggest grassroots campaign in ever.  The DNC obviously did favor Clinton, though, and a lot of Southern states were stupid enough to believe she'd match up better against Trump than Sanders.


Let’s just not make the mistake of underestimating the opponents in these next election cycles. Please refrain from insults and let’s have a dialogue about concerns on both sides and find a middle ground. While this political drama is great for entertainment, it typically leads to uprisings and civil wars. Frankly at this point, I’m afraid due to less and less tolerance being shown on both sides for the opposing viewpoints.


----------



## Xzi (Jan 11, 2018)

Futurdreamz said:


> *cough*


From the article: "Second, people who work in the Trump administration have wildly divergent views about their boss. Some think he is a deranged child, as Michael Wolff reported. But some think he is merely a distraction they can work around. Some think he is strange, but not impossible. Some genuinely admire Trump. *Many filter out his crazy stuff and pretend it doesn’t exist.*"

In other words, these people know he's nuts, they just play make-believe all day.  Dangerous times we're living in when a madman is tweeting about his nuclear button and half his administration just ignores his lunacy until it's too late.



MaverickWellington said:


> Relief efforts can go wrong and have gone wrong.


I never questioned that.  I pointed out that nearly all those deaths were preventable, they only had to get those people food and water.  Or just transport them out of the territory temporarily.

If the Trump administration believed they did nothing wrong, they'd publish the true number of deaths.  Clearly even they know they fucked up bad on Puerto Rico.  The one bit of minuscule good news is that many Puerto Ricans are now scattered among various US states, and they have the right to vote.


----------



## ThisIsDaAccount (Jan 11, 2018)

Just to clarify my position, you can't impeach a president cuz you don't like him. Impeachment is serious business, and to be honest trump hasn't done anything that we frankly didn't expect him to do. Other presidents have committed similar "impeachment" offenses and gotten away with it.


----------



## brickmii82 (Jan 11, 2018)

MaverickWellington said:


> Thanks for confirming you have absolutely no idea what you're talking about.
> https://thinkprogress.org/katrina-timeline-90ec8a71fb99/
> https://www.theguardian.com/world/2005/sep/03/hurricanekatrina.usa1
> Relief efforts can go wrong and have gone wrong. They're not some idealist, superhero bullshit. They're run by real people who make mistakes, and may not be staffed, funded, or supplied enough to be as effective as necessary. Relief efforts *mitigate* damages. They do not reverse them.
> ...


Katrina is a bad example. You have a point about people making mistakes, but engineers told local officials repeatedly that those levies would break. Then corruption showed immensely in the relief effort with money being pocketed by said officials and “buddies” getting the rebuilding contracts rather than folks who could efficiently do the job.


----------



## Xzi (Jan 11, 2018)

ThisIsDaAccount said:


> Just to clarify my position, you can't impeach a president cuz you don't like him. Impeachment is serious business, and to be honest trump hasn't done anything that we frankly didn't expect him to do. Other presidents have committed similar "impeachment" offenses and gotten away with it.


You're wrong.  Trump hasn't even separated himself from his business interests, which every other president in history did.  There's nothing typical about Trump compared to past presidents.  Past presidents didn't use Twitter and come into office with zero political or governing experience.


----------



## ThisIsDaAccount (Jan 11, 2018)

Xzi said:


> You're wrong.  Trump hasn't even separated himself from his business interests, which every other president in history has.


Don't get me wrong, I'm not a fan of that, but until Congress makes that a law we can't fire him for it. At least now maybe they will at some point.


----------



## MaverickWellington (Jan 11, 2018)

brickmii82 said:


> Katrina is a bad example. You have a point about people making mistakes, but engineers told local officials repeatedly that those levies would break. Then corruption showed immensely in the relief effort with money being pocketed by said officials and “buddies” getting the rebuilding contracts rather than folks who could efficiently do the job.


Corruption played a part in it, yes, but there's other things to note than just that. Specifically in understaffing and undersupplying.
https://www.usatoday.com/story/news...effort-texas-leaders-residents-say/839619001/
The same shit happened in harvey, people were critical of the red cross for -- surprise surprise -- the same reasons. Slow response, and disorganization. As I've said, relief efforts are not these amazing, flawless saving graces that moron idealists hold them up to be. I agree that there should be a stronger effort to organize them for when shit actually gets bad, but to label them (or the government) as incompetent for issues out of their control is just dishonest.


----------



## LukeHasAWii (Jan 11, 2018)

Woah. There's a lot of very strong political arguments here.... I'm going to head back to the gaming section


----------



## MaverickWellington (Jan 11, 2018)

Xzi said:


> Past presidents didn't use Twitter and come into office with zero political or governing experience.


Thank goodness too, if we had a president like Bernie Sanders the fallout would be awful.


----------



## ThisIsDaAccount (Jan 11, 2018)

LukeHasAWii said:


> Woah. There's a lot of very strong political arguments here.... I'm going to head back to the gaming section


Same here


----------



## brickmii82 (Jan 11, 2018)

MaverickWellington said:


> Corruption played a part in it, yes, but there's other things to note than just that. Specifically in understaffing and undersupplying.
> https://www.usatoday.com/story/news...effort-texas-leaders-residents-say/839619001/
> The same shit happened in harvey, people were critical of the red cross for -- surprise surprise -- the same reasons. Slow response, and disorganization. As I've said, relief efforts are not these amazing, flawless saving graces that moron idealists hold them up to be. I agree that there should be a stronger effort to organize them for when shit actually gets bad, but to label them (or the government) as incompetent for issues out of their control is just dishonest.


That’s definitely a better example. Katrina was a hobo in a dumpster fire shitshow. Harvey turned out somewhat ok despite relief critiques. Ask @Chary


----------



## Xzi (Jan 11, 2018)

MaverickWellington said:


> Thank goodness too, if we had a president like Bernie Sanders the fallout would be awful.


What are you smoking?  Sanders has experience, unlike Trump.  He'd actually know how stay out of the spotlight to govern, whereas Trump is just an attention whore who gets nothing done except cutting relief to the middle/lower class.


----------



## Kioku_Dreams (Jan 11, 2018)

Xzi said:


> What are smoking?  Sanders has experience, unlike Trump.  He'd actually know how stay out of the spotlight to govern, whereas Trump is just an attention whore who gets nothing done except cutting relief to the middle/lower class.


Sanders promised us the sky, without a way to actually reach it. I'm glad Sanders lost.


----------



## brickmii82 (Jan 11, 2018)

I would’ve voted for Bernie. Oddly enough I would’ve voted for Ron Paul too lol.


----------



## Xzi (Jan 11, 2018)

Memoir said:


> Sanders promised us the sky, without a way to actually reach it. I'm glad Sanders lost.


You're kidding, right?  Trump promised everything in his campaign, including universal healthcare.  The big difference is that Trump is a fake populist where Sanders is a real one.  Trump doesn't intend to keep any of his campaign promises.  There's no way that the wall gets funded, either.


