Trump's Presidency

[Moxie]

Asmo, that's really a load of justifying. Surely, the NYT, LATimes and CNN are part of the mainstream media and not arms of the Democratic Party. Did I neglect to mention they also banned the BBC? I don't think that's Democratic party-controlled journalism. Trump is waging a campaign against the media, crying "FAKE NEWS" all the time to create a climate of confusion about where actual news comes from, and what its value is. This is a rather dangerous path to go down. Spicer himself, presumably speaking for the President (then -elect,) as it is his job, said that the WH would never ban a news outlet:

“Conservative, liberal or otherwise, I think that’s what makes a democracy a democracy versus a dictatorship,” he said.

Hmmm. I wonder what has changed since December?

The link below contains the quote, but is also the NYTimes editorial position on the action, and an interesting read.

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/02/24/...s-corps-from-the-white-house.html?src=me&_r=0

 

[Federberg]

I think that the two of you are taking positions that are a little biased.

@Asmodeus if you can't see that only inviting favourable press is a sign of moral weakness? Please stop with this "fake or biased news nonsense" this is not the campaign anymore, you should have loyalty to your country's highest traditions. These outlets are reporting facts and you know it.

@Moxie correct me if I'm wrong but this is not a permanent ban right? I think there's a little too much hysteria right now. Like it or not Trump will do one good thing that liberals are in drastic need of - move on from victimhood and being too PC (I happen to agree with Bill Maher on this). They must set aside excessive outrage and see the wood for the trees. I know we've discussed this before, but my opinion is growing stronger... progressives need a compelling counter-narrative to truly oppose Trump. Right now most independents are probably like most of us observing on the outside and mainly see the hysteria. That won't win the argument and it's frightening to me that Trump doesn't even see the Dems as an opponent at the moment, so much so he's forced to make the media his opposition. Demagoguery like his needs a counter-point

 

[Federberg]

Wow! Is Trump walking back from his hardline immigration stance!? What will Bannon say?

 

[britbox]

I liked Trump's address to congress.

 

[Federberg]

Yes it was largely what he needed to do. Still quite a few inaccuracies and inconsistencies but the tone was much much better. I think he has two speech writers, the person who did this one and also the one for black colleges is right on the money. Let's hope he starts to use them more often. Learning on the job I guess!

 

[Moxie]

It's rather disturbing how much people are willing to grade Trump on the curve for not being a complete freak. While the tone was different, the message wasn't, except for the bits where he took credit for things that the Democrats actually did.

Oh, and how about Sessions lying under oath? How long will HE last?

 

[Moxie]

You may not like that it is Huffington Post, but that's just me being lazy. The content is straightforward and without comment. Sen. Franken, who was the one who initially questioned Sessions in the confirmation hearings, has a follow-up, and he's well within his rights to ask: What exactly was said, to the Russians, and by whom, during the campaign, relative to Sessions' knowledge, personal experience and assistants.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry..._58b8bd27e4b0b998941653c0?ut7ioonyfixuma38fr&

 

[Federberg]

It's rather disturbing how much people are willing to grade Trump on the curve for not being a complete freak. While the tone was different, the message wasn't, except for the bits where he took credit for things that the Democrats actually did.

Oh, and how about Sessions lying under oath? How long will HE last?

That's fair, but you can understand why. I mean 90% of the stuff he comes up with is just rank amateurish so any sense of normality gets applauded

 

[Federberg]

So Sessions saw sense and recused himself. This whole Russia thing is either bigger than even I feared or this administration is spectacularly incompetent at crisis management. Now it turns out Trump's son in law was also talking with the Russians, so it's going to be increasingly difficult for Trump to wall himself off from all of this.

For me the funniest piece of news overnight is the fact that VP Pence as governor of Indiana was found to have been using his private emails for sensitive communications. I do hope you get a bee in your bonnet about that @britbox!

