Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Trump

Collapse
X
Collapse
First Prev Next Last
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Strong Oval Office address tonight. Trump should do one of these every week. I like the teleprompter discipline. Next one needs to be by the fire with Melania wearing something tight.


    T


    ...

    Comment


    • So the Democrats shut down the Government over 5.7 billion in wall funding, but they are angry at Trump for not opening the Government back up over that same 5.7 billion in wall funding? Seems very hypocritical...

      Why did the Democrats vote against the 12/20/18 House funding bill to keep the Government open? It passed the House and needed 60 votes in the Senate to avoid the shut down. Senate Democrats refused to vote for it and the Government was shut down. Basically the Government is shut down because Democrats refuse to fund border security.

      The chief of U.S. Border Patrol during Barack Obama's presidency said Monday that President Trump is right in his view that border walls are effective. Mark Morgan said on "Tucker Carlson Tonight" that walls "absolutely work" and that there is no real argument against building and implementing one. He added that although he was removed from his position by President Trump's administration, Trump's stance on border security makes sense. "The president is right. ... That's based on historical data and facts that can be proven," Morgan said. He said that opponents of a border wall are looking to make a political point.

      "I cannot think of a legitimate argument why anyone would not support the wall as part of a multi-layered border security issue," noting his experience with the FBI in Texas. "Why aren't we listening to the experts and the people who do it every day? I don't understand that Tucker."

      Comment




      • Comment


        • Has Vegas joined the growing army of Fake News producers and Trump Derangement Syndrome affiliates? I found the following curious...

          https://www.marketwatch.com/story/pr...gly-2019-01-09

          Before the president’s address on border security Tuesday night, Bookmaker.eu put the over/under on the number of lies he’d spew at 3.5. For bettors, it was a no-brainer, as hundreds of thousands of dollars loaded up on the over.

          In fact, Bookmaker odds consultant John Lester told MarketWatch that the site has never seen such a lopsided response from its customers.

          “Never in our 30-year history have we been this one-sided (9 to 1) on a wager,” he said. “You would have to go back to the early Mike Tyson fights (pre-Buster Douglas) to find a wager with comparable one-sided demand.”

          “We knew the President would be prone to exaggeration to support his need for Democratic support to fund his wall,” Lester said. “However, we hoped the 8-minute time constraint coupled with the unlikelihood of the President going off-script would keep the total number of false statements low.”
          A couple things immediately jump out at me. What on earth are you going to use as a definitive statement on how many "lies" are uttered with both sides claiming "different facts"? And don't the hyperbolic comments from the bookie seem like this whole thing was contrived and there was never an expectation of a profitable bet for the house? That would be a first for Vegas.

          So then I decided to go to Fake News Central and see how many lies they thought Trump spewed last night.

          https://www.cnn.com/2019/01/08/polit...ech/index.html

          I can't find 4 lies spewed based on this article. Can you?

          I think this bet was pure propaganda underwritten by a Vegas fat cat with TDS.


          T


          ...

          Comment




          • Owned.


            T


            ...

            Comment


          • https://www.usatoday.com/border-wall...ico/559702001/

            Comment


            • shockfan89_
              shockfan89_ commented
              Editing a comment
              Very good read.

              I think the thing that surprised me the most is that some ranchers don't want a wall because they would rather have the law enforced so people quit coming. They also don't want just the wall, they say agents are needed too.

              I agree, we need a multi-layered approach to solve the problem once and for all. Wall, technology, agents, enforce the law, remove ALL federal funding from any sanctuary city/state, prosecute people who hire illegal immigrants, crack down on visa overstays, … Of all of those, the wall is the most important, first piece, to stop the flow of traffic. They you can use your resource to address the other areas.

          • Trump today: "When I said Mexico would pay for the wall in front of thousands and thousands of people ... obviously I never meant Mexico would write a check." Source

            Trump during campaign: Mexico will "make a one-time payment of $5-10 billion." Source

            It's like this hilarious circle: (1) Trump says something outlandish; (2) supporters say don't take him at his word take him at his intention/opponents say "you can't possibly mean what you just said;" (3) Trump says "no, no, I DID mean exactly what I said;" and then (4) I obviously never said or meant what I said.

