Trump

[ShandyH]

Interesting turn of events.

One of the Democrats who was against impeachment from the start looks likely to switch parties.

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news...-van-drew-meets-trump-to-discuss-party-switch

Tyrone, you’re actually called Vladimir aren’t you? You’re a busted flush.

 

[Eeyore]

So the right wing folk on here defend Trump. His detractors attack him. So no one is really worth reading.

The truth is we know f***k all about the truth.

 

[Tyrone Biggums]

Tyrone, you’re actually called Vladimir aren’t you? You’re a busted flush.

Hi Rachel Maddow.

I guess quoting the Guardian isn't even enough these days for the mentally disturbed syndrome sufferers.

 

[Tyrone Biggums]

So the right wing folk on here defend Trump. His detractors attack him. So no one is really worth reading.

The truth is we know f***k all about the truth.

Not quite true.

What happens is information is provided from non-right wing sources but due to the Trump Derangement Syndrome that's totally dismissed because it doesn't align with their pre conceived views.

There's plenty of people out there providing well researched news on what's actually going on. Like the below video. No right wingers, no corporate money pushing a narrative involved.

 

[Stato]

I don't think that link you provided helps your case much.

It does not address how someone like Hunter Biden all of a sudden ends up with a job, in a foreign country, getting paid a large sum of money to sit on a board he has no expertise of.

How do you think Hunter Biden ended up with such a lucrative job in a foreign country?

It also proves that the very thing that started off this impeachment process "quid pro quo" was exactly what Biden and the Obama administration committed when dealing with Ukraine years ago.

This is what quid pro quo really looks like.

There is a difference between nepotism / taking advantage of your connections and actual corruption. The Biden situation is more akin to the deals that Trump's children are making because of their names. The GOP adoption of this tactic is evidence of a lack of options when trying to defend Trump's obviously corrupt and illegal actions: https://newrepublic.com/article/155836/republicans-prepare-give-hunter-biden-benghazi-treatment. It's the standard Putin false equivalency argument: 'If nobody is beyond suspicion, it doesn't matter that I am an obvious crook.'

I know that there is no point trying to change your mind, but for the sake of truth, I also have to point out that you have conveniently ignored that what Biden said to Ukraine was government policy. Whether right or wrong it was done to try to advance the interests of the USA. What Trump did was directly contrary to the USA's foreign policy, but advanced the interests of Donald Trump. That's why he has been impeached: not for lying about an extra marital affair like Clinton (although, unsurprisingly, he's done that too), but for using the Government's money in the same way he used The Trump Foundation's money: to feather his own nest.

The only honest defence of Trump is 'Yes, I know that he is a crook, but he is convenient to the policies that I want, so let's ignore that.' If you want to defend him, stop pivoting to other issues and, without accusing anyone else, address the points about the man himself:

Why doesn't it matter that he is an admitted sexual predator?
Why doesn't it matter that he is appealing all cases that instruct release of his taxes, four years on from saying that he would definitely release them himself?
Why doesn't it matter that he broke election law whilst paying off a porn star and is avoiding standing trial for his actions?
Why doesn't it matter that he continually uses the office of the president to fund his own businesses?
Why doesn't it matter that he used money from a charitable fund intended for veterans to fund his own political ends?
Why doesn't it matter that he called for foreign interference in the 2016 election?
Why doesn't it matter that he used government money to try to buy foreign interference in the 2020 election?
None of these have anything to do with politics. They are to do with the trustworthiness and character of the man. Why doesn't that matter?

 

[vegster]

This is what quid pro quo looks like

Very illuminating.

 

[Tyrone Biggums]

There is a difference between nepotism / taking advantage of your connections and actual corruption. The Biden situation is more akin to the deals that Trump's children are making because of their names. The GOP adoption of this tactic is evidence of a lack of options when trying to defend Trump's obviously corrupt and illegal actions: https://newrepublic.com/article/155836/republicans-prepare-give-hunter-biden-benghazi-treatment. It's the standard Putin false equivalency argument: 'If nobody is beyond suspicion, it doesn't matter that I am an obvious crook.'