It's absolutely astounding that after only about 40 days, all of the things these guys were accusing HRC of doing, they've been found to do. @britbox I would love to hear your comments about the Yemen raid because there are some aspects of it that if you are fair are far worse than Benghazi

 

[Ricardo]

there are some aspects of it that if you are fair are far worse than Benghazi

what kind of HRC bs is that? you are telling someone how to comment based on your assumption 'if you are fair'. Guess what, if you are fair you wouldn't draw conclusion from Vanity fair as source of reference........

 

[Federberg]

what kind of HRC bs is that? you are telling someone how to comment based on your assumption 'if you are fair'. Guess what, if you are fair you wouldn't draw conclusion from Vanity fair as source of reference........

Lol! Poking your head from under the bridge again? @britbox is so much smarter than you, I'll wait for his studied response. Can't be bothered with you on a rainy Friday morning

 

[britbox]

So Sessions saw sense and recused himself. This whole Russia thing is either bigger than even I feared or this administration is spectacularly incompetent at crisis management. Now it turns out Trump's son in law was also talking with the Russians, so it's going to be increasingly difficult for Trump to wall himself off from all of this.

For me the funniest piece of news overnight is the fact that VP Pence as governor of Indiana was found to have been using his private emails for sensitive communications. I do hope you get a bee in your bonnet about that @britbox!

It's absolutely astounding that after only about 40 days, all of the things these guys were accusing HRC of doing, they've been found to do. @britbox I would love to hear your comments about the Yemen raid because there are some aspects of it that if you are fair are far worse than Benghazi

On the emails, it's a bit of a flimsy parallel to be frank. Yeah, Pence was careless using a public account. Although, he didn't break any state or federal laws. Clinton, on the other hand had classified information on her personal server. There is a distinction between sensitive and classified. Clinton broke the law.

On the Yemen raid, Trump approved a mission put forward by military advisors. It went badly wrong. My main criticism of Clinton concerned the lead up to Benghazi when the department ignored requests to beef up security despite concluding it was high risk. They actually reduced security despite being asked to do the reverse by the people on the ground. In a nutshell, Clinton and co, went against the requests on the ground with disastrous consequences... Trump went with the requests on the ground with disastrous consequences.... Overall though, I don't agree with the Americans getting involved in Yemen at all - much like Libya.

 

[Ricardo]

Lol! Poking your head from under the bridge again? @britbox is so much smarter than you, I'll wait for his studied response. Can't be bothered with you on a rainy Friday morning

well he actually cares to study while you rely on vanity fair to establish your facts.......

 

[Ricardo]

On the emails, it's a bit of a flimsy parallel to be frank. Yeah, Pence was careless using a public account. Although, he didn't break any state or federal laws. Clinton, on the other hand had classified information on her personal server. There is a distinction between sensitive and classified. Clinton broke the law.

On the Yemen raid, Trump approved a mission put forward by military advisors. It went badly wrong. My main criticism of Clinton concerned the lead up to Benghazi when the department ignored requests to beef up security despite concluding it was high risk. They actually reduced security despite being asked to do the reverse by the people on the ground. In a nutshell, Clinton and co, went against the requests on the ground with disastrous consequences... Trump went with the requests on the ground with disastrous consequences.... Overall though, I don't agree with the Americans getting involved in Yemen at all - much like Libya.

well said, point is it isn't parallel comparison between the two matters. even with clear agenda in place, Federberg fails to mount an argument with an ounce of intelligence.

advise for everyone though, don't let someone who feeds off info from crap source rub his stupidity off on you

 

[Federberg]

On the emails, it's a bit of a flimsy parallel to be frank. Yeah, Pence was careless using a public account. Although, he didn't break any state or federal laws. Clinton, on the other hand had classified information on her personal server. There is a distinction between sensitive and classified. Clinton broke the law.

On the Yemen raid, Trump approved a mission put forward by military advisors. It went badly wrong. My main criticism of Clinton concerned the lead up to Benghazi when the department ignored requests to beef up security despite concluding it was high risk. They actually reduced security despite being asked to do the reverse by the people on the ground. In a nutshell, Clinton and co, went against the requests on the ground with disastrous consequences... Trump went with the requests on the ground with disastrous consequences.... Overall though, I don't agree with the Americans getting involved in Yemen at all - much like Libya.