            "Just remember: what you're seeing and what you're reading is not what's happening."

            Comment


            • WuDrWu
              WuDrWu commented
              Editing a comment
              What difference does it make, honestly? No one with a brain thought Mexico would pay for the wall with a check. But the US got a better deal out of Mexico so indirectly one can make the point that they are paying for it. But let's just say he lied. Hardly the 1st politician to lie. Obama lied. Clinton lives a lie every day. But ok, only Trump lies. Everyone else tells the truth. Does it really matter? Shouldn't protecting our border, where we have problems, be more important than calling Trump a liar and NOT protecting our border? I don't understand the fight here.


              But what I find truly ironic is that a lawyer, you, live day to day spinning the facts, events and circumstances to fit the narrative that you are either attacking or defending. That's your livelihood. You go to work everyday and it's basically you telling a judge that the other guy is lying, and him saying the same thing about you, when mostly it's just degrees of grey that you're arguing about. But Trump is an awful person for doing the exact same thing.

            • jdshock
              jdshock commented
              Editing a comment
              WuDrWu - the difference is that this feels like a completely different level of absurd. It's him saying the sky is green, BOTH supporters and opponents saying "he didn't mean that," and then him saying "of course I meant exactly that!" Then, six months later, he warns us to ignore what the media is saying because he never said the sky is green.

              "No one with a brain thought Mexico would pay for the wall with a check" - He did. And it's how he sold it. Time and time again. I've said this again and again on here. There is a HUGE difference between a typical politician spinning things. A typical politician will say "x, y, and z show our economy is improving" while ignoring a, b, and c. That's just how marketing/spin/whatever works. But I've never before seen a politician that so regularly states the equivalent of 2+2=5. I mean just pure, objectively false, lies. And then his supporters run around saying "take him seriously, not literally." And "it's all the same, every politician lies."

              At least a couple of times a month he just says something that is so blatantly false, and he asks us to believe it and to disregard the fake news for pointing out the truth. It's bonkers. I don't understand how you all can put up with it.

            • Kung Wu
              Kung Wu commented
              Editing a comment
              I don't know, I think there's a difference between lying and just not being able to achieve "Plan A". Obviously the first thing you would try to do is get Mexico to pay for the project, if possible. And he'd definitely accept a check if he could force Mexico to write him one, but he never went out and said "that's the only way to get them to pay for it". He just can't pull off getting them to write the check, so he is getting the money through another means. That's not lying, it's "going to Plan B". And apparently he has a "Plan C", if "Plan B" doesn't work. It wouldn't surprise me if he has a "Plan D" in the works.

          • Trump: taking him seriously, not literally

            Ocasio-Cortez: Take her literally, but not seriously
            Livin the dream

            Comment


            • I think Trump should start beginning a furlough process for federal workers. Issue a certain number of furloughs per day, until the $5.7B is raised in future federal employee payroll, or until the Dems sign off. At $100,000 per employee (including benefits), he would only need to lay off 57,000 federal workers -- or 2.85% of the workforce. And he would get that $5.7B every year if he also issues a hiring freeze to replace the furloughed workers. If he wants to be done with it in a month, he could just begin laying off 1,900 workers per day for 30 days. If the Dems sign off on the "remainder", they could save federal jobs -- up to them.

              Problem solved.
              Last edited by Kung Wu; 1 week ago.
              Kung Wu say: "If Chuck Norris had a coach, his name would be Gregg Marshall."

              Comment


              • C0|dB|00ded
                C0|dB|00ded commented
                Editing a comment
                Yeah, that wouldn't work. An incredible PR disaster where Trump's takes the innocent middle-class worker and forces him/her to pay for "his wall". That would be game over.


                T


                ...

            • If we can get off the CNN/MSM daily talking points for just a couple of minutes (just saw the CNN crawler comments about the check thing which seems new to me), when it comes to security, can anyone tell me why me getting cattle driven through the airport, having my unit search (using the back of the hand) and having to provide multiple IDs even though I've lived here my entire life and been cleared by TSA, is fine and dandy to keep the airways safe and secure, but better border security where we have daily drug runs, thefts, assaults and human trafficking is a moral indecency and cannot be tolerated?

