Trump

[jdmee]

Whatever happened to @seskridge? I haven't seen her around in a while.

I think she was chased off when she was talking about her voting record and ...

I think it was @MoValley John who ended up chasing her off.



* Edited by Kung Wu ... She requested personal details and her account be removed. Her request was based on an incident that, if indeed happened, is seriously disappointing. It had nothing to do with @MoValley John:.

[jdshock]

Whatever happened to @seskridge? I haven't seen her around in a while.

She appears to have deleted her account.

[jdmee]

Citation needed. Seriously I make all attempts in my posts to cite things and prove my points with unbiased news(NPR, BBC, AP, Reuters) or actually government sites and legitimate studies, and I consistently face counter arguments that just say I'm wrong with zero sources. I'm willing to concede when I'm wrong, I have been in the past and I will be in the future, but just saying it, doesn't make it so. Give me something to work with. I'm trying to enter these discussions honestly and upfront. I have received one source from Kung Wu, which he agreed wasn't a genuine equivalency. I want to debate Trump with facts, knowledge, and understanding. But I don't feel any reciprocal effort to back points and arguments with genuine substance.

RE: The Iran payment. I was going to provide this http://nypost.com/2016/09/08/no-we-d...ansom-payment/

which states

which talks about the Victims of Trafficking and Violence Protection Act where that law specifically provided that “no funds shall be paid to Iran . . . from the Foreign Military Sales Fund, until [such claims] have been dealt with to the satisfaction of the United States.”

However, after more research I see that according to https://www.brookings.edu/blog/marka...t-the-details/

However, Congress actually paid these victims using an appropriated $400 million. As State Department official Grosh explained, “[the Act] provides that the United States shall be fully subrogated to the extent of the payment… What that means is those claims then become the U.S. government claims.” However, as described in a 2008 Congressional Research Service Report, the Act also “provided that the United States ‘shall pursue’ these subrogated rights as claims or offsets to any claims or awards that Iran may have against the United States.”

Out of that comes two things:

13A The president chose very poor timing for those payments, why then?

13B. Why did the president chose not to pursue those subrogated rights claims?

As far as I know those two questions have never been answered.

[ShockCrazy]

RE: The Iran payment. I was going to provide this http://nypost.com/2016/09/08/no-we-d...ansom-payment/

which states



However, after more research I see that according to https://www.brookings.edu/blog/marka...t-the-details/



Out of that comes two things:

13A The president chose very poor timing for those payments, why then?

13B. Why did the president chose not to pursue those subrogated rights claims?

I think ultimately it did have to do with the hostage situation. So we did owe them money, and Iran was willing to return the hostages in exchanged for money already owed, which while shitty and terrible of Iran, on our side seems like a positive outcome given we would have ultimately had to pay them eventually anyways.

[shockfan89_]

Seriously still no cites.
3. Give me a regulation that a business is now no longer following due to Trump.
4. saying it doesn't make it so, give me an article.
7. I have googled it and I have provided cites to the contrary. I have no where at all seen confirmation of more laws passed. http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-me...ate-historica/ No milestone laws, relatively high house keeping legislation early, but that has vastly tapered off as I have shown above.
8. Activists? You calling Kagan and Sotomayor activists??? On what basis?
9. Open to interpretation? No it's not I gave all the evidence, the travel ban was neutered and it's current scope overlaps with already enacted policy to be more stringent on ALL B-2 visas. Also they overturned the injunction these things happen is every time a "smack down to cry baby activist district courts"?
13 Cite, cite cite.... Seriously.

I understand you want cites but in this day and age of fake news and "editorial journalism" you can find a cite for anything and everything. Just because you have a cite, it can still be left-leaning, right-leaning, or completely spun.

Washington (CNN) — In his first 100 days, President Donald Trump has signed more bills into law than the previous five presidents and has signed more executive orders than any president since Harry Truman.

In his first 100 days, Trump signed more bills into law than all but two presidents in the last 84 years; since that point, he's continued to add to that number, signing a total of 38 bills, according to GovTrack (actually, four more than he bragged Monday when he said it was more than 34.)

Truman signed 55
Kennedy signed 26
Clinton and Eisenhower each signed 22
Carter signed 21
HW Bush 18
Obama 14
Johnson 10
Ronald Reagan and Nixon 9
W Bush 7

4. http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/...r-down-70-pct/

By Stephen Dinan and Andrea Noble - The Washington Times - Tuesday, May 9, 2017

Illegal immigration across the southwestern border is down a stunning 76 percent since President Trump was elected, with the flow of children and families dropping even faster as analysts say the administration’s commitment to enforcing the law has changed the reality along the border.

[ShockCrazy]

I understand you want cites but in this day and age of fake news and "editorial journalism" you can find a cite for anything and everything. Just because you have a cite, it can still be left-leaning, right-leaning, or completely spun.

Washington (CNN) — In his first 100 days, President Donald Trump has signed more bills into law than the previous five presidents and has signed more executive orders than any president since Harry Truman.