That's fair regarding the level of seriousness in the Pence email case. Correct me if I'm wrong, but I don't believe that it's been established that Clinton broke the law. If that was the case the witch hunt would be over by now. However with regards to Yemen, it's worth noting that the Obama administration had not yet approved the raid. It's unclear whether due diligence was done. That's what the Executive is supposed to do. Apparently the go ahead was given during a dinner attended by Trump, his son in law and Bannon. If that's the case, it's absolutely appalling. That's the sort of thing that needs to be gone over in detail in the SitRoom. You don't take such a casual approach with military lives over dinner. And then to top it all, he's now trying to blame the generals.

I find the whole thing appalling to be honest. And now, I'm looking at tapes of Sessions criticising Bill Clinton for perjuring himself over a non-governmental case. The hypocrisy is stunning

 

[Federberg]

well said, point is it isn't parallel comparison between the two matters. even with clear agenda in place, Federberg fails to mount an argument with an ounce of intelligence.

advise for everyone though, don't let someone who feeds off info from crap source rub his stupidity off on you

I long for the day you're able to make an intelligent point of your own. Everything about you is so derivative. Don't you have any pride?

 

[Federberg]

Oh and by the way, we're now finding out that the new head of the EPA also used his personal email for government business and lied about it to Congress. Hypocrisy, hypocrisy, hypocrisy

 

[britbox]

That's fair regarding the level of seriousness in the Pence email case. Correct me if I'm wrong, but I don't believe that it's been established that Clinton broke the law. If that was the case the witch hunt would be over by now. However with regards to Yemen, it's worth noting that the Obama administration had not yet approved the raid. It's unclear whether due diligence was done. That's what the Executive is supposed to do. Apparently the go ahead was given during a dinner attended by Trump, his son in law and Bannon. If that's the case, it's absolutely appalling. That's the sort of thing that needs to be gone over in detail in the SitRoom. You don't take such a casual approach with military lives over dinner. And then to top it all, he's now trying to blame the generals.

I find the whole thing appalling to be honest. And now, I'm looking at tapes of Sessions criticising Bill Clinton for perjuring himself over a non-governmental case. The hypocrisy is stunning

Sessions should fall on his sword. The fact he's Attorney General makes it even worse than it is. I don't buy the recuse... he forgot to mention it first time around? Even if the reasons for discussion were different than what he was asked about, then he shouldn't have denied contact.

Well, we don't know what previous diligence and discussion were had by Trump and the military... maybe he just had to make a quick decision on something that had been discussed in depth previously... and he just happened to be at dinner. We'll have to see the impending fallout on that one... but if he's making an executive decision then he should own it.

 

[Federberg]

Sessions should fall on his sword. The fact he's Attorney General makes it even worse than it is. I don't buy the recuse... he forgot to mention it first time around? Even if the reasons for discussion were different than what he was asked about, then he shouldn't have denied contact.

Well, we don't know what previous diligence and discussion were had by Trump and the military... maybe he just had to make a quick decision on something that had been discussed in depth previously... and he just happened to be at dinner. We'll have to see the impending fallout on that one... but if he's making an executive decision then he should own it.

I agree absolutely. He has to own it.

I'm chuckling at the idea that it was discussed in depth. I have serious doubts about that, given the management style we're all observing

 

[Ricardo]

I long for the day you're able to make an intelligent point of your own. Everything about you is so derivative. Don't you have any pride?

bhahahaha, Federberg trying to bark louder......well first you need to be able to derive from proper info, which you apparently cannot.....Vanity Fair remember?

btw i know you are trying (to look smart) but all these talking in political discussions only do the opposite, it shows you are trying too hard and step by step you make a fool of yourself by revealing too much....i didn't know you were so stupid before and you find it 'appalling' about how Trump arrived at his decision? give us a break, he is US president and you are a British wannabe