              Comment


              • jdshock
                jdshock commented
                Editing a comment
                Everyone on the right wants to say the left wants totally open borders.

                Admittedly, the left is not totally unified on this issue, but I think you would find that most people think a wall is just a pretty expensive and ineffective way to secure the border.

              • shockfan89_
                shockfan89_ commented
                Editing a comment
                I can understand people being misinformed or misled into thinking 5.7 billion is a lot of money (it's actually about equal to what we pay for 8 days of interest on the national debt), but why is it people think it is ineffective? You do know that Obama's chief of Border Patrol admitted it was the best way to secure the border? In 2013, Senate Democrats unanimously voted for 700 miles of wall/fence to secure the border. Did it just recently become ineffective?

              • WuDrWu
                WuDrWu commented
                Editing a comment
                FYI the Democratic platform is FILLED almost exclusively with programs that are expensive and ineffective. THIS is your line in the sand? This is where you say "enough big spending is enough big spending on boondoggles"?

            • Originally posted by jdshock View Post
              Trump today: "When I said Mexico would pay for the wall in front of thousands and thousands of people ... obviously I never meant Mexico would write a check." Source

              Trump during campaign: Mexico will "make a one-time payment of $5-10 billion." Source

              It's like this hilarious circle: (1) Trump says something outlandish; (2) supporters say don't take him at his word take him at his intention/opponents say "you can't possibly mean what you just said;" (3) Trump says "no, no, I DID mean exactly what I said;" and then (4) I obviously never said or meant what I said.

              "Just remember: what you're seeing and what you're reading is not what's happening."
              Very, very weak JDS. You offer up a typed memo and try to spin it as though Trump has been saying all along that he's going to make Mexico write a check? LOLOLOL!

              I've watched a lot of Trump stump speeches and I have never ONCE heard him say he's going to force Mexico to "write a check". He always says, "We're going to build a wall... and Mexico is going to pay for it." He's said that 15 billion times. Every Trumper knows what he means and likely most Liberals do too.

              Even if he was ad-libbing and attempting to rile up the people in one of his rallies and said, "I'm going to go over there and sit in the Mexican president's office until he hands me a check", we'd all know he was just saying that he's going to drive a hard bargain. This is called plain talk which is often rife with bad grammar and embellishments. It's designed to engender trust by lowering the invisible wall of superiority plain folk see when they are sharing company with a person of importance or high rank. Trump just wants people to see him as "one of the boys" and that's one of his biggest advantages in elections.

              You want to know the kind of lies that actually hurt the American people including yours truly?



              White House Web page: "If you like your doctor, you can keep your doctor. If you like your health care plan, you can keep your health care plan."


              President’s weekly address, June 6, 2009: "If you like the plan you have, you can keep it. If you like the doctor you have, you can keep your doctor, too. The only change you’ll see are falling costs as our reforms take hold."


              Town hall in Green Bay, Wis., June 11, 2009: "No matter how we reform health care, I intend to keep this promise: If you like your doctor, you'll be able to keep your doctor; if you like your health care plan, you'll be able to keep your health care plan."


              Remarks at the American Medical Association, June 15, 2009: "I know that there are millions of Americans who are content with their health care coverage — they like their plan and, most importantly, they value their relationship with their doctor. They trust you. And that means that no matter how we reform health care, we will keep this promise to the American people: If you like your doctor, you will be able to keep your doctor, period. If you like your health care plan, you'll be able to keep your health care plan, period. No one will take it away, no matter what."


              Presidential press conference, June 23, 2009. "If you like your plan and you like your doctor, you won't have to do a thing. You keep your plan. You keep your doctor."


              Rose Garden remarks, July 15, 2009. "If you like your doctor or health care provider, you can keep them. If you like your health care plan, you can keep that too."


              Remarks at a rally for New Jersey Gov. Jon Corzine, July 16, 2009: "if you've got health insurance, you like your doctor, you like your plan — you can keep your doctor, you can keep your plan. Nobody is talking about taking that away from you."


