The Trump implosion thread!

Quote: ams288

I can't think of anything less relevant than what you have and haven't heard.

It's not a rumor, they are performing. The
Beach Boys are also considering it. Most
performers are rabid Lefties, why would
they be there. You act surprised at this.

Quote: ams288

I LOVE the fact that all the A-list performers have turned Donald down.

A normal Republican wouldn't be bothered by it at all. Who cares that celebrities don't want to perform at your inauguration?

But Donald is the biggest star f***er there is, so it is a slap in his puffy orange face. He wants A-list celebrities to perform for him badly. But he can't get any.

http://www.thewrap.com/insiders-trump-team-dangles-ambassadorships-to-lure-a-list-inauguration-singers-exclusive/

The same person who writes about EB posting things about what Trump says posts a link to a blather-filled piece from some trash source like it is the absolute truth. That piece is pretty much what fake news is all about...take a tiny kernel of truth and quote whatever unnamed sources you want to turn it into some supposedly huge story.

I'm so tired of people on both sides posting stories with nothing (or very little) to them claiming them to be some kind of a huge revelation. Yes, AMS288, it is both sides. yes, AMS288, it is crap when both sides do it.

...and don't bother going into telling us about the folks who have actually said that they would not do a Trump event. If you aren't asked to do one, you can't turn one down. Just saying you won't do it is not the same as turning down an actually offered gig. It is just some politically irrelevant person (a celebrity) trying to stay in the spotlight and tell us how the feel politically.

Quote: RonC

...and don't bother going into telling us about the folks who have actually said that they would not do a Trump event.

Wonder why RonC wants to avoid hearing this? Is it because he knows plenty of A-listers have confirmed that they turned down Donald, but he wants to keep falsely claiming this is a "fake news" item?

When righties claim something is "fake news" - that's a pretty good indication that it's true and they are desperate to avoid the truth.

Quote: ams288

Wonder why RonC wants to avoid hearing this? Is it because he knows plenty of A-listers have confirmed that they turned down Donald, but he wants to keep falsely claiming this is a "fake news" item?

When righties claim something is "fake news" - that's a pretty good indication that it's true and they are desperate to avoid the truth.

...and the next fairy tale you come up with will be that there is, of course, no fake news from the left...

Of course people have turned Donald down. it is, after all, a free country. I just find it funny that you use tabloid garbage that really said nothing in your effort to "prove it"...

Quote: RonC

I'm so tired of people on both sides posting stories with nothing (or very little) to them claiming them to be some kind of a huge revelation.

Try TheCesspit. I think the rest are simply trolling each other for kicks, and I can't be arsed to delve into politics much more. Cess'll be straight with ya.

Quote: Face

Try TheCesspit. I think the rest are simply trolling each other for kicks,

There's no use arguing with Trump supporters. They are, after all, Trump supporters. They consider any claim by the Orange Man as holy writ, even when presented with contrary evidence. They use double-think to claim massive electoral fraud and yet proclaim the election as 100% legitimate. Like that.

And they are too easily offended when they step outside their safe spaces. Look how they react to the phrase "Orange Man." You'd think I'd said something like "walking sack of shit in vaguely human form." Not to mention they regard any disagreement with trump, no matter in what trivial a matter, as a mortal offense.

Quote: Nareed

There's no use arguing with Trump supporters. They are, after all, Trump supporters. They consider any claim by the Orange Man as holy writ, even when presented with contrary evidence. They use double-think to claim massive electoral fraud and yet proclaim the election as 100% legitimate. Like that.

And they are too easily offended when they step outside their safe spaces. Look how they react to the phrase "Orange Man." You'd think I'd said something like "walking sack of shit in vaguely human form." Not to mention they regard any disagreement with trump, no matter in what trivial a matter, as a mortal offense.

But I'm arguably a Trump supporter. I mean, I think he's a dips#$% and have held that view since about '93 or so, but I did want him to win.

It's chicken and egg. BOTH sides have been ridiculous at one point or another; I dunno who started it. But what the Right and Left are doing now is identical to what the Left and Right did 4 and 8 years ago. And everyone thinks turnabout is fair play, even though they do not know who's turn it is about.

