Trump, Oh my god ! - Page 62 - Politics Forum.org | PoFo

Wandering the information superhighway, he came upon the last refuge of civilization, PoFo, the only forum on the internet ...

Political issues and parties in the USA and Canada.

Moderator: PoFo North America Mods

Forum rules: No one line posts please.
User avatar
By Drlee
#15057876
@Godstud that said, why would a Republican?

Good question. For the same reason for starters.
User avatar
By Godstud
#15057885
I guess I imagined real Republicans to be fiscally conservative. My mistake.
User avatar
By Drlee
#15057905
I guess I imagined real Republicans to be fiscally conservative. My mistake.


That was my point. I was being sarcastic when I said, "Why would a liberal hate Trump? He spends money like a drunken sailor."

It is one of the great ironies of our times. The once fiscally conservative republicans refuse to cut spending because it will cost them votes but because the rich want tax cuts, they put everything on the national credit card.

Of course the republican party is now, in no way, conservative. It claims the term for its own but the party was one decidedly fiscally conservative and socially libertarian. Now it is neither. It is a corporatist party or perhaps leaning fascist.
User avatar
By jimjam
#15057922
Hindsite wrote:a false or misleading statement


The rule of thumb is that pretty much everything coming out of Impeached President Trump's very large mouth is a lie. :|
User avatar
By Hindsite
#15058061
jimjam wrote:The rule of thumb is that pretty much everything coming out of Impeached President Trump's very large mouth is a lie. :|

My rule of thumb is to believe President Trump believes everything he says. I have yet to catch him in any real lies. Lies are meant to deceive. President Trump does not do that as far as I can tell. Deceiving is what the Democrats and the Fake news media do.
User avatar
By Godstud
#15058063
A Trump lie, unless you really are so monumentally stupid, that you think that his lies are true...

Trump, who has tilted at windmills for more than a decade, made perhaps his strangest claim on the subject at a National Republican Congressional Committee fundraiser on April 2.

"Wind. If you -- if you have a windmill anywhere near your house, congratulations, your house just went down 75% in value. And they say the noise causes cancer," he said.

There might indeed be a "they" Trump has heard saying that wind turbines -- which he habitually calls "windmills" -- cause cancer. That should not mean the President should pass on their false claim to the country. But Trump is not only a serial liar but a serial sharer of inaccurate information he has heard from a motley collection of dubious sources -- "many people," "some people," "they" -- and not bothered to verify.

https://edition.cnn.com/2019/12/31/poli ... index.html

Go to the site. There are many more lies, there, that Trump has told.

Don't be a sheep, @Hindsite. Think for yourself.
User avatar
By Hindsite
#15058068
Godstud wrote:A Trump lie, unless you really are so monumentally stupid, that you think that his lies are true...

Trump, who has tilted at windmills for more than a decade, made perhaps his strangest claim on the subject at a National Republican Congressional Committee fundraiser on April 2.

"Wind. If you -- if you have a windmill anywhere near your house, congratulations, your house just went down 75% in value. And they say the noise causes cancer," he said.

There might indeed be a "they" Trump has heard saying that wind turbines -- which he habitually calls "windmills" -- cause cancer. That should not mean the President should pass on their false claim to the country. But Trump is not only a serial liar but a serial sharer of inaccurate information he has heard from a motley collection of dubious sources -- "many people," "some people," "they" -- and not bothered to verify.

https://edition.cnn.com/2019/12/31/poli ... index.html

Go to the site. There are many more lies, there, that Trump has told.

Don't be a sheep, @Hindsite. Think for yourself.

The Democrats and the fake news media have done much worse than this. Look at all the times they claimed the President was a Russian agent and a traitor to America for colluding with the Russians.
User avatar
By Godstud
#15058077
Saying someone else lies does not absolve someone else of their lies, @Hindsite
User avatar
By Hindsite
#15058086
Godstud wrote:Saying someone else lies does not absolve someone else of their lies, @Hindsite

So what? It does not dissolve you of your lies either.
User avatar
By Godstud
#15058091
Hindsite wrote:So what?
Why are you dismissive of Trump's lying? No one should be dismissive of lies.

I don't ever knowingly tell falsehoods. Trump does. Your pitiful attempt to insult me only shows how conned you are, by Trump.
User avatar
By Groom
#15058131
Drlee wrote:Very true.

This is a huge deal and Iran is going to extract a huge price. It is one thing to go after a more or less stateless terrorist like Bin Laden. It is implicit that folks like him and the ISIS leader are far game. It is quite another to go after the second most powerful person in Iran and a legitimate member of their government. Soleimani, though a died in the wool bad actor, is not a rogue. This was absolutely no different than going after the Iranian president. Overt political assassination has never been the US position.

Attacking a member of the Iranian government (several of their soldiers actually) is probably an act of war. I don't know what Iran will do but I would not want to be on a ship in the region right now.

I understand that Lindsey Graham said that he had been "notified" but none of the congressional leadership has. This is unconstitutional.