              Presidential weekly address, July 18, 2009: "Michelle and I don’t want anyone telling us who our family’s doctor should be – and no one should decide that for you either. Under our proposals, if you like your doctor, you keep your doctor. If you like your current insurance, you keep that insurance. Period, end of story."


              Rose Garden remarks, July 21, 2009: "If you like your current plan, you will be able to keep it. Let me repeat that: If you like your plan, you'll be able to keep it."


              Remarks in Shaker Heights, Ohio, July 23, 2009: "Reform will keep the government out of your health care decisions, giving you the option to keep your coverage if you're happy with it."


              Town hall in Raleigh, N.C.,July 29, 2009: "I have been as clear as I can be. Under the reform I've proposed, if you like your doctor, you keep your doctor. If you like your health care plan, you keep your health care plan. These folks need to stop scaring everybody. Nobody is talking about you forcing … to change your plans."


              Presidential weekly address, Aug. 8, 2009: "Under the reforms we seek, if you like your doctor, you can keep your doctor. If you like your health care plan, you can keep your health care plan."


              Town hall in Portsmouth, N.H., Aug. 11, 2009: "Under the reform we're proposing, if you like your doctor, you can keep your doctor. If you like your health care plan, you can keep your health care plan."


              Town hall in Belgrade, Mont., Aug. 14, 2009: "If you like your health care plan, you can keep your health care plan. This is not some government takeover. If you like your doctor, you can keep seeing your doctor. This is important."


              Presidential weekly address, Aug. 15, 2009: "No matter what you’ve heard, if you like your doctor or health care plan, you can keep it."


              Town hall in Grand Junction, Colo.,Aug. 15, 2009: "I just want to be completely clear about this. I keep on saying this but somehow folks aren't listening — if you like your health care plan, you keep your health care plan. Nobody is going to force you to leave your health care plan. If you like your doctor, you keep seeing your doctor."


              Remarks to Organizing for America, Aug. 20, 2009: "No matter what you've heard, if you like your doctor, you can keep your doctor under the reform proposals that we've put forward. If you like your private health insurance plan, you can keep it."


              Presidential weekly address, Aug. 22, 2009: "Under the reform we seek, if you like your doctor, you can keep your doctor. If you like your private health insurance plan, you can keep your plan. Period."


              Remarks on health care reform, March 3, 2010: "If you like your plan, you can keep your plan. If you like your doctor, you can keep your doctor. Because I can tell you that as the father of two young girls, I wouldn’t want any plan that interferes with the relationship between a family and their doctor."


              Presidential weekly address, March 6, 2010: "What won’t change when this bill is signed is this: If you like the insurance plan you have now, you can keep it. If you like your doctor, you can keep your doctor. Because nothing should get in the way of the relationship between a family and their doctor."


              Remarks in Glenside, Pa., March 8, 2010: "If you like your plan, you can keep your plan. If you like your doctor, you can keep your doctor."


              Remarks in St. Charles, Mo.,March 10, 2010: " If you like your plan, you can keep your plan. If you like your doctor, you can keep your doctor."


              Remarks in St. Louis, Mo.,March 10, 2010: "If you like your plan, you can keep your plan. If you like your doctor, you can keep your doctor. I’m the father of two young girls –- I don’t want anybody interfering between my family and their doctor."


              Remarks in Strongsville, Ohio, March 15, 2010: "If you like your plan, you can keep your plan. If you like your doctor, you can keep your doctor. I don't want to interfere with people’s relationships between them and their doctors."


              Remarks in Fairfax, Va., March 19, 2010: "If you like your doctor, you’re going to be able to keep your doctor. If you like your plan, keep your plan. I don’t believe we should give government or the insurance companies more control over health care in America. I think it’s time to give you, the American people, more control over your health."



              T


              ...
              Last edited by C0|dB|00ded; 1 week ago.

              Comment


              • jdshock commented
                1 hour ago

                the difference is that this feels like a completely different level of absurd. It's him saying the sky is green, BOTH supporters and opponents saying "he didn't mean that," and then him saying "of course I meant exactly that!" Then, six months later, he warns us to ignore what the media is saying because he never said the sky is green.

