Got something to say or just want fewer pesky ads? Join us... 😊
Trump
- Thread starter ShandyH
- Start date
Tyrone Biggums
Well-known member
Hi Rachel Maddow.
I guess quoting the Guardian isn't even enough these days for the mentally disturbed syndrome sufferers.
Last edited:
Tyrone Biggums
Well-known member
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
Well-known member
- Dec 21, 2011
- 7,367
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
Sanity Clause
- May 5, 2008
- 28,272
Very illuminating.
Last edited:
Tyrone Biggums
Well-known member
This is what mediabias says about the site you linked.
https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/new-republic/
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.
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?
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.
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.
Tom Hark Preston Park
Will Post For Cash
- Jul 6, 2003
- 72,321
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
Banned
Now steady
blue-shifted
Banned
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.
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
Sanity Clause
- May 5, 2008
- 28,272
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.
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
Well-known member
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
Why oh why oh why?
Get with the times, Daddy-o, it's KAG now...
vegster
Sanity Clause
- May 5, 2008
- 28,272
Whats that ? some new fancy shooter ?
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
Well-known member
The same hysteria that brands Brexiteers and the Conservative party as far right.
