Donald Trump

[Red]

First Farage now Marine Le Pen dining at Trump Tower yesterday. It's a magnet for racists that place.

 

[Bilo]

...Erdogan.

I try to sway from comparing him with Erdogan. Not because it's inaccurate, it's frightening how similar they are to one another, but rather because Erdogan is what they want. It's a needless point to make.

They do follow the same blueprint though, Erdogan is just ahead in the cycle. If anything, he's a useful indicator of what's down the line in Trump's rhetoric and desired consequences.

 

[johnnytodd]

First Farage now Marine Le Pen dining at Trump Tower yesterday. It's a magnet for racists that place.

winners mate winners

 

[JaseTheVillain]

winners mate winners

 

[Abertawe]

I thought when he was elected President that he would be curtailed by the Republican party and when he started giving jobs to rich old Republicans whilst making a U-turn on some of the statements he made during the election, I figured that was coming to pass. He even spoke in a more reserved (well, for Trump) manner for a week or two.

That press conference evaporated any hopes I had for the above - labeling legitimate news organisations as fake, constantly bragging about how he could have earned billions more but had the humility to refuse the offer, bragging about pretty much everything else he has (or hasn't) done yet, deflecting questions about personal criticism now with his views on the DNC, flat out guessing the current state of Russia and the threat of hacking, repeating himself whilst saying fuck all, doubling down on the border wall and repealing Obamacare. Lost count of the number of times he said "great" and "tremendous". Republicans, give this man a script please, it is fucking painful to listen to.

I give him less than a year before he's impeached, there has bound to be some (more) dirt on him.

Wrong. He gave a great press conference. You want Trump to fail, let me tell you, it's not gonna happen, it's just not gonna happen folks. He's loyal to the ruling forces so in terms of impeachment he's safe. The jobs president will be a success.

 

[Pagnell]

I agree he won't be impeached but it was a fucking terrible press conference, particularly in the context of him being an incoming President.

 

[Abertawe]

I agree he won't be impeached but it was a fucking terrible press conference, particularly in the context of him being an incoming President.

You won't be banned but that was a fucking terrible post.

 

[Bilo]

You won't be banned but that was a fucking terrible post.

Let's break it down together mate.

The first, obvious point, was the extremely hostile tone held towards media outlets who had publicized anything unfavorable for him in general and CNN in particular. He's failed to address and point at exactly which part of CNN's reporting regarding the Russia report was "fake". Buzzfeed toed the line ethically (but it wasn't anywhere near fake), so Trump tries to get CNN on guilt by (extremely vague) association. And of course, repeatedly typing fake news in caps lock on his twitter which came before shutting down CNN's reporter completely at the press conference. The main purpose? To force every media outlet to eventually keep in mind that they have a choice: report favorably or have no access. Old as electricity, that, but quite effective in unstable times. Especially if you've managed to convince a solid part of your fanbase that media holds some sort of conspiracy against yourself, like Trump (and countless of right wing populists) have spent a lot of time doing. The conspiracy really is key, otherwise even you and those sympathizing with his political views would question a president refusing to address a reporter from one of the biggest and most influential news outlets in the country. It's democratically horrible of course, but he doesn't care and his fanbase thinks he's just hitting back. But you have to ask yourself what he's hitting back at.

You see, the allegations regarding his ties to Russia and any eventual leverage can be cleared in an instant through releasing his tax returns. You might remember that he promised to release them. So for Trump it's a choice, either having to explain why he broke a promise that, if what he says is true, would actually prove that the Russia report is fake -- or just caps lock fake news and shut down any reporter trying to shed light on his, let's agree, dubious choice of actions throughout the entire situation.

It didn't work completely though, as he couldn't quite shut down every single reporter. So when he was asked about his tax returns, as he was, he replied that it was impossible due to his companies going through a tax revision. It's a complete and utter lie, but when any reporter tried to ask a follow up question on the subject, the microphone was removed.

Instead of one lining Pagnell's post, feel free to offer an alternative narrative as to why he chooses to caps lock fake news and shut down reporters rather than simply release his tax returns and disprove them. You'll struggle, I'm sure, because if he spoke the truth his actions make literally no sense. And if he lies, well that leads me to my next point.

He takes office with the confidence numbers in US at 37%. That's the lowest in history. George Bush, after an incredibly infected and controversial election, took office at 51%. Obama at 75%.

Of course the press conference was a fucking trainwreck, and that's putting it mildly. The only thing he achieved was making it slightly more understandable that he didn't host a single press conference in six months. He just has no idea what he's doing and his instinct is to lie, threaten and abuse his powers in every possible way because he knows nothing else; or he'd have shown it by now.