                "No one with a brain thought Mexico would pay for the wall with a check" - He did. And it's how he sold it. Time and time again. I've said this again and again on here. There is a HUGE difference between a typical politician spinning things. A typical politician will say "x, y, and z show our economy is improving" while ignoring a, b, and c. That's just how marketing/spin/whatever works. But I've never before seen a politician that so regularly states the equivalent of 2+2=5. I mean just pure, objectively false, lies. And then his supporters run around saying "take him seriously, not literally." And "it's all the same, every politician lies."

                At least a couple of times a month he just says something that is so blatantly false, and he asks us to believe it and to disregard the fake news for pointing out the truth. It's bonkers. I don't understand how you all can put up with it.
                Naw, it's not like that at all. Either you are purposefully trolling or completely blinded and mentally controlled by the Fake News media.

                Trump is one of the most honest politicians that has ever ran for office. He does like to exaggerate like a car salesman but it's harmless and typical New Yorker B.S.

                When he gets the wall built, which he will, he will have had one of the most successful presidencies with respect to accomplishing tasks promised in the history of the universe. The only thing unfulfilled is 'Bumcare. The mantel of that failure hangs over a dead man's grave. Good ol' Mr. Thumbs Down.


                T


                ...

                Comment


                • jdshock commented
                  17 minutes ago

                  Everyone on the right wants to say the left wants totally open borders.

                  Admittedly, the left is not totally unified on this issue, but I think you would find that most people think a wall is just a pretty expensive and ineffective way to secure the border.
                  Walls work. They work especially well when combined with electronic surveillance and guards. They will corral people into heavily guarded areas. I believe the wall will pay for itself within a year.

                  In addition to the wall, we need to refine our mail scanning techniques as well as make the penalty for overstaying your visa jail time if apprehended.

                  This is what you call comprehensive reform. But it starts with a wall.


                  T


                  ...

                  Comment


                  • I don't disagree that the right tries to make everyone on the left in DC look like they want open borders, but the left in DC doesn't need much help looking that way either.

                    It's not as bad, though, as the left trying to tie every Republican to Nazis, which is done everyday. So don't even start there.

                    I don't think even 30% of the left want open borders. I visit often with customers of mine who by chance happen to be Dems....100% (small sample size for sure) do NOT want open borders and 100% want better border security. But also, 100% absolutely suffer from TDS. All they know is they hate Trump, everything Trump says or does, and everyone and everything associated with Trump. Complete and utter derangement. And these are smart businessmen, otherwise.

                    Comment


                    • shockfan89_
                      shockfan89_ commented
                      Editing a comment
                      I would argue that also extends to most Democrats in Congress. They have always said they do NOT want open borders and want better border security, they have even said, and voted, to spend more than POTUS is asking for on a wall. But their TDS is so strong they would rather be seen as hypocrites and change the effectiveness of walls than to agree with Trump.

                      I think Trump should come out tomorrow and say that the Democrats in Congress have agreed walls are not effective so starting tomorrow all prison walls will be taken down. Democrats can own the repercussions from that too.

                  • How many times have we heard the Fake News media proclaim that illegal immigrants commit crimes at a lower rate than American citizens?

                    https://www.washingtontimes.com/news...tive-born-stu/

                    The report, from the Crime Prevention Research Center, used a previously untapped set of data from Arizona that detailed criminal convictions and found that illegal immigrants between 15 and 35 are less than 3 percent of the state’s population, but nearly 8 percent of its prison population.

                    And the crimes they were convicted of were, on the whole, more serious, said John R. Lott Jr., the report’s author and president of the research center.

                    His findings also challenge the general narrative that immigrants commit fewer crimes. Those past studies usually don’t look at legal versus illegal populations, Mr. Lott said.

                    This data has been out there for a year.

                    Can JDS please explain to me why the Washington Compost et al. is willfully lying to the American people?

                    Slip the truth out then bury it under a mountain of propaganda. This is what you call The Art of the Deception.


                    T


                    ...

                    Comment

                    Working...
                    X