----------



## MaverickWellington (Jan 11, 2018)

Xzi said:


> You're kidding, right?  Trump promised everything in his campaign, including universal healthcare.  The big difference is that Trump is a fake populist where Sanders is a real one.


Campaigns are literally nothing more than "VOTE FOR ME I AGREE WITH YOU." Believing anything they say is ridiculous. You are precisely why I'm glad Bernie lost.


----------



## Xzi (Jan 11, 2018)

MaverickWellington said:


> Campaigns are literally nothing more than "VOTE FOR ME I AGREE WITH YOU." Believing anything they say is ridiculous. You are precisely why I'm glad Bernie lost.


Nobody is half the liar that Trump is, sorry.  Trump lies sometimes literally for no reason, or even when the facts are easily verifiable.  The "both sides are the same" argument is more bullshit in 2018 than it ever has been before, obviously Trump supporters didn't believe that about Clinton.

The irony is that Sanders probably would've delivered on a lot more of Trump's campaign promises than Trump will.


----------



## Chary (Jan 11, 2018)

brickmii82 said:


> That’s definitely a better example. Katrina was a hobo in a dumpster fire shitshow. Harvey turned out somewhat ok despite relief critiques. Ask @Chary


The Red Cross actually was VERY quick on getting the relief money out during Harvey. They however, did have so much traffic their website was dead for a week. When it did come back up though, they did good. In terms of shelter help, they were always down at the George R Brown center giving out cans of food, cots for the elderly, and donations. A LOT of people, however, do not have the same experience as me, so perhaps there was something else that I missed in regards to the Red Cross. FEMA was the real MVP, though, for Harvey victims. In a whole, I was very lucky and had a lot of help from the government (and GBAtemp!) and I think they did a spectacular job for relief efforts for most of Houston TX.


----------



## MaverickWellington (Jan 11, 2018)

Xzi said:


> Nobody is half the liar that Trump is, sorry.  Trump lies sometimes literally for no reason, or even when the facts are easily verifiable.  The "both sides are the same" argument is more bullshit in 2018 than it ever has been before, obviously Trump supporters didn't believe that about Clinton.


What part of "campaign promises are not worth taking at face value" did you get "trump is actually better than everyone" from? You did this in the net neutrality threads too, anytime I'd say something, because you apparently absolutely MUST disagree with me you'll say some shit that isn't even related to what I said just to be contrarian.


----------



## Xzi (Jan 11, 2018)

MaverickWellington said:


> What part of "campaign promises are not worth taking at face value" did you get "trump is actually better than everyone" from? You did this in the net neutrality threads too, anytime I'd say something, because you apparently absolutely MUST disagree with me you'll say some shit that isn't even related to what I said just to be contrarian.


I was just framing the argument in a different way, I didn't say he was better than everyone, or that you said that.  Though I still feel there's a distinction to be made between previous presidents who attempted but failed to live up to some of their campaign promises, versus Trump who knew he was never even going to attempt to live up to them in the first place.

Worth noting that infrastructure was big for both Bernie and Trump during the campaign, but Trump only recently killed his plan for infrastructure maintenance and repair.


----------



## MaverickWellington (Jan 11, 2018)

Xzi said:


> I was just framing the argument in a different way, I didn't say he was better than everyone, or that you said that.  Though I still feel there's a distinction to be made between previous presidents who attempted but failed to live up to some of their campaign promises, versus Trump who knew he was never even going to attempt to live up to them in the first place.


Little early to make those kind of statements, especially when Politifact has pages notating the status of all of his promises.
http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/promises/trumpometer/






























This of course not counting the ones in the works or listed as "compromise," both in part because;

>in the works
because they obviously aren't done yet

>compromise
because they fall into two cases of either "he said this and did it while doing something else so it's a compromise" or it's a legitimate compromise.

Your blind trump hate is so fucking hilarious


----------



## brickmii82 (Jan 11, 2018)

MaverickWellington said:


> Little early to make those kind of statements, especially when Politifact has pages notating the status of all of his promises.
> http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/promises/trumpometer/
> 
> 
> ...


Why don’t you like the tax reform package? That’s one of the few things I like personally. Percentage-wise, 15k to 60k gets more tax relief than seen in yeeeeeaaars. Plus the corporate tax reduction should help us compete on a global scale.


----------



## MaverickWellington (Jan 11, 2018)

brickmii82 said:


> Why don’t you like the tax reform package? That’s one of the few things I like personally. Percentage-wise, 15k to 60k gets more tax relief than seen in yeeeeeaaars. Plus the corporate tax reduction should help us compete on a global scale.


I dislike it on a more personal reason because my significant other's parents are being hit with higher rates than they deserve because of some weird technicality. I'll have to check in with them on what exactly the issue is. I brought that up however as it's something people discuss more as reasons to dislike Trump than "duhhh buzzfeed told me that uhhhhhh trump make girls do the pee pee on bed!!!!"


----------



## Costello (Jan 12, 2018)

This thread almost derailed at some point but I see we've managed to remain civil. Good.

@Memoir please avoid calling people retards or things like this.
If you think people are retards because you disagree with them, instead of insulting them try to understand their point of view. Once you understand it, you can better contradict them.


----------



## Joe88 (Jan 12, 2018)

Xzi said:


> Rofl, now you're really grasping at straws.  Somebody could smash Obama over the head with a rock several times and he could still go out and give a speech better than the best one we've gotten out of ol' Donny Alzheimer's.  Trump couldn't even manage to win a single debate against Hillary Clinton, and she's one of the worst campaigners I've ever seen in politics.


Obama could only do that if there was a teleprompter and a speech made by someone else that went through 30 pc officers beforehand to make sure nobody gets offended.
Thats why people like trump, he just goes out and talks without teleprompters and speaks whats on his mind, heart to heart unfilitered, not premade speeches, and doesnt care if people get offended by it.

and winners and losers of debates are subjective, of course hard core liberals will say she won all debates
imo she took the first but trump really hit her hard in the second and third debate


----------



## MaverickWellington (Jan 12, 2018)

Joe88 said:


> Obama could only do that if there was a teleprompter and a speech made by someone else that went through 30 pc officers beforehand to make sure nobody gets offended.
> Thats why people like trump, he just goes out and talks without teleprompters and speaks whats on his mind, heart to heart unfilitered, not premade speeches, and doesnt care if people get offended by it.
> 
> and winners and losers of debates are subjective, of course hard core liberals will say she won all debates
> imo she took the first but trump really hit her hard in the second and third debate


"Winner of debate" doesn't mean anything anyways, it's basically "who said what I agree with the most" to which every idiot is going to pick their candidate on. They state their stances, and people decide to vote for them based on that. 

As for Trump as a speaker, I think he probably uses a teleprompter, but it isn't necessarily a bad thing. I do definitely believe he writes his own speeches though, it's got this ridiculous level of crassness that I think no writer would ever let slip out of the white house, and I respect that. May not like the guy, or his attitude, but I gotta give him credit for saying shit for himself.


