American Politics

[geysir]

Trump does his best to imitate a 5 year old boy's understanding of the intrepid windmill warrior Don Quixote and why 'windmills' (apparantly still spinning today in Trump's make believe world) should be prosecuted for killing protected species such as bald eagles.

[SkStu]

(a) He is on record as calling it a hoax, and
(b) in that article, he is on record as saying he thinks it will change back again and that any impact will take millions of years

That's what I put in my post, and it's correct.

OK, so he's gone from "It is a hoax" - which he has said - to now thinking it's not a hoax but he's defined as something that's so far removed from what it actually is that it's clear that he still has no intentions of actually dealing with the issue.

Just to reiterate - capitalism is dependent on infinite growth to keep standing. That in itself is a logical impossibility of course, but climate change (and plastics and resources such as oil and metals) are very real and immediate barriers to infinite growth. So the easiest way to deal with these is to ignore them - but you can't do that in this day and age, so you have to either deny or diminish them and hope they don't crystallise on your watch. That's what he's doing.

In fairness, in that regard, he's merely doing what the rest of the world is doing - but he does lose further credibility by coming across as an ignorant buffoon whenever he talks about it.

You’re all over the place. A bit like the orange man.

[SkStu]

Problem is you're not relevant here. If the line is going in the right direction but too slowly - as it is in many places, Ireland included - then that's no good overall.


It also quotes him saying climate change is a "hoax"; he thinks it will "change back again". He thinks it's something which could impact over "millions of years" (same article - from an interview with CBS)

We don't know what he really thinks of course - but there can be no doubt that he has no intention of doing anything practical about it if it means cutting jobs. Because that's more important than an entire planet of course. ("I don't want to give trillions and trillions of dollars. I don't want to lose millions and millions of jobs." - same article again). Standard capitalist fare - keep increasing production, and with it pollution/carbon emissions, because nothing bad's going to happen in four years, and then it's someone else's problem.

Not good enough when the bigger picture is looked at.

I think we have covered this off. Trump, as a president, could be better for the environment and climate change from a leadership perspective and from a policy perspective. I agree. But i would temper that by saying that his administration is still doing their bit to curb emissions and increasing funding for the work of the EPA - not as much as Obama's. But he was not elected on that message so it is likely not a high priority for him - the reasons for which, you set out above and in the quoted part.

Funny? **** me, you've some weird sense of humour. What do you find funny about him? Seriously?

just a few examples here. I mean he's no Dave Chappelle but you get the jist. He can have a laugh at his and others expense.

https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/1163603361423351808

https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/1184595335794036737

https://twitter.com/KellyO/status/1192903151927603201

This split-screen reaction to Trump’s jokes—fans seeing a twinkle in his eye, opponents seeing creeping authoritarianism—happens offline, too. At a veterans’ event in Louisville, Ky., last August, Trump joked about wanting to give himself the Medal of Honor: “I wanted one, but they told me I don’t qualify,” he said of his aides. “I said, ‘Can I give it to myself anyway?’ They said, ‘I don’t think that's a good idea.” His foes freaked out, and some news outlets covered the crack as if it were a serious statement. But as the Louisville Courier-Journal reported from the scene, “Trump was smiling as he said it, and the crowd laughed.”

"So many people have been leaving the White House," Trump joked. "It's actually been really exciting and invigorating 'cause you want new thoughts. So I like turnover. I like chaos. It is really good. Now, the question everybody keeps asking: Who's going to be the next to leave, Steve Miller or Melania?"
...
"This might be the best night I've had since watching your faces on election night," Trump said.

The thing here though is that Trump is all those things rolled into one - as well as being borderline mentally unstable (hiring/firing at will, and his twitter comments actually), and unable to actually do what he's told (e.g. making fairly top-level phone calls on a bog-standard mobile). All of that rolls up into something really worrying.

I'm not worried. Neither are the American voters, it seems. As indicated by his increasing approval ratings (which are higher than Obama's at the same point in their presidencies) and the decrease in approval for impeachment.