 

[Abertawe]

You've not really said anything other than "I believe media corporations don't serve political agendas therefor Trump has no right to deride them". He has every right to battle his enemies, enemies that are going after him not for the people or democracy, but because he's rejigged their settled establishment. FAKE NEWS & FAKE INTELLIGENCE isn't an imagination. There are examples that can be cited from every decade right back to their formation. In terms of tax returns & Russia I and most normal people don't care. The world will be a better place with closer US & Russian ties, that's worth any dubious tax or golden shower unproven allegations. Trump might be shit but he's less shit than Hilary. Fuck tax returns I want those emails reported in MSM, it'd blown your little minds. Trump is a boss, the jobs president. He won. He will be a success for most ordinary americans, something which Obama can't claim. Those going after Trump had the chance create a revolution but they destroyed it so fuck em. A rejigged establishment still isn't great but for Americans the rejig will be better for them than the previous. Stop being so tunnel visioned my young Swedish brother, the alternative was horrible.

In relation to Pagz, the boy is the king of one liners without substance. I quoted and derided for exactly that reason.

 

[johnnytodd]

Let's break it down together mate.

The first, obvious point, was the extremely hostile tone held towards media outlets who had publicized anything unfavorable for him in general and CNN in particular. He's failed to address and point at exactly which part of CNN's reporting regarding the Russia report was "fake". Buzzfeed toed the line ethically (but it wasn't anywhere near fake), so Trump tries to get CNN on guilt by (extremely vague) association. And of course, repeatedly typing fake news in caps lock on his twitter which came before shutting down CNN's reporter completely at the press conference. The main purpose? To force every media outlet to eventually keep in mind that they have a choice: report favorably or have no access. Old as electricity, that, but quite effective in unstable times. Especially if you've managed to convince a solid part of your fanbase that media holds some sort of conspiracy against yourself, like Trump (and countless of right wing populists) have spent a lot of time doing. The conspiracy really is key, otherwise even you and those sympathizing with his political views would question a president refusing to address a reporter from one of the biggest and most influential news outlets in the country. It's democratically horrible of course, but he doesn't care and his fanbase thinks he's just hitting back. But you have to ask yourself what he's hitting back at.

You see, the allegations regarding his ties to Russia and any eventual leverage can be cleared in an instant through releasing his tax returns. You might remember that he promised to release them. So for Trump it's a choice, either having to explain why he broke a promise that, if what he says is true, would actually prove that the Russia report is fake -- or just caps lock fake news and shut down any reporter trying to shed light on his, let's agree, dubious choice of actions throughout the entire situation.

It didn't work completely though, as he couldn't quite shut down every single reporter. So when he was asked about his tax returns, as he was, he replied that it was impossible due to his companies going through a tax revision. It's a complete and utter lie, but when any reporter tried to ask a follow up question on the subject, the microphone was removed.

Instead of one lining Pagnell's post, feel free to offer an alternative narrative as to why he chooses to caps lock fake news and shut down reporters rather than simply release his tax returns and disprove them. You'll struggle, I'm sure, because if he spoke the truth his actions make literally no sense. And if he lies, well that leads me to my next point.

He takes office with the confidence numbers in US at 37%. That's the lowest in history. George Bush, after an incredibly infected and controversial election, took office at 51%. Obama at 75%.

Of course the press conference was a fucking trainwreck, and that's putting it mildly. The only thing he achieved was making it slightly more understandable that he didn't host a single press conference in six months. He just has no idea what he's doing and his instinct is to lie, threaten and abuse his powers in every possible way because he knows nothing else; or he'd have shown it by now.

I bet your shit in bed.

 

[Renegade]

 

[Bilo]

You've not really said anything other than "I believe media corporations don't serve political agendas therefor Trump has no right to deride them". He has every right to battle his enemies, enemies that are going after him not for the people or democracy, but because he's rejigged their settled establishment. FAKE NEWS & FAKE INTELLIGENCE isn't an imagination. There are examples that can be cited from every decade right back to their formation. In terms of tax returns & Russia I and most normal people don't care. The world will be a better place with closer US & Russian ties, that's worth any dubious tax or golden shower unproven allegations. Trump might be shit but he's less shit than Hilary. Fuck tax returns I want those emails reported in MSM, it'd blown your little minds. Trump is a boss, the jobs president. He won. He will be a success for most ordinary americans, something which Obama can't claim. Those going after Trump had the chance create a revolution but they destroyed it so fuck em. A rejigged establishment still isn't great but for Americans the rejig will be better for them than the previous. Stop being so tunnel visioned my young Swedish brother, the alternative was horrible.

In relation to Pagz, the boy is the king of one liners without substance. I quoted and derided for exactly that reason.

See below:

feel free to offer an alternative narrative as to why he chooses to caps lock fake news and shut down reporters rather than simply release his tax returns and disprove them.

So putting pride and our amazingly many differences aside, why doesn't Trump just disprove them? If what he says is true, i.e. Russia has no financial leverage over him, releasing his tax returns would be immensely favorably for him. Also, he'd keep a promise, which so far isn't a habit of his.