It's tiresome for those who enjoy intelligent discussion. But for those who like to poke, I guess it's fun.

Quote: Nareed

There's no use arguing with Trump supporters. They are, after all, Trump supporters. They consider any claim by the Orange Man as holy writ, even when presented with contrary evidence. They use double-think to claim massive electoral fraud and yet proclaim the election as 100% legitimate. Like that.

And they are too easily offended when they step outside their safe spaces. Look how they react to the phrase "Orange Man." You'd think I'd said something like "walking sack of shit in vaguely human form." Not to mention they regard any disagreement with trump, no matter in what trivial a matter, as a mortal offense.

The "Orange Man" is so original. I am betting that you were the very first one to notice Donald's trademark fashion color!

You are wrong, of course. I hear many people from all sides of the table, including many who voted for Trump, who have challenged Trump on things that he has done or said. Sure you have your folks who accept no flaws in their hero, just as you do with Obama...but they are the minority, not the majority.

*********

It is great to see that Harry Reid's move to eliminate the fillibuster on some issues will help get the majority of Trump's cabinet appointees get approved. There are some that will be close on the vote and could get disapproved, but most will be rubber-stamped on a party line or better vote. Yep, Harry did that for the country...the Republicans were almost dumb enough to make that move a few years before that, but Reid turned out to be the one to disarm his own party.

Quote: RonC

Yep, Harry did that for the country...the Republicans were almost dumb enough to make that move a few years before that, but Reid turned out to be the one to disarm his own party.

He got the 51% majority approval in 2013
because he was 100% sure Hillary would
be coronated in 2017. He was laying the
way for the most powerful out of control
Dem monarchy we've ever seen. Both
houses of congress and a Queen that had
nothing to stop her. The best laid plans...

That's what's happening on the Left now.
They had planned this for so long, it
was such a done deal, they can't wrap
their tiny minds around Hillary is gone.
Especially the media. They talked themselves
into believing Trump would lose so yugely
that he would drag congress down with him.
They would have fought replacing Scalia
much harder if they thought there was a
chance of this happening.

Quote: Face

But I'm arguably a Trump supporter. I mean, I think he's a dips#$% and have held that view since about '93 or so, but I did want him to win.

That wouldn't be the first time you said something I just couldn't comprehend.

Quote:

It's chicken and egg. BOTH sides have been ridiculous at one point or another; I dunno who started it

It started with the Iran-Contra hearings.

Briefly: Reagan wanted to support the counter-revolutionary forces in Nicaragua (called Contras for "Contrarevolucionarios), Congress, dominated by Democrats, opposed this. At the same time Lebanon-based Shiite terrorists/guerillas backed by Iran held several American hostages. So Reagan in the biggest mistake of his political life, decided to sell arms to Iran in exchange for money and for letting the hostages go. The money was then funneled to the Contras.

Political arguments aside, Congress eventually held televised hearings, where they raked many Reagan administration personnel through the coals. When that circus and fighting were done, it was the turn of prosecutors to get involved. try finding an impartial jury or admissible evidence, and try finding testimony for the hearings when what you know might implicate you in criminal matters.

The end result was the GOP was left humiliated, hurt, and looking for a fight. With the added bonus, so to speak, that they could paint the Democrats as unpatriotic for failing to back initiatives to fight Communism. Now add that Bush the Elder lost his reelection bid after winning a popular war with a minimum of allied casualties, and that Bill Clinton didn't even win a majority of the popular vote (though he got more popular votes than his rivals), and you can see why the GOP's goal was to undo the 1992 election.

That's he brief story.

Now for the bipartisan report.

Reagan committed a major act of outright idiocy by trading weapons sales for hostages. This encouraged the taking of further hostages. And Congress decided to equal him by "investigating" more the diversion of fund to the Contras than a real, actual, major foreign policy failure.

There's a great deal more about consequences in this story. for one thing, The US backed Iraq in the Iran-Iraq war. Ask yourself what Hussein thought about his backer selling arms to the enemy. And other things as well.