----------



## Xzi (Jan 12, 2018)

MaverickWellington said:


>


Looks like they need to update, the last of the Carrier plant employees lost their jobs not long ago and the plant was shuttered.  Everything else you listed was simple executive order, it can be undone as easily as it was done.  I'd also question much of it as "accomplishments."  At best they're neutral moves, at worst they hurt America going forward.  Not to mention how the list of unkept promises is at least twice as long.  Here's the complete list for anyone curious: http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/promises/trumpometer/browse/?page=1

(I stopped counting when I neared 100 unfulfilled promises versus your six or so fulfilled.)



Joe88 said:


> Thats why people like trump, he just goes out and talks without teleprompters and speaks whats on his mind, heart to heart unfilitered


He sure does, and most of what comes out is either racism or ignorance about the way government works.  Here's today's quote about how much of a "shithole" non-white countries are:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/poli...1ac729add94_story.html?utm_term=.e9c05f2dbd42

This really isn't any different from the Southern Strategy that Republicans have used for decades.  Nor is it any different from the "guy I'd like to have a beer with" argument of the GWB years.  We all know how well that ended.  Unfortunately America has the memory of a goldfish.



Memoir said:


> Sanders promised us the sky, without a way to actually reach it. I'm glad Sanders lost.


Again you're wrong.  Sanders actually provided details on his programs and how he was going to pay for them.  Trump promised a lot of the same stuff (also a wall made of wasted taxpayer dollars), but provided no details whatsoever.  It really is sad how easily Americans are duped.  Trump's corporate tax cut money alone would've paid for all of Sanders' programs, FFS.


----------



## gman666 (Jan 12, 2018)

Tigran said:


> Because one side LITTERALY wants to oppress, abuse, and kill thousands of people and then force the remaining people into their belief system.
> 
> Or are you saying we shouldn't have said "You know.. Those protesters against Nazi's are just as bad as Nazis."


I should have been more clear in my statement.. I was trying to highlight that partisanship lead to an inexperienced potentially corrupt candidate to take over the executive branch, and it allowed like minded people to take over the legislative/judicial branch. Partisanship overrides the fact that most people are not hard-lined conservatives or liberals and it defies what the founding fathers had in mind (then again they didn't account for many of today's social/political issues). I would say that partisanship, especially a 2 party system, is a real problem in America's politics. I'm not validating the actions of any party or group, but I am trying to say that critical thinking should supersede partisan ideology.


----------



## Tigran (Jan 12, 2018)

gman666 said:


> I should have been more clear in my statement.. I was trying to highlight that partisanship lead to an inexperienced potentially corrupt candidate to take over the executive branch, and it allowed like minded people to take over the legislative/judicial branch. Partisanship overrides the fact that most people are not hard-lined conservatives or liberals and it defies what the founding fathers had in mind (then again they didn't account for many of today's social/political issues). I would say that partisanship, especially a 2 party system, is a real problem in America's politics. I'm not validating the actions of any party or group, but I am trying to say that critical thinking should supersede partisan ideology.



Ahh, Got ya, sorry for the mis-understanding what you meant.


----------



## StarTrekVoyager (Jan 12, 2018)

I just want to say that I don't care in the slightest about Trump being a Republican. I do'nt even care if he's racist or something like that. Really. I would've taken 16 years of Ted Cruz over 6 months of Trump. Trump himself does not have the intellectual level needed to be a President of any Nation on the world. I actually think Kim Jong-Un is smarter.


----------



## dAVID_ (Jan 12, 2018)

The faults of democracy...

And the manipulation of people. It's like Hitler said.

"If you make a lie simple, and repeat it many times, people will
believe it."


----------



## MaverickWellington (Jan 12, 2018)

StarTrekVoyager said:


> I just want to say that I don't care in the slightest about Trump being a Republican. I do'nt even care if he's racist or something like that. Really. I would've taken 16 years of Ted Cruz over 6 months of Trump. Trump himself does not have the intellectual level needed to be a President of any Nation on the world. I actually think Kim Jong-Un is smarter.


And you're basing that on...what again?

--------------------- MERGED ---------------------------

I love that the children (or in x[na]zi's case, manchildren) compare someone worse than Trump to Trump in a positive light as some kind of sick burn to Trump. Don't you desperate losers have anything better to do but moan about Trump all day?


----------



## TotalInsanity4 (Jan 12, 2018)

Costello said:


> if it turns out to be proven true what impact will it have on anything?
> I'd say probably none... if you already support Trump this isn't the kind of thing thats going to put you off, right?


It'll be more kindling for the bonfire that everyone keeps saying Mueller is going to light under Donald's ass


----------



## TotalInsanity4 (Jan 13, 2018)

brickmii82 said:


> That’s definitely a better example. Katrina was a hobo in a dumpster fire shitshow. Harvey turned out somewhat ok despite relief critiques. Ask @Chary


Not to trivialize the amazing response time of the continental US after this bout of natural disasters, but I'd like to remind everyone that large swaths of Puerto Rico STILL don't have power


----------



## Xzi (Jan 13, 2018)

I suppose this thread has been off-topic in every which way already, so I might as well post this here rather than making a new one.  Today, WSJ is reporting Trump paid $130K to a porn star a month before the 2016 election, in return for her silence on a sexual affair they had in 2006.  Trump had married Melania in 2005 and she was pregnant at the time.

https://www.wsj.com/articles/trump-...yment-for-adult-film-stars-silence-1515787678

WSJ had previously reported that Trump's friend at the National Enquirer paid off a Playboy model for him ($150K).  The cover was that she was being paid for a series of short articles.  Trump was with her around the same time as the other porn star (2006).

https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/n...ry-playboy-models-alleged-affair-trump-944427


----------



## StarTrekVoyager (Jan 13, 2018)

MaverickWellington said:


> I love that the children (or in x[na]zi's case, manchildren) compare someone worse than Trump to Trump in a positive light as some kind of sick burn to Trump. Don't you desperate losers have anything better to do but moan about Trump all day?


"My button is bigger and redder than yours"


----------



## TotalInsanity4 (Jan 13, 2018)

StarTrekVoyager said:


> "My button is bigger and redder than yours"


I believe it's "bigger and more powerful"


----------



## Gourmet (Jan 13, 2018)

So trump didn't want to win, made hookers piss on obamas bed, has dementia, and successfully colluded with russians for presidency.

Shouldn't you focus on one narrative? They don't really mix together, even if you really want all fake news about him being true.


----------



## TotalInsanity4 (Jan 13, 2018)

Gourmet said:


> So trump didn't want to win, made hookers piss on obamas bed, has dementia, and successfully colluded with russians for presidency.
> 
> Shouldn't you focus on one narrative? They don't really mix together, even if you really want all fake news about him being true.


Where did anyone say he made hookers piss on _Obama's _bed?