Way to miss the point there Stu. I made the likeness to draw a topical parallel between their supporters - in both cases, the person being supported could do no harm at all, even though dodgy rumblings were there right from the get-go, and even though people were pointing out the issues. They were entirely right in Delaney's case, and I think Trump supporters could do worse than look at the blind support Delaney got and reevaluate their views accordingly.

OK. So?

So it's not taking the matter off topic at all. Whereas "The US is the cleanest it's ever been" (even though it's not) followed by "But what about China?" is an attempt at deflection onto a different topic.

OK. Well, all i can say is i really wasnt (and havent ever) tried to take this thread off topic. I have always tried to engage with what is being put in front of me to prevent this thread from becoming a complete circle jerk. I thought i was pointing out something relevant to the discussion we were having but ill play by your rules. Why don't you start a thread on it? As an issue that is so important to you? Maybe that way we could have a fuller discussion on all of the contributors to climate change without breaking any of these rules?

[pineapple stu]

You’re all over the place. A bit like the orange man.

Sorry Stu - going to call out this ****** first off. There's a charter in place here which calls for at least an attempt at intelligent conversation. The above...isn't.

I think we have covered this off. Trump, as a president, could be better for the environment and climate change from a leadership perspective and from a policy perspective. I agree. But i would temper that by saying that his administration is still doing their bit to curb emissions and increasing funding for the work of the EPA - not as much as Obama's. But he was not elected on that message so it is likely not a high priority for him - the reasons for which, you set out above and in the quoted part.

But again here, you don't really seem to take into account that throwing the EPA a few quid isn't going to do anything. Token attempts like that are really no more than an attempt at PR. And saying that it wasn't in his mandate - that's not really an excuse for such an important issue.

It's obviously a tricky issue, but America is supposedly the leader of the free world and needs at least to be trying to be seen to going dramatically greener - reducing oil dependency, reducing the number of gas guzzlers, improving public transport, tackling industry issues such as water pollution and over-use, etc, etc. As I say, not easy, but to talk away from it isn't defendable.

just a few examples here. I mean he's no Dave Chappelle but you get the jist. He can have a laugh at his and others expense.

Yeah, you and I have a very different view of what humour is. Interesting too that all the examples you can quote are putting Trump at the centre of things as per usual - typical behaviour for someone as blindly egocentric as he is.

I'm not worried. Neither are the American voters, it seems.

Again, though, you say this as if it's relevant. National security concerns exist whether or not you're worried about them.

OK. So?

I mean, the point is literally in what you quoted. I'm comparing Delaney and Trump, and noting the similarities in the arguments used by those who defend him. And hindsight has shown a new light to Delaney - one which we all knew was there. Trump will be the same.

Anyways, you've nothing to really add and I've better things to be arguing about at Christmas time, so let's just end with a quote from the video geysir linked above. I think it's quite indicative of the clueless calibre of person in charge at the moment. If you want me, I'll be off reading Commander in Cheat.

I never understood wind. You know, I know windmills very much. I have studied it better than anybody. But they are manufactured, tremendous — if you are into this — tremendous fumes and gases are spewing into the atmosphere. You want to see a bird graveyard? You just go. Take a look. A bird graveyard. Go under a windmill someday. You'll see more birds than you've ever seen ever in your life.

(And for balance, here's a short article highlighting the bull**** in that one passage alone)

[SkStu]

I don't know why you are so angry over my posts. If you take a deep breath or two, you will notice that I actually agree with you about whether he could or should be doing more on this issue. That is quite clearly the thrust of the point i was making but that seems to have escaped your attention in your rush to get offended and angry.

The post that seemed to have tipped you over the edge was intended as a light-hearted way to diffuse the tension/conversation - hence the winking & smileys and so on. But my sense of humour is clearly different to yours as you have pointed out many times. Sorry if i caused any offense.