Here is what Pelosi ought to do.

She ought to have a vote to rescind the impeachment articles pending a new investigation into allegations that the president precipitated an unconstitutional war.

Earlier this week the Iranian leader taunted Trump and said "there is nothing he can do" about the embassy storming. Well guess again dude. You just got your bluff called in spades. And now you have to tread very lightly. If you provoke Trump you will find yourself in a hot war that you cannot win and he cannot lose. Yet you have to act. So what is the calculus?

I will not put this in capital letters but let me say, I do not believe this was a smart move, a legal move or even a justifiable move. Full stop.

Having said that. I would not want to be in Supreme Leader's shoes right now. His economy is in a shambles. But mostly his problem is that he can't figure out what Trump will do. He can't be sure that he won't evoke a protracted hot war with the US. And though such a war would be very costly to the US and unlikely to lead to regime change, It would be far worse for Iran.

My guess is that he will execute a proxy strike against a US ship somewhere.

War with Iran....Body count? Thousands of US and its allies' casualties. Iranian casualties? 200K or so...

Trump is in the stronger position here for certain.


What do you say about following tweet:
User avatar
By Drlee
#15058138
What do you say about following tweet:


The President of the United States does not have the authority to go to war in the first place without congressional authority. That is already the problem. Though I think that "notifying" congress in a tweet is pathetic and shows contempt for the law, the issue is not a US response to an Iranian retaliation. The key word is "retaliation".

As I think of this I am forced to admit that the guy he hit was a really bad actor. No argument about that. But it has appeared that Trump has been headed this way since he abrogated the nuclear treaty we had with Iran. That was foolhardy. Now they are free to build nukes. Russia and China are thrilled to have a nuclear armed ally in the region. Trump has single handed made Iran into a nuclear armed Islamic terrorist state. It is appalling.
User avatar
By Groom
#15058156
Drlee wrote:The President of the United States does not have the authority to go to war in the first place without congressional authority. That is already the problem. Though I think that "notifying" congress in a tweet is pathetic and shows contempt for the law, the issue is not a US response to an Iranian retaliation. The key word is "retaliation".

As I think of this I am forced to admit that the guy he hit was a really bad actor. No argument about that. But it has appeared that Trump has been headed this way since he abrogated the nuclear treaty we had with Iran. That was foolhardy. Now they are free to build nukes. Russia and China are thrilled to have a nuclear armed ally in the region. Trump has single handed made Iran into a nuclear armed Islamic terrorist state. It is appalling.


There is another (urgent/important) news out there, if true: OMG

"Iraqi prime minister says Qassem Soleimani was in Iraq to 'discuss de-escalating tensions between Iran and Saudis' when he was killed - and claims Trump had asked for help mediating talks after embassy attack"

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/articl ... -says.html
By Finfinder
#15058164
Drlee wrote:Very true.

This is a huge deal and Iran is going to extract a huge price. It is one thing to go after a more or less stateless terrorist like Bin Laden. It is implicit that folks like him and the ISIS leader are far game. It is quite another to go after the second most powerful person in Iran and a legitimate member of their government. Soleimani, though a died in the wool bad actor, is not a rogue. This was absolutely no different than going after the Iranian president. Overt political assassination has never been the US position.

Attacking a member of the Iranian government (several of their soldiers actually) is probably an act of war. I don't know what Iran will do but I would not want to be on a ship in the region right now.

.


No its not. Why are you so surprised I believe in a speech in July Trump warned Iran of this. It just enforces Trumps ability to negotiated because he does not draws "imaginary red lines". Why do think China made a deal with us?


Drlee wrote:Here is what Pelosi ought to do.

She ought to have a vote to rescind the impeachment articles pending a new investigation into allegations that the president precipitated an unconstitutional war.

Earlier this week the Iranian leader taunted Trump and said "there is nothing he can do" about the embassy storming. Well guess again dude. You just got your bluff called in spades. And now you have to tread very lightly. If you provoke Trump you will find yourself in a hot war that you cannot win and he cannot lose. Yet you have to act. So what is the calculus?

I will not put this in capital letters but let me say, I do not believe this was a smart move, a legal move or even a justifiable move. Full stop.

Having said that. I would not want to be in Supreme Leader's shoes right now. His economy is in a shambles. But mostly his problem is that he can't figure out what Trump will do. He can't be sure that he won't evoke a protracted hot war with the US. And though such a war would be very costly to the US and unlikely to lead to regime change, It would be far worse for Iran.

My guess is that he will execute a proxy strike against a US ship somewhere.

War with Iran....Body count? Thousands of US and its allies' casualties. Iranian casualties? 200K or so...

Trump is in the stronger position here for certain.


You forgot the sky is falling and chicken little. Not going to happen and apparently you haven't learned from the first impeachment. What exactly are the charges.?

Drlee wrote:That was my point. I was being sarcastic when I said, "Why would a liberal hate Trump? He spends money like a drunken sailor."