And, if I understand the current narrative, it is that he got unethically sourced information to make Clinton look bad from high-ranking Russian officials, but never ACTUALLY wanted to win the presidency; he wanted to go down as a martyr and stir up drama. IF that is the case, that would mean he wouldn't have technically set out to rig the election (unless you interpret it as against himself, which would actually lend credence for once to his claims that Russian hackers were fixing the election in Clinton's favor just before November 2016). That still does constitute collusion with a foreign government, though (again, IF it's true), and things will not go well for Trump if Mueller has evidence that stuff went down


----------



## Joe88 (Jan 13, 2018)

Gourmet said:


> So trump didn't want to win, made hookers piss on obamas bed, has dementia, and successfully colluded with russians for presidency.
> 
> Shouldn't you focus on one narrative? They don't really mix together, even if you really want all fake news about him being true.


Don't forget he also payed porn multiple stars hush money after he cheated on his wife with them, sexually molested over 20 woman, watches over 8 hours of tv a day, eats hamburgers in bed,was putins puppet, was bannon's puppet, was invanka's and jarad's puppet, 
is literally worse then dictators who have reporters killed or imprisoned and tortured because they wrote something negative about them https://www.usatoday.com/story/news...op-honors-press-oppressors-awards/1017934001/


----------



## Xzi (Jan 14, 2018)

Joe88 said:


> Don't forget he also payed porn multiple stars hush money after he cheated on his wife with them, sexually molested over 20 woman, watches over 8 hours of tv a day, eats hamburgers in bed,was putins puppet, was bannon's puppet, was invanka's and jarad's puppet,
> is literally worse then dictators who have reporters killed or imprisoned and tortured because they wrote something negative about them https://www.usatoday.com/story/news...op-honors-press-oppressors-awards/1017934001/


Here's a new one to add to the list: "Haitian government claims ousted dictator ‘Baby Doc’ Duvalier laundered stolen money through Trump Tower."

https://www.rawstory.com/2018/01/ha...r-laundered-stolen-money-through-trump-tower/

_"Records show more than 1,300 Trump condos were purchased through shell companies, which allow buyers to shield their finances and identities, and without a mortgage, which protects buyers from lender inquiries.  Those two characteristics raise alarms about possible money laundering, according to statements issued in recent months by the Department of Treasury, which has investigated transactions just like those all over the country."
_


Gourmet said:


> So trump didn't want to win, made hookers piss on obamas bed, has dementia, and successfully colluded with russians for presidency.
> 
> Shouldn't you focus on one narrative? They don't really mix together, even if you really want all fake news about him being true.


They don't fit together for a normal person, but then Trump is anything but normal.  These things were all just a consequence of the progression of time, what you think doesn't fit is beyond me.

In case you don't believe me on the dementia thing, two days ago Trump claimed he has "a very good relationship" with Kim Jong Un.  This suggests he didn't know who Kim Jong Un was momentarily:

https://www.nytimes.com/2018/01/11/us/politics/trump-kim-jong-un-north-korea-relationship.html


----------



## Anfroid (Jan 14, 2018)

Joe88 said:


> is literally worse then dictators who have reporters killed or imprisoned and tortured because they wrote something negative about them/


I dunno, for some reason I think people who kill or torture might be just a little worse but you're free to your own opinion.


----------



## TotalInsanity4 (Jan 14, 2018)

Anfroid said:


> I dunno, for some reason I think people who kill or torture might be just a little worse but you're free to your own opinion.


He's being sarcastic


----------



## Xzi (Jan 14, 2018)

Anfroid said:


> I dunno, for some reason I think people who kill or torture might be just a little worse but you're free to your own opinion.


On that I'd agree, but we shouldn't undersell the importance of the fact that the Trump administration is covering up about a thousand American deaths in Puerto Rico.

https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2017/12/08/us/puerto-rico-hurricane-maria-death-toll.html


----------



## Anfroid (Jan 14, 2018)

TotalInsanity4 said:


> He's being sarcastic


Sorry, there's so much fake stuff taken for truth it's hard to tell when one is being sarcastic.


----------



## TotalInsanity4 (Jan 14, 2018)

Xzi said:


> On that I'd agree, but we shouldn't undersell the importance of the fact that the Trump administration is covering up about a thousand American deaths in Puerto Rico.
> 
> https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2017/12/08/us/puerto-rico-hurricane-maria-death-toll.html


Not to mention he doesn't particularly seem to care


----------



## hoist20032002 (Jan 14, 2018)

when it comes down to it..IF you think that bernie, hillary, obama, hillbilly, the bushes, carter are better than trump than guess what? you my friend believe in a fantasy world full of socialism, marxism and communism because those named are no better than trump. NONE of those mentioned INCLUDING trump actually give af about the poor, the homeless, the sick and dying, whether they're american or not. IF you think that ANY of those people give a damn about you or want a better world for us and our kids...You need to be getting an evaluation of your brain...


----------



## Xzi (Jan 14, 2018)

hoist20032002 said:


> when it comes down to it..IF you think that bernie, hillary, obama, hillbilly, the bushes, carter are better than trump than guess what? you my friend believe in a fantasy world full of socialism, marxism and communism because those named are no better than trump. NONE of those mentioned INCLUDING trump actually give af about the poor, the homeless, the sick and dying, whether they're american or not. IF you think that ANY of those people give a damn about you or want a better world for us and our kids...You need to be getting an evaluation of your brain for being mentally challanged...


This is devoid of reality.  Obama put in place all the regulations protecting the economy and healthcare/environmental programs that Trump is now tearing down.  Of course there's a difference in the way the two parties govern.  Are Democrats perfect?  Far from it.  That doesn't mean you should ignore the individual.  Sanders is an Independent, he was running as a Democrat to gain more traction.  Obama wasn't as progressive as I would've liked, but he was much better than the previous eight years.  Hillary is a terrible campaigner.


----------



## hoist20032002 (Jan 14, 2018)

one last thing lol. you all going off about "the world is coming to an end with trump in office" just have chicken little syndrome. I bet you all never freaked out like this during bush sr, hillbilly, bush jr TWICE and obama TWICE when those 4 have done some dispicable stuff as well. keep thinking trump is the only one that's everrrrr done anything bad. I for one don't like tRump nor did I vote for him or the criminal/ thief/lier/racist/xenophobic/sexist hillary (this is based off her actions and her interviews) and I believe we need a 3rd party system besides demonrats or republicants. If people are going to bash a crappy president like tRump..Don't forget to bash the others because none of them care about you or any of us. 

--------------------- MERGED ---------------------------



Xzi said:


> This is devoid of reality.  Obama put in place all the regulations protecting the economy and healthcare/environmental programs that Trump is now tearing down.  Of course there's a difference in the way the two parties govern.  Are Democrats perfect?  Far from it.  That doesn't mean you should ignore the individual.  Sanders is an Independent, he was running as a Democrat to gain more traction.  Obama wasn't as progressive as I would've liked, but he was much better than the previous eight years.  Hillary is a terrible campaigner.


 lol we lived just fine before NN, obamacare and obama's regulations. we'll do fine without it. now my family and friends don't have to pay premiums out their asses for insurence nor have to serve time for not being able to pay for their kids insurence when they already paid out their asses. there's that chicken little syndrome XD not sure if you know or not but that's what presidents do..they change things, just like obama changed rules and regulations that bush made. do you even politic?