But since you feel like i dodged my duty to engage in intelligent conversation, I could address it more directly if you like. For example, how you misquoted the original article you linked to to support that Trump believes climate change is a hoax despite him being directly quoted in the article that you linked to saying the exact opposite. I pointed this out and, instead of acknowledging that you had erred and providing a different supporting source, you doubled down on your assertion and contradicted yourself at least once while doing so and then ended with the revelation that he is no different to the rest of the world. If you want to call me out for whatever those ******'s above represent, allow me to do the same.

There is nothing - absolutely nothing - inappropriate with my posts here and how i have engaged in debate/discussion with you and others. If you have a problem with my posts or approach, use the report button. Otherwise, quit whining about it.

Feliz Navidad.

[mark12345]

The mainstream media? That graph is from whitehouse.gov. It was released by the Trump administration!

Peadar, to get an idea of what the American mainstream media are capable of and responsible for, try to get your hands on a copy of The Trayvon Hoax.
This just published book is also coming out (or perhaps is already out) in movie form.

https://www.thetrayvonhoax.com

I wish you and yours a very Happy Christmas.

[osarusan]

Regarding the impeachment, this point was always coming - the point when he was impeached by Congress and the process was due to progress to the Senate. I wonder what the Democrat plan is from this point forward. I've never been able to guess what they actually want now.

Do they want a trial in the Senate? I don't see a Senate trial ever forcing Trump out of office, because, lets not kids ourselves, there won't be any impartial jurors, even if they aren't as open about it as McConnell has been. So I don't see how the Democrats can 'win' that.

Do they simply not progress further? What are the implications of that? The Republicans will be rightly criticising them for only doing the easy half of the job.

Do they use the disagreement over trial regulations as a way to delay, and wait until closer to elections and mire Trump down in that?

[tetsujin1979]

Peadar, to get an idea of what the American mainstream media are capable of and responsible for, try to get your hands on a copy of The Trayvon Hoax.
This just published book is also coming out (or perhaps is already out) in movie form.

www.thetrayvonhoax.com

I wish you and yours a very Happy Christmas.

The author of the book has released a documentary claiming that Elvis is still alive, another that Paul McCartney is dead, and yet another that Barack Obama's biological father is a communist.

[mark12345]

The author of the book has released a documentary claiming that Elvis is still alive, another that Paul McCartney is dead, and yet another that Barack Obama's biological father is a communist.

News to me. Was he trying to make some larger theoretical point with those assertions? Don't know what it could have been but..........
In any event the book is all very factual and is a major indictment on the American media who had all the facts at their disposal 7 years ago but chose not to disclose them to the public as it would have interfered with their ongoing narrative. This case prompted the beginning of BLM. And I have not seen any rebuttal of the facts he presents in the book (other than perhaps from the family, but they did reportedly get $2m dollars from sales of memorabilia). Ultimately Trayvon Martin and George Zimmerman are victims of a media which wants to perpuate division among Americans. A lot of heretofore unknown facts came out about Zimmerman (which show him as a supporter of Obama, mentor of black youth and all around good person - wonder why the media never told us that at the time?). Just a couple of weeks ago Zimmerman, whose life has been destroyed, filed a major lawsuit against all concerned.

[mark12345]

Regarding the impeachment, this point was always coming - the point when he was impeached by Congress and the process was due to progress to the Senate. I wonder what the Democrat plan is from this point forward. I've never been able to guess what they actually want now.

Do they want a trial in the Senate? I don't see a Senate trial ever forcing Trump out of office, because, lets not kids ourselves, there won't be any impartial jurors, even if they aren't as open about it as McConnell has been. So I don't see how the Democrats can 'win' that.

Do they simply not progress further? What are the implications of that? The Republicans will be rightly criticising them for only doing the easy half of the job.

Do they use the disagreement over trial regulations as a way to delay, and wait until closer to elections and mire Trump down in that?