In his first 100 days, Trump signed more bills into law than all but two presidents in the last 84 years; since that point, he's continued to add to that number, signing a total of 38 bills, according to GovTrack (actually, four more than he bragged Monday when he said it was more than 34.)

Truman signed 55
Kennedy signed 26
Clinton and Eisenhower each signed 22
Carter signed 21
HW Bush 18
Obama 14
Johnson 10
Ronald Reagan and Nixon 9
W Bush 7

I am not citing biased sites. Point out one citation you could say is spun? The thing is while there were 38 bills signed you can clearly see both from politifact and by looking at the link I also previously sent, the vast majority were house keeping legislation. Also can you at least acknowledge now that it has become an incredibly ineffective term? That number indicates that since the start of May a grand total of 5 things have been passed since we now sit at 43, which is on pace for the worst term in a non-divided government. And in fact the only worse ones are modern Republican congresses under Obama. I will acknowledge he did sign a lot more things in those first 100 days than most, but I what came of it? He has so few legislative wins he celebrated a bill passing the House and not even making it to the floor of the Senate.

[Aargh]

Sometimes it seems we might just as well have a debate between Rush Limbaugh and Bill Maher as what we've got here. It's sort of like WWI. Both sides are dug into their trenches and not giving up or gaining an inch of ground.

[shockfan89_]

I am not citing biased sites. Point out one citation you could say is spun? The thing is while there were 38 bills signed you can clearly see both from politifact and by looking at the link I also previously sent, the vast majority were house keeping legislation. Also can you at least acknowledge now that it has become an incredibly ineffective term? That number indicates that since May a grand total of 5 things have been passed since we now sit at 43, which is on pace for the worst term in a non-divided government. And in fact the only worse ones are modern Republican congresses under Obama. I will acknowledge he did sign a lot more things in those first 100 days than most, but I what came of it? He has so few legislative wins he celebrated a bill passing the House and not even making it to the floor of the Senate.

First of all I don't judge effectiveness by the number of bills signed into law. You said it wasn't true and I pointed out it is true. Now you want to talk about how effective the bills are?

Yes I will say the media's constant distraction with fake news and leaked anonymous reports have made this Presidency less effective than it could have been. Their plan from the beginning was to resist any positive action and delay progress. Congratulations, the media has proven people are dumb enough to believe a story that doesn't exist if they hear it enough times over and over.

Trump was elected to Make American Great Again, and is making some really positive attempts to save this country. Has he made mistakes? You bet! Is he his own worst enemy? Duh! But the political establishment is far worse. He has also opened our eyes to how corrupt DC is including political heads of our intelligence agencies, and the great lengths the Obama administration has gone to sabotage the incoming administration.

[shockfan89_]

Sometimes it seems we might just as well have a debate between Rush Limbaugh and Bill Maher as what we've got here. It's sort of like WWI. Both sides are dug into their trenches and not giving up or gaining an inch of ground.

I totally agree. I thought Trump might actually be able to make a difference but both Republicans and Democrats have us so convinced the other party is wrong that nobody actually works to improve the country. It is just all about party and the news media is a huge part of the problem. I would love to see ObamaCare repealed and then BOTH parties work together to come up with a real solution that doesn't tax us to death and provides reasonable coverage in the private sector. Name one large federal program that is efficiently run and not in massive debt and fraud and then I might believe federal-run healthcare could be a good idea. Afterall, we already have federal-run healthcare for veterans. How many of you want the VA as our future health care?

[ShockCrazy]

First of all I don't judge effectiveness by the number of bills signed into law. You said it wasn't true and I pointed out it is true. Now you want to talk about how effective the bills are?

Yes I will say the media's constant distraction with fake news and leaked anonymous reports have made this Presidency less effective than it could have been. Their plan from the beginning was to resist any positive action and delay progress. Congratulations, the media has proven people are dumb enough to believe a story that doesn't exist if they hear it enough times over and over.

Trump was elected to Make American Great Again, and is making some really positive attempts to save this country. Has he made mistakes? You bet! Is he his own worst enemy? Duh! But the political establishment is far worse. He has also opened our eyes to how corrupt DC is including political heads of our intelligence agencies, and the great lengths the Obama administration has gone to sabotage the incoming administration.

I concede he signed more in the first 100 days since Truman, but my contention stands that both in quality and quantity of policy he is on pace for THE most ineffective first congressional term of a president ever.

The media has nothing to do with the ineffectiveness. For better or worse things chugged a long still while Clinton was investigated and impeached, why now is the media halting ALL progress? What about the last nearly 100 days has become more difficult than the first 100? Could any of it at all have to do with the legislation that is trying to be pushed? Why if Republicans have control of every aspect and the media is so spun and terrible can't the government still get anything done?

But lets suppose your right it's the media creating a witchhunt and that's stalling all legislation, don't you find it ironic that Obama was elected to "make Change" and the Republicans were obstructionist to ALL ends in allowing anything to happen(people who can actually impact the legislative process), and these men were commended, but now the media is awful? The other side had the same feeling you did 8 years ago, even when it's the other side in charge don't you think this behavior is reprehensible either way(assuming the media treatment is the actual cause, I'm skeptical).