----------



## TotalInsanity4 (Jan 14, 2018)

hoist20032002 said:


> lol we lived just fine before NN, obamacare and obama's regulations. we'll do fine without it. now my family and friends don't have to pay premiums out their asses for insurence nor have to serve time for not being able to pay for their kids insurence when they already paid out their asses. there's that chicken little syndrome XD not sure if you know or not but that's what presidents do..they change things, just like obama changed rules and regulations that bush made. do you even politic?


You do realize that the Affordable Care Act is still in place, right? So your friends were either lying about premiums now or while Obama was in office, because nothing should have changed. And why are you talking about Net Neutrality? (I assume that's "NN"?)


----------



## hoist20032002 (Jan 14, 2018)

TotalInsanity4 said:


> You do realize that the Affordable Care Act is still in place, right? So your friends were either lying about premiums now or while Obama was in office, because nothing should have changed. And why are you talking about Net Neutrality? (I assume that's "NN"?)


It's not a lie. They (friends AND family) were forced to get insurence for themselves, their wives and their kids. They worked offshore and IF they didn't pay for it, they'd have been locked up or highly fined for penalties. Mhm, that's it, I said NN because it was under obama's regulations.


----------



## HamBone41801 (Jan 14, 2018)

Tigran said:


> What the difference between a Republican and Isis?
> 
> 
> Not a damn thing.
> ...


Jesus, dude. I dislike the republican party and the conservative mindsetin general as much as the next guy, but I think you should calm down.


----------



## Xzi (Jan 15, 2018)

hoist20032002 said:


> lol we lived just fine before NN, obamacare and obama's regulations. we'll do fine without it. now my family and friends don't have to pay premiums out their asses for insurence nor have to serve time for not being able to pay for their kids insurence when they already paid out their asses. there's that chicken little syndrome XD not sure if you know or not but that's what presidents do..they change things, just like obama changed rules and regulations that bush made. do you even politic?


Bush actually made his own policy/legislative changes for better or worse, yes.  Trump had *one *legislative accomplishment in 2017, and it was corporate welfare authored by Congress.  The rest has been unilateral executive orders to tear down what others have created (GWB's Somalia refugees included), not anything that Trump himself has created.

When you make GWB look like a moderate, that's not a good thing.


----------



## TotalInsanity4 (Jan 15, 2018)

hoist20032002 said:


> It's not a lie. They (friends AND family) were forced to get insurence for themselves, their wives and their kids. They worked offshore and IF they didn't pay for it, they'd have been locked up or highly fined for penalties. Mhm, that's it, I said NN because it was under obama's regulations.


They wouldn't have been locked up, they just would have been fined a percentage of their income: http://www.savingtoinvest.com/penalties-for-not-having-health-insurance-under-obamacare/. Which, they still will if they don't have insurance


----------



## MaverickWellington (Jan 15, 2018)

TotalInsanity4 said:


> They wouldn't have been locked up, they just would have been fined a percentage of their income: http://www.savingtoinvest.com/penalties-for-not-having-health-insurance-under-obamacare/. Which, they still will if they don't have insurance


Which is dumb and should be removed. There shouldn't be penalties for not having insurance.


----------



## TotalInsanity4 (Jan 15, 2018)

MaverickWellington said:


> Which is dumb and should be removed. There shouldn't be penalties for not having insurance.


It has to be there for the ACA to work, unless we move to true single-payer. If everybody isn't paying into the pot, then there won't be money to give to people who are trying to actually use the insurance

And besides, the fees are less than paying for the insurance, anyway


----------



## Tigran (Jan 15, 2018)

And getting sick or injured should never put someone in danger of losing their home and lively hood.

Or a guy die because his Gofundme was 50 dollars short of being able to afford life saving medicine.


----------



## TotalInsanity4 (Jan 15, 2018)

Tigran said:


> And getting sick or injured should never put someone in danger of losing their home and lively hood.
> 
> Or a guy die because his Gofundme was 50 dollars short of being able to afford life saving medicine.


Precisely


----------



## MaverickWellington (Jan 15, 2018)

TotalInsanity4 said:


> It has to be there for the ACA to work, unless we move to true single-payer. If everybody isn't paying into the pot, then there won't be money to give to people who are trying to actually use the insurance
> 
> And besides, the fees are less than paying for the insurance, anyway


They shouldn't be there at all. People who choose to not have insurance/can't afford it should not be forced into paying for other people's insurance. Full stop. I don't care how nice ACA might be.


----------



## TotalInsanity4 (Jan 15, 2018)

MaverickWellington said:


> They shouldn't be there at all. People who choose to not have insurance/can't afford it should not be forced into paying for other people's insurance. Full stop. I don't care how nice ACA might be.


I'd really hope that people would be able to afford to pay 2.5% of their income, considering that's the value that's used. And as far as I'm aware, people who fall under a certain income range don't have to pay a fee, they're just able to enroll into the system


----------



## Tigran (Jan 15, 2018)

MaverickWellington said:


> They shouldn't be there at all. People who choose to not have insurance/can't afford it should not be forced into paying for other people's insurance. Full stop. I don't care how nice ACA might be.



No one should die because his Gofundme was 50 dollars short of being able to afford life saving medicine.


----------



## MaverickWellington (Jan 15, 2018)

Tigran said:


> No one should die because his Gofundme was 50 dollars short of being able to afford life saving medicine.


And when you make it so that money has to come from people who can't afford insurance/don't want to buy it, you are not actually tackling the fucking problem, you're encouraging it.

"I want to charge shittons of money for life saving medicines because I'm a cunt" is a problem. The solution is not "Okay, I will take money from everyone to fund your cunt behaviors." The solution is "No, this is life saving medicine and you have no right to jack up the prices."


----------



## TotalInsanity4 (Jan 15, 2018)

MaverickWellington said:


> And when you make it so that money has to come from people who can't afford insurance/don't want to buy it, you are not actually tackling the fucking problem, you're encouraging it.
> 
> "I want to charge shittons of money for life saving medicines because I'm a cunt" is a problem. The solution is not "Okay, I will take money from everyone to fund your cunt behaviors." The solution is "No, this is life saving medicine and you have no right to jack up the prices."


I can agree with that. The amount of money that goes into the single-payer pot should ideally be a percentage of income (preferably on an exponential or linear slider as income increases). Could even just come straight out of income tax as long as tax brackets are fixed


----------



## MaverickWellington (Jan 15, 2018)

TotalInsanity4 said:


> I can agree with that. The amount of money that goes into the single-payer pot should ideally be a percentage of income (preferably on an exponential or linear slider as income increases). Could even just come straight out of income tax as long as tax brackets are fixed


I don't really know of a solution that's fair to everyone and won't piss a significant chunk of people off. On one hand, the medicines should cost money as both payment to the researchers as well as to cover the costs of the research itself. The medical industry creates important, life saving medicines that should be rewarded, but at the same time people who jack up the prices just to make bank off insurance companies and people desperate for it are fucking tools. It's a difficult debate to have because, I personally feel anyways, there's no proper solution that makes everyone happy.