My point was, that I feared you miss, is that the war on media for the alleged Russia ties and refusal to release his tax returns don't combine. If what you say is true, he has an open goal he can't miss. Instead, chooses to come up with a bullshit excuse (genuinely, impartially untrue) not to. See below:

So for Trump it's a choice, either having to explain why he broke a promise that, if what he says is true, would actually prove that the Russia report is fake -- or just caps lock fake news and shut down any reporter trying to shed light on his, let's agree, dubious choice of actions throughout the entire situation.

He hates the media in general and CNN in particular. He claims he has nothing to hide, but he comes up with a bullshit excuse instead of just disproving them. You don't touch on that. So I'll ask you again; what's your take on it? Why do you believe he acts like he does? The fact that you don't care about whether or not Russia has a financial leverage on the president of the United States is your choice, it doesn't in any way give reason to his thinking and line of action.

Fuck tax returns I want those emails reported in MSM

Out of interest; if not for "MSM", how would you even know about those emails?

 

[Bilo]

I bet your shit in bed.

This sentence makes no sense. Literally none at all. Best wishes, your favorite scandinavian.

 

[Abertawe]

See below:

So putting pride and our amazingly many differences aside, why doesn't Trump just disprove them? If what he says is true, i.e. Russia has no financial leverage over him, releasing his tax returns would be immensely favorably for him. Also, he'd keep a promise, which so far isn't a habit of his.

My point was, that I feared you miss, is that the war on media for the alleged Russia ties and refusal to release his tax returns don't combine. If what you say is true, he has an open goal he can't miss. Instead, chooses to come up with a bullshit excuse (genuinely, impartially untrue) not to. See below:

He hates the media in general and CNN in particular. He claims he has nothing to hide, but he comes up with a bullshit excuse instead of just disproving them. You don't touch on that. So I'll ask you again; what's your take on it? Why do you believe he acts like he does? The fact that you don't care about whether or not Russia has a financial leverage on the president of the United States is your choice, it doesn't in any way give reason to his thinking and line of action.


Out of interest; if not for "MSM", how would you even know about those emails?

Mate I don't think I care about Trump's supposed ties with Russia or his tax going ons anywhere near as much as you do. I just accept that powerful people are pretty ropey, I never believed Trump to be any different in the first place so I'm certainly not going to defend him (there hasn't been anything with the required proof to level up any of these allegations from mere rumours to this point though)

He hates the media that serves the other side. There isn't that much to read into it. He'll be sound with those that support him and scornful to those that oppose him, the same as any other political figure. The difference is the ferociousness by all involved. You give off the impression that 'the media' are some natural force for good though which just isn't the case. They are every bit as complicit in illegal wars, genocide & the such like as politicians are. If Trump wants to have a scrap with them then above the comedy of it all I don't care all that much.

As for your last question it wasn't down to MSM as to how I came to know about the emails. The MSM hasn't reported the content, which proves my case. If they did the election wouldn't have been a contest. I assume you have just read about the hacking of emails and haven't researched what some of the leaks include? You wouldn't hold the views you do if you had.

Why do you see Russia as this big evil monster too? I know they aren't great on certain issues but they represent no harm on a global scale.

 

[Bilo]

Mate I don't think I care about Trump's supposed ties with Russia or his tax going ons anywhere near as much as you do. I just accept that powerful people are pretty ropey, I never believed Trump to be any different in the first place so I'm certainly not going to defend him (there hasn't been anything with the required proof to level up any of these allegations from mere rumours to this point though)

Twice now I've asked you to offer any kind of alternative explanation as to why he doesn't just disprove the media. Twice you've concluded that you don't care. These have nothing to do with each other but this is my interpretation of it: you have no problem with a foreign power having significant leverage over the most powerful man in the western world. Fair enough, it doesn't answer my question but I guess it explains why you don't. A less favorable interpretation would be that you simply can't explain it. No judgment here though, I can't either. Trump would fucking love to show up the media, so the fact that he doesn't really, really implicates that he can't. Especially when it's combined with downright lies as an excuse for it (see the part about removing the microphone).

As for his tax returns disproving Russia's alleged financial leverage, that's not rumors, it's a statement of fact.

He hates the media that serves the other side. There isn't that much to read into it. He'll be sound with those that support him and scornful to those that oppose him, the same as any other political figure. The difference is the ferociousness by all involved. You give off the impression that 'the media' are some natural force for good though which just isn't the case. They are every bit as complicit in illegal wars, genocide & the such like as politicians are. If Trump wants to have a scrap with them then above the comedy of it all I don't care all that much.

The media isn't one voice, one concern. They do have an extremely important role to play in every functioning democracy though. For example, there's a direct linear correlation between a strong public service media and the fulfilling of criteria for a functioning democracy.