Wait intelligence agencies being corrupt??? What are you talking about? That's off the rails.

[Play Angry]

1. Nominate and confirm SCOTUS justice (check)
2. Repeal and replace Obamacare
3. Pass tax reform
4. Pass infrastructure bill

The above represents the "must perform" items which dominated campaign talking points. Item 1 was accomplished quickly. Item 2 has been a slow-motion trainwreck and remains a work in progress. Items 3 and 4 have not left the starting blocks. We are are about ~25% of the way through this term of Congress.

Most of the rest is noise on both sides.

[shockfan89_]

But lets suppose your right it's the media creating a witchhunt and that's stalling all legislation, don't you find it ironic that Obama was elected to "make Change" and the Republicans were obstructionist to ALL ends in allowing anything to happen(people who can actually impact the legislative process), and these men were commended, but now the media is awful? The other side had the same feeling you did 8 years ago, even when it's the other side in charge don't you think this behavior is reprehensible either way(assuming the media treatment is the actual cause, I'm skeptical).

Wait intelligence agencies being corrupt??? What are you talking about? That's off the rails.

The media is increasingly becoming part of the Democratic party which is a huge concern. They should be independent as to not become state-run. Admitting that fact it is easy to see the past 8 years the media was a bit different. The media was aiding the administration versus trying to tear it down. I agree Republicans were obstructing, much like the Democrats are now. It was no more right or wrong then than now, just not as bad because Dems were in control and had the media in their back pocket.

I also feel the current administration is working to improve America for all Americans. Didn't feel that was the case with the last administration. I will support anyone in office that pushes power down to states and localities whether they have a D or an R by their name. We need to reduce the size of the federal government and get control of spending so we don't ruin our children and grandchildren's chance of having the same prosperity we were able to have.

BTW I said political heads of our intelligence agencies. Comey and Clapper were the most political (and inept) heads of those departments with Comey even becoming a leaker. They need to get back to being apolitical and doing the right thing for the country, not the administration.

[ShockCrazy]

The media is increasingly becoming part of the Democratic party which is a huge concern. They should be independent as to not become state-run. Admitting that fact it is easy to see the past 8 years the media was a bit different. The media was aiding the administration versus trying to tear it down. I agree Republicans were obstructing, much like the Democrats are now. It was no more right or wrong then than now, just not as bad because Dems were in control and had the media in their back pocket.

I also feel the current administration is working to improve America for all Americans. Didn't feel that was the case with the last administration. I will support anyone in office that pushes power down to states and localities whether they have a D or an R by their name. We need to reduce the size of the federal government and get control of spending so we don't ruin our children and grandchildren's chance of having the same prosperity we were able to have.

BTW I said political heads of our intelligence agencies. Comey and Clapper were the most political (and inept) heads of those departments with Comey even becoming a leaker. They need to get back to being apolitical and doing the right thing for the country, not the administration.

But I still don't see how the media effects the actual legislation? Are Republicans just spineless in that case?

I agree we should reign in spending, and it should be moved towards state and local level. But let's not pretend that's what Republicans want either. I don't believe the administration is working in our benefit, I think it is working to benefit Donald Trump and his ego and mostly to slow progress.

Comey was certainly too forward facing(although one could argue Loretta Lynch who is genuinely terrible is responsible for that) and had Trump dismissed him on taking office I don't think a single person would have complained, certainly not myself. Comey should have not remained in that role, but all appearances seem to show Donald was fine with Comey's screw ups as long as they benefited himself, the second that stopped he was punitive. Also leaking implies some illegality and what he did was in no way shape or form illegal. Fox News even issued a rare retraction with regards to that.

I just honestly find it horribly sad that both parties managed to pick the singularly worst candidates among those who ran for their nomination. There weren't really Democrats in the primary I would have ultimately voted for, but only Hilary was truly un-electable and unstomachable. Meanwhile on the Republican side I definitely would have voted for Kasich, and likely Bush and probably Rand(although he frustrates me). Yet even after that, Republicans cling to their guy, no matter what he says or does just because he ran as a Republican. I just find it shameful how tolerant of all the antics they've suddenly become when they were railing against those exact things in the primaries.

[SHOXJOCK]

Whatever happened to @seskridge? I haven't seen her around in a while.

I think she was chased off when she was talking about her voting record and ...

I think it was @MoValley John who ended up chasing her off.

She appears to have deleted her account.

Thank you MoValley John. Hope she didn't put your pet rabbit in a cooking pot at your house!!!

[pinstripers]

I think ultimately it did have to do with the hostage situation. So we did owe them money, and Iran was willing to return the hostages in exchanged for money already owed, which while shitty and terrible of Iran, on our side seems like a positive outcome given we would have ultimately had to pay them eventually anyways.

Sweet Mother of Jesus. We didn't owe them anything. Some of it was Irainian funds in American banks, which had been frozen for years by the US govt. Giving them cash (planeloads stacked on pallets and shrinkwrapped cash, currency) might seem like a positive thing to a lunatic begging for the end of the world, I suppose

http://www.cnn.com/2016/08/03/politics/us-sends-plane-iran-400-million-cash/index.html