----------



## Futurdreamz (Jan 15, 2018)

*blank stare*

We... don't really have to think about basic healthcare costs at all here. Other stuff like Dental is another story, but it's covered through my work so I only pay ~$100 or less for fillings and cleanings.


----------



## Tigran (Jan 15, 2018)

Futurdreamz said:


> *blank stare*
> 
> We... don't really have to think about basic healthcare costs at all here. Other stuff like Dental is another story, but it's covered through my work so I only pay ~$100 or less for fillings and cleanings.




But.. But.. Don't you know! You're healthcare is so bad that so many die every day! You all come down to the USA to get heath care. (No.. I'm not being serious.. but that's actually the argument a lot of people use.)


----------



## TotalInsanity4 (Jan 15, 2018)

MaverickWellington said:


> I don't really know of a solution that's fair to everyone and won't piss a significant chunk of people off. On one hand, the medicines should cost money as both payment to the researchers as well as to cover the costs of the research itself. The medical industry creates important, life saving medicines that should be rewarded, but at the same time people who jack up the prices just to make bank off insurance companies and people desperate for it are fucking tools. It's a difficult debate to have because, I personally feel anyways, there's no proper solution that makes everyone happy.


Ideally you would just have a government-backed insurance program that automatically covers emergency operations and pre-existing conditions that require medication, while (at the very least loosely) regulating the maximum price of life-saving or changing drugs. Then you could allow the free market to offer more tailored plans that can be modularly added on top of the single-payer plan. That's what I could see making everyone happy; the free market remains intact, but nobody would have to pay out the ass to go to the hospital


----------



## Xzi (Jan 15, 2018)

MaverickWellington said:


> I don't really know of a solution that's fair to everyone and won't piss a significant chunk of people off. On one hand, the medicines should cost money as both payment to the researchers as well as to cover the costs of the research itself. The medical industry creates important, life saving medicines that should be rewarded, but at the same time people who jack up the prices just to make bank off insurance companies and people desperate for it are fucking tools. It's a difficult debate to have because, I personally feel anyways, there's no proper solution that makes everyone happy.


Too many Shkrelis of the world.  We need to regulate drug prices, even if that means you can only charge 2x the cost of the drug.  This 5x to 10x stuff is out of control.


----------



## TotalInsanity4 (Jan 15, 2018)

Futurdreamz said:


> *blank stare*
> 
> We... don't really have to think about basic healthcare costs at all here. Other stuff like Dental is another story, but it's covered through my work so I only pay ~$100 or less for fillings and cleanings.


We know. The conservative party just has a boner for capitalism down here in the good ole US of A


----------



## Tigran (Jan 15, 2018)

TotalInsanity4 said:


> We know. The conservative party just has a boner for capitalism down here in the good ole US of A



Such a boner that they are allowing some to die because his Gofundme was 50 dollars short of being able to afford life saving medicine.


----------



## StarTrekVoyager (Jan 15, 2018)

While all these people die, us French are enjoying our free healthcare system that was voted by De Gaulle, a conservative 
Also, all of this crap is why I love being at LaREM and a proud centrist.


----------



## TotalInsanity4 (Jan 15, 2018)

StarTrekVoyager said:


> While all these people die, us French are enjoying our free healthcare system that was voted by De Gaulle, a conservative
> Also, all of this crap is why I love being at LaREM and a proud centrist.


You definitely wouldn't be a centrist by US standards, you'd actually be pretty left-wing here


----------



## StarTrekVoyager (Jan 15, 2018)

TotalInsanity4 said:


> You definitely wouldn't be a centrist by US standards, you'd actually be pretty left-wing here


Actually, in the US, I'd be an alien, because I'm an economic neoliberal as well as a progressist


----------



## TotalInsanity4 (Jan 15, 2018)

StarTrekVoyager said:


> Actually, in the US, I'd be an alien, because I'm an economic neoliberal as well as a progressist


That's actually still pretty left here. Ever since basically the 80's we've had an irrational fear of socialist economic policy, which means even most of the Democratic candidates (up until a few years ago) still support the private sector


----------



## StarTrekVoyager (Jan 15, 2018)

Macron's policy is basically social-liberalism (liberalism is used in its economical (i.e. right-wing) meaning). It's basically giving more freedom to companies while ensuring rights for workers.


----------



## Tigran (Jan 15, 2018)

StarTrekVoyager said:


> Macron's policy is basically social-liberalism (liberalism is used in its economical (i.e. right-wing) meaning). It's basically giving more freedom to companies while ensuring rights for workers.



Rights for workers? Whats that? We sure as hell don't have that here.


----------



## Joe88 (Jan 16, 2018)

and there goes another liberal msm narrative


----------



## TotalInsanity4 (Jan 16, 2018)

Joe88 said:


> and there goes another liberal msm narrative


This guy?


----------



## Joe88 (Jan 16, 2018)

TotalInsanity4 said:


> This guy?


No, the white house doctor who also examined President Obama http://www.cnn.com/2018/01/16/politics/ronny-jackson-health-donald-trump/index.html


----------



## Tigran (Jan 16, 2018)

Joe88 said:


> No, the white house doctor who also examined President Obama http://www.cnn.com/2018/01/16/politics/ronny-jackson-health-donald-trump/index.html



Thought they said a psych exam wasn't going to be part of his Physical. Is there any proof of this besides trump saying it?

And I seriously -seriously- doubt he's the "Most Healthy President ever."


----------



## TotalInsanity4 (Jan 16, 2018)

Joe88 said:


> No, the white house doctor who also examined President Obama http://www.cnn.com/2018/01/16/politics/ronny-jackson-health-donald-trump/index.html


I'm glad to hear he doesn't have dementia, though I never thought he did in the first place


----------



## Tigran (Jan 16, 2018)

TotalInsanity4 said:


> I'm glad to hear he doesn't have dementia, though I never thought he did in the first place



I question this due the "Healthiest individual ever elected."


----------



## TotalInsanity4 (Jan 16, 2018)

Tigran said:


> I question this due the "Healthiest individual ever elected."


That's his private doctor, I believe, unless I skimmed over a line


----------



## Joe88 (Jan 16, 2018)

Tigran said:


> Thought they said a psych exam wasn't going to be part of his Physical. Is there any proof of this besides trump saying it?
> 
> And I seriously -seriously- doubt he's the "Most Healthy President ever."


The doctor is on the white house briefing right now saying all this
trump himself asked for the psych exam


----------



## Tigran (Jan 16, 2018)

I read the report... So I see the official report.. I just refuse it. There is no way in hell trump is the "Healthiest person ever elected."

I'm more inclined that he either paid off the doctor, threatened the doctor, or the doctor is a republic shill.