This is what mediabias says about the site you linked.

https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/new-republic/

These media sources are moderately to strongly biased toward liberal causes through story selection and/or political affiliation. They may utilize strong loaded words (wording that attempts to influence an audience by using appeal to emotion or stereotypes), publish misleading reports and omit reporting of information that may damage liberal causes. Some sources in this category may be untrustworthy.

Can you honestly say that if we changed Hunter Biden to the name of one of Trump's children you'd be saying the same thing?

Everyone with a semblance of honesty about them knows the absolute shit storm that would erupt if it was a kid of Trumps who got some plumb job OS getting paid huge sums of money despite zero expertise.

I know that there is no point trying to change your mind, but for the sake of truth, I also have to point out that you have conveniently ignored that what Biden said to Ukraine was government policy. Whether right or wrong it was done to try to advance the interests of the USA.

What Trump did was directly contrary to the USA's foreign policy, but advanced the interests of Donald Trump. That's why he has been impeached: not for lying about an extra marital affair like Clinton (although, unsurprisingly, he's done that too), but for using the Government's money in the same way he used The Trump Foundation's money: to feather his own nest.

What Biden did is a text book example of quid pro quo. This is exactly why Trump was to be impeached, quid pro quo. This is all the Democrats said for the first few months.

So how is it in Biden's case "Government policy" but if Trump had done that it's impeachable?

The only honest defence of Trump is 'Yes, I know that he is a crook, but he is convenient to the policies that I want, so let's ignore that.' If you want to defend him, stop pivoting to other issues and, without accusing anyone else, address the points about the man himself:

See you don't even understand impeachment. Donald Trump being a shit bloke isn't ground for impeachment.

Like him or loathe him everyone is innocent until proven guilty yes?

The way the Democrats have ran this up until now is doing the opposite, pushing a guilty verdict from the start then saying "prove innocence".

As it stand the Democrats have failed to prove unequivocally he's guilty.

Why doesn't it matter that he is an admitted sexual predator?
Why doesn't it matter that he is appealing all cases that instruct release of his taxes, four years on from saying that he would definitely release them himself?
Why doesn't it matter that he broke election law whilst paying off a porn star and is avoiding standing trial for his actions?
Why doesn't it matter that he continually uses the office of the president to fund his own businesses?
Why doesn't it matter that he used money from a charitable fund intended for veterans to fund his own political ends?
Why doesn't it matter that he called for foreign interference in the 2016 election?
Why doesn't it matter that he used government money to try to buy foreign interference in the 2020 election?
None of these have anything to do with politics. They are to do with the trustworthiness and character of the man. Why doesn't that matter?

I guess everything you've noted has been seen previously in other Presidents or those running for that office so nobody cares anymore.

If you actually delved deeper it was the Clinton campaign who paid for a foreign spy to garner information from Russian contacts to put together a dossier to use against Trump. It's called the Steele dossier and when you look at how it came to be, how it was tried to be used to bring Trump down and how now it's been exposed. That might be why people will look past Trumps negatives and consider him the lesser of two evils this time around.

 

[Hugo Rune]

I notice that Trump calls the Democrats the 'Radical Left'. What a lying toad. The Democrats are more right wing than our current Conservative party for Christ's sake!

 

[Tom Hark Preston Park]

Did anyone ever really expect that the Trump presidency was going to end in any other way than tears and impeachment? Was nailed on from day one

 

[blue-shifted]

I notice that Trump calls the Democrats the 'Radical Left'. What a lying toad. The Democrats are more right wing than our current Conservative party for Christ's sake!

Now steady

 

[blue-shifted]

The thing that has changed since Watergate is the nature of the reporting.