It is one of the great ironies of our times. The once fiscally conservative republicans refuse to cut spending because it will cost them votes but because the rich want tax cuts, they put everything on the national credit card.

Of course the republican party is now, in no way, conservative. It claims the term for its own but the party was one decidedly fiscally conservative and socially libertarian. Now it is neither. It is a corporatist party or perhaps leaning fascist.


The real irony is you can't name a single modern day president who doesn't spend money like a drunken sailor. The other irony is you can't name a better candidate (that is electable) that will display the most Republicans ideals than Trump. So what is so enlightening about your posts? We get it you hate the guys personality, so what you are now John Mccain Jr. ,taking your ball and going home ? There is almost 200 conservative judge appoints try to freaking be happy for once the glass is half full.
User avatar
By Drlee
#15058166
The real irony is you can't name a single modern day president who doesn't spend money like a drunken sailor.


Bill Clinton balanced the budget. That is a good start. He did it working across party lines.

The other irony is you can't name a better candidate (that is electable) that will display the most Republicans ideals than Trump.


Jeb Bush.

There are more but that serves to prove my point. You will say he is unelectable. Very true with Trump holding the party by the balls.

So what is so enlightening about your posts? We get it you hate the guys personality, so what you are now John Mccain Jr. ,taking your ball and going home ?


Are you trying to make a point or just a childishly odd post?

There is almost 200 conservative judge appoints try to freaking be happy for once the glass is half full.


Some are conservative and some are not. You really don't know what a conservative is and you are not alone.
By Finfinder
#15058174
Drlee wrote:Bill Clinton balanced the budget. That is a good start. He did it working across party lines.
Jeb Bush.
There are more but that serves to prove my point. You will say he is unelectable. Very true with Trump holding the party by the balls.
.


So you name a Democrat and guy who is a life long establishment politician, who couldn't get elected. The fact is you have no idea what Jeb Bush would have done he certainly would have been corporation friendly something you despise so by your rules that should rule him out.

Drlee wrote:Are you trying to make a point or just a childishly odd post?.



I have the same standing question for you in most of your veiled insulting posts. No its not childish to point out your observations are not new or that insightful, since you claim to be intellectually superior.

Drlee wrote:Some are conservative and some are not. You really don't know what a conservative is and you are not alone.


Well Drlee I know that Bill Clinton did not appoint conservative judges. That is odd you as the ultimate conservative, support Clinton, or any Democrat for president. Or is that childish to point out? :D
User avatar
By Drlee
#15058201
...since you claim to be intellectually superior.


To whom? To you or to others here?

This is your strawman. I made no such claims. I have no idea about others here so I could not make any such determination. Many posts here leave me suspicious but I keep those suspicions to myself. When I speak of Trump supporters as a group, I suppose there could be some bright people among them but I see little evidence of it.
The fact is you have no idea what Jeb Bush would have done he certainly would have been corporation friendly something you despise so by your rules that should rule him out.


I am quite "corporation friendly". I own one. I do not want them messing with politics, picking the people's pockets through tax breaks, overcharging the government for goods and services, and buying politicians. Those ARE conservative values. This is partially why I frequently point out that you and others here who claim to be conservative, aren't and do not know why I would say that.
User avatar
By Hindsite
#15058259
Godstud wrote:Why are you dismissive of Trump's lying? No one should be dismissive of lies.

I don't ever knowingly tell falsehoods. Trump does. Your pitiful attempt to insult me only shows how conned you are, by Trump.

I don't believe President Trump knowingly tells falsehoods. I like what President Trump says. That is why I support him. Did I tell you I have two TRUMP 2020 shirts?
User avatar
By Godstud
#15058261
Believe what you want, but facts speak for themselves. Trump is a liar. Only the Trump zealots think otherwise.

Great, you bought some over-priced rags.
User avatar
By Hindsite
#15058262
Groom wrote:There is another (urgent/important) news out there, if true: OMG

"Iraqi prime minister says Qassem Soleimani was in Iraq to 'discuss de-escalating tensions between Iran and Saudis' when he was killed - and claims Trump had asked for help mediating talks after embassy attack"

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/articl ... -says.html

The former U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations, Nikki Haley said that the security council had banned Qassem Soleimani from leaving Iran. So he should have not been in Iraq to be taken out in the first place. If President Trump had not done something about this war criminal and terrorist leader, he would still be out there directing terrorist activities all over the Middle East. Thank God for the Trump of God.
HalleluYah

Godstud wrote:Believe what you want, but facts speak for themselves. Trump is a liar. Only the Trump zealots think otherwise.

Great, you bought some over-priced rags.

Trump did not lie about ordering the death strike against the Iranian terrorist leader Qassem Soleimani.
Praise the Lord.
  • 1
  • 60
  • 61
  • 62
  • 63
  • 64
  • 68
Election 2020

No, I am saying that a large percentage of the peo[…]

@wat0n 1. Between 20% and 25% of police killi[…]

The Wuhan virus—how are we doing?

@Sivad Since you have no argument, have a good[…]

The most logical explanation is that it comes fr[…]