----------



## TotalInsanity4 (Jan 16, 2018)

Tigran said:


> I read the report... So I see the official report.. I just refuse it. There is no way in hell trump is the "Healthiest person ever elected."
> 
> I'm more inclined that he either paid off the doctor, threatened the doctor, or the doctor is a republic shill.


I've actually got to agree with this, there's no way in hell words that absolutist aren't tainted with some kind of bribery somewhere


----------



## Tigran (Jan 16, 2018)

TotalInsanity4 said:


> I've actually got to agree with this, there's no way in hell words that absolutist aren't tainted with some kind of bribery somewhere



Also.. There is no way that someone who has to call people names like a 3 year old and says he has a great memory... and then "never" remembers what we have recorded him saying, is mentally stable. (and take this from someone who is not mentally stable. I hear voices and see hallucinations all the time. But at least I recognize what they are)


----------



## Futurdreamz (Jan 16, 2018)

Tigran said:


> Also.. There is no way that someone who has to call people names like a 3 year old and says he has a great memory... and then "never" remembers what we have recorded him saying, is mentally stable. (and take this from someone who is not mentally stable. I hear voices and see hallucinations all the time. But at least I recognize what they are)


I dare you to transcribe from memory the last conversation you spoke which lasted longer than five minutes.


----------



## Tigran (Jan 16, 2018)

No I can't... But I'm mentally damaged due to diabetes. Yet I still bet I could pass that test without much problem. Most of those questions are not deep and can easily be done by lying.

Also it doesn't matter if I can. Trump claims to have "one of the great memories of all time" and yet... never remembers anything.. and even in his conferences seem to have to ask the same question multiple times.


----------



## TotalInsanity4 (Jan 16, 2018)

Futurdreamz said:


> I dare you to transcribe from memory the last conversation you spoke which lasted longer than five minutes.


To be fair, though, the details a lot of journalists/officials ask him for are rarely things small things. And it's also not like he vaguely answers or says there's a possbility but overall denies stuff, he ONLY deals in (frequently false) absolutes. The best recent example being "I am the LEAST racist person you have ever interviewed"


----------



## invaderyoyo (Jan 16, 2018)

People like Trump get voted in because there's an irrational stigma around the word "socialist" in the US, even though a lot of people don't understand what it means.


----------



## ThisIsDaAccount (Jan 16, 2018)

Joe88 said:


> and there goes another liberal msm narrative


Good, the only thing worse than Donald Trump having the nuclear codes is Donald Trump on dementia having the nuclear codes.


----------



## TotalInsanity4 (Jan 16, 2018)

Tigran said:


> [...] and even in his conferences seem to have to ask the same question multiple times.


I'd bet that that's him trying to give off the impression that he's engaged and leading the discussion, even though it really just makes it painfully obvious that he has no clue what' going on


----------



## Tigran (Jan 16, 2018)

invaderyoyo said:


> People like Trump get voted in because there's an irrational stigma around the word "socialist" in the US, even though a lot of people don't understand what it means.



Remember... Republicans in South Carolina where trying to vote in a Pedophile.. Even using the excuse "If my 14 year old daughter came home with a Judge as a boyfriend that would be great!"

Most of the bible thumpers will vote for -anyone- with an R next to their name because their same mentality is that of Isis. "Everyone should be of our religion! If they are not they are sub human!"


----------



## ThisIsDaAccount (Jan 16, 2018)

Tigran said:


> Remember... Republicans in South Carolina where trying to vote in a Pedophile.. Even using the excuse "If my 14 year old daughter came home with a Judge as a boyfriend that would be great!"


I also recall one guy trying to justify it by saying that Mary was 13 when she had Jesus.

And just to emphasize, he was talking about the VIRGIN Mary.


----------



## Tigran (Jan 16, 2018)

ThisIsDaAccount said:


> I also recall one guy trying to justify it by saying that Mary was 13 when she had Jesus.
> 
> And just to emphasize, he was talking about the VIRGIN Mary.



I still want to know how they knew she was a virgin. Did they check to see if she still had her hymen or something? (considering that's STILL hard to do)

Not to mention young girls giving birth in that time period was nothing strange.


----------



## TotalInsanity4 (Jan 16, 2018)

Tigran said:


> I still want to know how they knew she was a virgin. Did they check to see if she still had her hymen or something? (considering that's STILL hard to do)


We don't, we just know that the Bible says so


----------



## Tigran (Jan 16, 2018)

TotalInsanity4 said:


> We don't, we just know that the Bible says so



The bible also tells people to not go about preaching all the time.. But they do anyways.  

Also Jesus could have sinned, John 8:7 "And as they continued to ask him, he stood up and said to them, “Let him who is without sin among you be the first to throw a stone at her.” And he didn't throw a stone... so one -could- read that as he himself sinned.


----------



## TotalInsanity4 (Jan 16, 2018)

Tigran said:


> The bible also tells people to not go about preaching all the time.. But they do anyways.
> 
> Also Jesus could have sinned, John 8:7 "And as they continued to ask him, he stood up and said to them, “Let him who is without sin among you be the first to throw a stone at her.” And he didn't throw a stone... so one -could- read that as he himself sinned.


The way it's supposed to be read I think is that he has no wish to stone the guy, and he knows no one else will, either

Regardless, let's not make this about religion, because it honestly shouldn't be


----------



## Tigran (Jan 16, 2018)

TotalInsanity4 said:


> The way it's supposed to be read I think is that he has no wish to stone the guy, and he knows no one else will, either
> 
> Regardless, let's not make this about religion, because it honestly shouldn't be




The problem is religion is very much a part of this problem. In fact it's at the very heart of a lot of it.


----------



## TotalInsanity4 (Jan 16, 2018)

Tigran said:


> The problem is religion is very much a part of this problem. In fact it's at the very heart of a lot of it.


Agreed, but only in abstract, and not the portion you brought up


----------



## Tigran (Jan 16, 2018)

TotalInsanity4 said:


> Agreed, but only in abstract, and not the portion you brought up



Except most of the people in the Bible belt and the more "empty states" will vote for Republicans because they are "Good Christians" and use churches to pay for their campaigns.


----------



## TotalInsanity4 (Jan 16, 2018)

Tigran said:


> Except most of the people in the Bible belt and the more "empty states" will vote for Republicans because they are "Good Christians" and use churches to pay for their campaigns.


Again, as I said, abstract


----------



## Futurdreamz (Jan 17, 2018)

TotalInsanity4 said:


> We don't, we just know that the Bible says so


I always figured it meant that Mary cheated on David and told him she didn't it was god.


----------



## Tigran (Jan 17, 2018)

Futurdreamz said:


> I always figured it meant that Mary cheated on David and told him she didn't it was god.



Or they did it.. But since they weren't married yet, she made up an excuse to tell people.


----------



## Futurdreamz (Jan 17, 2018)

Tigran said:


> Or they did it.. But since they weren't married yet, she made up an excuse to tell people.


That excuse got a little out of hand.


----------



## Tigran (Jan 17, 2018)

Futurdreamz said:


> That excuse got a little out of hand.



Many white lies do.