Trump has Fox News, in the same way as The Tories have the tabloids here, who can be relied on to relay the message in the desired way. (In return, the leaders won’t go after billionaire proprietors or moguls holding their money offshore. Everyone’s a winner).

For this reason the senators can reason they have sufficient cover to protect the president. Much riskier for them to break cover, maybe being the only one (or one of a small number) and be gunned down as a traitor when it fails.

The GOP senators could of course work together to knife the president in the back. Not sure why they would though.

One thing is for sure, the idea that this is a trial, and that there is a certain impartiality to it, is laughable.

 

[vegster]

Did anyone ever really expect that the Trump presidency was going to end in any other way than tears and impeachment? Was nailed on from day one

I still contest it could end in assassination, some Pennsylvanian ex-coalminer with an assault rifle and a grudge if Trump does not fully deliver MAGA in full quickly enough.

 

[knocky1]

The thing that has changed since Watergate is the nature of the reporting.

Trump has Fox News, in the same way as The Tories have the tabloids here, who can be relied on to relay the message in the desired way. (In return, the leaders won’t go after billionaire proprietors or moguls holding their money offshore. Everyone’s a winner).

For this reason the senators can reason they have sufficient cover to protect the president. Much riskier for them to break cover, maybe being the only one (or one of a small number) and be gunned down as a traitor when it fails.

The GOP senators could of course work together to knife the president in the back. Not sure why they would though.

One thing is for sure, the idea that this is a trial, and that there is a certain impartiality to it, is laughable.

So far it has not been a trial. That happens in the Senate. According to the U.S. Constitution, the House has the sole power of impeachment (Article I, Section 2, Clause 5), and after that action has been taken, the U.S. Senate has the sole power to hold the trial for all impeachments (Article I, Section 3, Clause 6).

The trial may not happen if Nancy witholds the impeachment articles thus not allowing Trump to exonerate himself. A stalemate.

 

[The_Viper]

Assuming it is Biden then it would be a massive improvement on corruption, dishonesty and bollocks. Even the GOP knows that but carry on playing the children’s game Simple Simon.

Trump is bad, we don't like Trump, he isn't on our team and he should be punished for being massively corrupt.

Insert Democrat Politician here is bad, but we like him, he's on our side and it's ok that he's doing corrupt things because he's on our team.


Politics has gotten so much like football it's insane, it's like Knocky or Wilf, everyone playing them hates them, everyone on their side loves them. Laughable.

 

[knocky1]

Trump is bad, we don't like Trump, he isn't on our team and he should be punished for being massively corrupt.

Insert Democrat Politician here is bad, but we like him, he's on our side and it's ok that he's doing corrupt things because he's on our team.


Politics has gotten so much like football it's insane, it's like Knocky or Wilf, everyone playing them hates them, everyone on their side loves them. Laughable.

Jeremy Corbyn has broken the mould.

 

[schmunk]

I still contest it could end in assassination, some Pennsylvanian ex-coalminer with an assault rifle and a grudge if Trump does not fully deliver MAGA in full quickly enough.

Get with the times, Daddy-o, it's KAG now...

 

[vegster]

Get with the times, Daddy-o, it's KAG now...

Whats that ? some new fancy shooter ?

 

[Albion my Albion]

I still contest it could end in assassination, some Pennsylvanian ex-coalminer with an assault rifle and a grudge if Trump does not fully deliver MAGA in full quickly enough.

My guess is that it will be a Midwest farmer that loses his whole farm, which includes losing his property, home, and way of making a living, due to the battle over tariffs with the Chinese. It will probably be a second amendment fan.

 

[Razzoo]

I notice that Trump calls the Democrats the 'Radical Left'. What a lying toad. The Democrats are more right wing than our current Conservative party for Christ's sake!

The same hysteria that brands Brexiteers and the Conservative party as far right.

 

[schmunk]

Get with the times, Daddy-o, it's KAG now...

Whats that ? some new fancy shooter ?