Whether you think it's democratically defendable to discredit those meant to examine and demand answers from those in power or not, another statement of fact is that it's what every -- literally without exception -- dictator does as well. Discrediting the media to every possible extent, at every chance, is step 1A to acquire non-democratic power in a democracy. You might think it's defendable. You might also google "lugenpresse" and start reading up on precisely why non-democratic leaders are so incredibly interested in going to war with the media. I mean, the Swedish media and the US media have extremely little in common. Yet Trump's rhetoric is identical with the right wing populists in Sweden (and Hitler, Duerte, Erdogan, Le Pen x2, the list goes on and on). Do note that these aren't opinions, they're very accepted theories based on a century of research on the subject in countless of democracies and non-democracies. It's a very simple concept to grasp: discredit those who hold you accountable for your actions. You might think Trump acts in a vacuum where it's defendable, or you'll hear the warning bells.

As for your last question it wasn't down to MSM as to how I came to know about the emails. The MSM hasn't reported the content, which proves my case. If they did the election wouldn't have been a contest. I assume you have just read about the hacking of emails and haven't researched what some of the leaks include? You wouldn't hold the views you do if you had.

This is odd. Because what you're asking is literally, exactly, what Trump is criticizing Buzzfeed for (trying to get CNN in on guilt by association, since CNN is a much more necessary target to discredit). If you want full disclosure, how do you even for a second agree with the criticism towards Buzzfeed and CNN that Trump put forth in the very press conference we're discussing? I mean, this little part of your post alone makes me think you've agreed with me all along that Trump's swings at CNN at the press conference were embarrassing. The man is against full disclosure. It really, really doesn't combine at all.

I know full well what the leaks include. And as I said in my first post on the subject, Buzzfeed's publication was bordering unethical. A publication of of the email leaks in full would have been equally unethical, from a press ethical perspective. CNN, however, have kept an ethical defendable stand point on both subjects. They've stuck to what's relevant while sorting out unconfirmed, potentially harmful and irrelevant information. Their reporting on the Russia report and the Clinton emails are strikingly similar in fact, it follows the same ethical code. Which isn't strange at all, it's shit you learn the first year studying journalism at the university.

Why do you see Russia as this big evil monster too? I know they aren't great on certain issues but they represent no harm on a global scale.

No, not necessarily. The problem isn't that it's Russia. The problem is that a foreign power holds potential leverage over a president of a country. Whether it's Russia or Canada is completely irrelevant. Trump will cling on to the "nobody knows", but you really have to start asking yourself why he doesn't just disprove it. He can, he should, and he won't. I've asked you twice and I won't ask again. I do sincerely hope you'll ask yourself that question though, when the dust settles. I mean, it can be applied on this little discussion as well: if there was a logical explanation to his line of action, you'd have presented it by now.

Bilo out.

 

[johnnytodd]

Thanks for ruining my thread you pair of bookworms.

 

[Abertawe]

 

[johnnytodd]

Who the fuck is that?

 

[Martino Quackavelli]

I bet your shit in bed.

*you're

 

[mnb089mnb]

I bet your shit in bed.

*you

 

[Red]

*you're

It's time we had a literacy test before people can join the forum.

 

[Dirk]

It's time we had a literacy test before people can join the forum.

*have? (sorry, I am always trying to improve my english, that's why I ask )

tbh: A literacy test in a Donald Trump thread? You're kidding me

 

[johnnytodd]

It's time we had a literacy test before people can join the forum.

and a loyalty test.

 

[johnnytodd]

See Mr Trump has said the UK is first in line for trade deals.

booya !

 

[johnnytodd]

 

[Abertawe]

See Mr Trump has said the UK is first in line for trade deals.

booya !

He won't necessarily be POTUS by the time we're out of the EU and in a position for trade deals to be rubber stamped. It is bizarre though that Donald Trump is more supportive of the UK than many on here are. The world in which we live in.

 

[johnnytodd]

He won't necessarily be POTUS by the time we're out of the EU and in a position for trade deals to be rubber stamped. It is bizarre though that Donald Trump is more supportive of the UK than many on here are. The world in which we live in.

I know what you mean you wouldn't want to be relying on Abergas to mind your back in a warzone.

 

[Abertawe]

I know what you mean you wouldn't want to be relying on Abergas to mind your back in a warzone.

Aber G is exactly the type of person I'd want on my side in a war. You on the other hand I can just imagine being a cowardly turncoat the moment things got ropey.

 

[johnnytodd]

Aber G is exactly the type of person I'd want on my side in a war. You on the other hand I can just imagine being a cowardly turncoat the moment things got ropey.

he could make the breakfast, but he seems very anti British and pro terrorist to me.

 

[Red]

he could make the breakfast, but he seems very anti British and pro terrorist to me.