----------



## Xzi (Jan 17, 2018)

Joe88 said:


> and there goes another liberal msm narrative


Trump didn't get a psychiatric exam when he went for his physical, the White House specifically denied that*.  This guy is pulling stuff from his ass.

It's also worth noting that even if he does at some point take a psychiatric exam, Trump can dictate what the doctor is and isn't allowed to release publicly about his health.

* https://www.axios.com/wwont-do-psyc...248-748e0786-e1b0-4945-b66f-b6b4ce15faca.html

Today's big news was that Bannon has been subpoenaed in Mueller's Russia investigation:

https://www.nytimes.com/2018/01/16/us/politics/steve-bannon-mueller-russia-subpoena.html

And he's reportedly ready to sing like a canary (to save his own ass if nothing else):

https://www.thedailybeast.com/steve-bannon-will-tell-all-to-robert-mueller-source-says


----------



## Joe88 (Jan 17, 2018)

Yes he did, he was given a cognitive test per trumps request, the doctor even stood at the podium answering media questions about his health for almost an hour.
http://www.cnn.com/2018/01/16/politics/ronny-jackson-health-donald-trump/index.html


----------



## Xzi (Jan 17, 2018)

Joe88 said:


> Yes he did, he was given a cognitive test per trumps request, the doctor even stood at the podium answering media questions about his health for almost an hour.
> http://www.cnn.com/2018/01/16/politics/ronny-jackson-health-donald-trump/index.html


Oh word.  Yeah it makes sense to do one when the doctor is willing to say anything about the results anyway.  If they wanted to be less conspicuous about it they coulda said "25/30" or something like that, but in typical Trump fashion it's "perfect" or nothing.  I don't for a second believe Trump has got a perfect score on any test ever, at least one that wasn't pay-per-grade.

Late edit, relevant James Gunn tweet: https://twitter.com/JamesGunn/status/953430261068218368

"Trump's medical exam says he's 6'3" and 239 pounds. Albert Pujols is 6'3" and 240 pounds. If the dementia tests are equally accurate, we are doomed." (Photos of each in tweet)


----------



## Tigran (Jan 17, 2018)

Joe88 said:


> Yes he did, he was given a cognitive test per trumps request, the doctor even stood at the podium answering media questions about his health for almost an hour.
> http://www.cnn.com/2018/01/16/politics/ronny-jackson-health-donald-trump/index.html



So you don't think 4 to 5 hours of sleep a night is good? I can tell you.. It's not.

Not to mention he has a maturity of a three year old, feeling the need to always call other people immature names.


----------



## Xzi (Jan 17, 2018)

Tigran said:


> So you don't think 4 to 5 hours of sleep a night is good? I can tell you.. It's not.
> 
> Not to mention he has a maturity of a three year old, feeling the need to always call other people immature names.


Trump has been running on low sleep for many years and he confesses that he eats almost all fast food, some of the worst fast food to boot (McDonald's).  This is all routine for him by now, and now is age 71.  It's obvious by how he says things and what he says that he mostly can't form complete thoughts now.  He'll move between subjects quickly or get outraged at specific things (usually brown/black people) and forget where he is and whose company he's in.

Thing is, Republicans don't care how many gaffes he makes or how far gone he is, Trump's a useful puppet for them as much as he is for foreign interests.  As long as Trump takes all the heat, Ryan, McConnell, and the rest of the Republican leadership don't have to face any accountability.


----------



## Tigran (Jan 17, 2018)

Xzi said:


> Trump has been running on low sleep for many years and he confesses that he eats almost all fast food, some of the worst fast food to boot (McDonald's).  This is all routine for him by now, and now is age 71.  It's obvious by how he says things and what he says that he mostly can't form complete thoughts now.  He'll move between subjects quickly or get outraged at specific things (usually brown/black people) and forget where he is and whose company he's in.
> 
> Thing is, Republicans don't care how many gaffes he makes or how far gone he is, Trump's a useful puppet for them as much as he is for foreign interests.  As long as Trump takes all the heat, Ryan, McConnell, and the rest of the Republican leadership don't have to face any accountability.



But aren't the  Republicans the party of self responsibility?


----------



## ThisIsDaAccount (Jan 17, 2018)

Tigran said:


> But aren't the  Republicans the party of self responsibility?


There's no such thing anymore, among both Rublicans or Democrats. Neither of the two parties seems to focus on making laws for the long term, they only do what will get votes.


----------



## Tigran (Jan 17, 2018)

ThisIsDaAccount said:


> There's no such thing anymore, among both Rublicans or Democrats. Neither of the two parties seems to focus on making laws for the long term, they only do what will get votes.



Oh I know.. I was just being a sarcastic ass about one of their "core beliefs."


----------



## Xzi (Jan 17, 2018)

ThisIsDaAccount said:


> There's no such thing anymore, among both Rublicans or Democrats. Neither of the two parties seems to focus on making laws for the long term, they only do what will get votes.


I dunno, with so many examples like marijuana legalization and net neutrality, it doesn't seem like Republicans care at all about what the voters want any more.  They care about solidifying corporate power in this country, the fallout is left for the next Dem in office to fix.


----------



## Tigran (Jan 17, 2018)

I want to see Trumps long form Birth certificate! I heard he was born in Bavaria. 

So we need to see his birth certificate to prove he's american!


----------



## Xzi (Jan 17, 2018)

Tigran said:


> I want to see Trumps long form Birth certificate! I heard he was born in Bavaria.
> 
> So we need to see his birth certificate to prove he's american!


To be fair, I've never seen an American that shade of orange before.  Or any human really.


----------



## Tigran (Jan 17, 2018)

Joe88 said:


> Yes he did, he was given a cognitive test per trumps request, the doctor even stood at the podium answering media questions about his health for almost an hour.
> http://www.cnn.com/2018/01/16/politics/ronny-jackson-health-donald-trump/index.html



Again.. 30 questions... I could probably pass that and I AM mentally damaged.


----------



## TotalInsanity4 (Jan 17, 2018)

Tigran said:


> Again.. 30 questions... I could probably pass that and I AM mentally damaged.


For reference, this is the test Trump aced: http://www.memorylosstest.com/dl/moca-test-english-7-1.pdf


----------



## Tigran (Jan 17, 2018)

Dude... Please tell me your joking....

Like I said.. I'm mentally damaged. *halucinations, unable to control anger.. and even memory issues* And I would be able to do that.


----------



## TotalInsanity4 (Jan 17, 2018)

Tigran said:


> Dude... Please tell me your joking....
> 
> Like I said.. I'm mentally damaged. *halucinations, unable to control anger.. and even memory issues* And I would be able to do that.


Also I find it interesting that they used this to test his mental health, because typically this type of test is used for diagnosing Alzheimer's. Yes, there are overlaps between Alzheimer's and dementia, but this test wouldn't catch stuff that differentiates them (nor would it catch any other mental health issues that don't include short-term memory loss as a symptom)


----------



## Tigran (Jan 17, 2018)

It also wouldn't catch narcissism, mental retardation or a few others.


----------