You are on the right track here osarusan. They certainly are employing delaying tactics. Word is that they are hoping to turn some Republicans and get enough votes for a full impeachment (but it does not seem to be working at this point in time). You do realize I hope that Donald Trump has been denied due process in all of this (ie the right to call his own witnesses and the right to cross-examine the ones already presented). And where is the whistleblower? American law states that any person facing a charge in a court has the right to face their accuser. This has also been denied him. The whistleblower has all of a sudden disappeared. With that said, the real reason for their delaying tactics is the health of Ruth Bader Ginsburg (Supreme Court Judge). She is in her 90's and has been in and out of the hospital. If Trump has an impeachment charge hanging over him he cannot appoint a new Supreme Court Judge which, if he did, would turn the court conservative for decades to come (I would bet that neither RTE or the BBC gave you that perspective?). Indeed someone joked the other day that Bader Ginsburg may already be dead and Jeffrey Epstein may still be alive.

[Poor Student]

You are on the right track here osarusan. They certainly are employing delaying tactics. Word is that they are hoping to turn some Republicans and get enough votes for a full impeachment (but it does not seem to be working at this point in time). You do realize I hope that Donald Trump has been denied due process in all of this (ie the right to call his own witnesses and the right to cross-examine the ones already presented). And where is the whistleblower? American law states that any person facing a charge in a court has the right to face their accuser. This has also been denied him. The whistleblower has all of a sudden disappeared. With that said, the real reason for their delaying tactics is the health of Ruth Bader Ginsburg (Supreme Court Judge). She is in her 90's and has been in and out of the hospital. If Trump has an impeachment charge hanging over him he cannot appoint a new Supreme Court Judge which, if he did, would turn the court conservative for decades to come (I would bet that neither RTE or the BBC gave you that perspective?). Indeed someone joked the other day that Bader Ginsburg may already be dead and Jeffrey Epstein may still be alive.

Ginsburg is 86, not in her 90s.

[peadar1987]

Trump threatening on Twitter to destroy Iranian cultural sites. Classy guy.

[mark12345]

Trump threatening on Twitter to destroy Iranian cultural sites. Classy guy.

A classy guy - that's one way of describing him. Particularly since he showed great restraint today in not responding to the missile attack of last night.
Remember this is the guy (Trump) who is "crazy" and is "going to get us into World War III". North Korea and now Iran - he's not doing too well on that score at the moment, is he?
But feel free to commend him at any time.

[dahamsta]

Source: https://www.reddit.com/r/politics/co...ither/fdaj6jx/

Crimes & Offences

• Abuse of power
• Violation of oath to preserve, protect, and defend the Constitution of the US
• Using taxpayer funds for personal benefit
• Directing government agencies and employees for personal benefit
• Targeting innocent American citizens for harassment and prosecution by a foreign nation
• Soliciting foreign political campaign assistance
• Extortion
• Bribery
• Obstruction of justice
• Witness tampering
• Witness intimidation
• Hiding evidence

Broken Promises

• Border wall
• ⁠Defeat ISIS
• ⁠Replace Obamacare
• ⁠Beat China in a trade war
• ⁠Bring manufacturing back to America
• ⁠Tax cuts for the middle class
• ⁠Drain the Swamp
• “Lock her up!!”
• America first

Trump is a crook and a failure. He is only a hero to other crooks and failures.

[mark12345]

Source: https://www.reddit.com/r/politics/co...ither/fdaj6jx/

Trump is a crook and a failure. He is only a hero to other crooks and failures.

The crimes and offences are all subjective and laughable, to be honest. Other than that he's defeated ISIS, has seen work started on the border wall, has brought manufacturing back to America in spades (along with 6 million new jobs), is draining the swamp (something neither you nor I even knew existed under Obama, Bush etc - I wonder why?) and has placed America first and foremost in everything he does, unlike other presidents for decades beforehand. He's winning the trade war with China and has just signed a great new MCA agreement while others are in the works with Japan and South Korea. He could and possibly should do more to prevent the tons of drugs crossing the border from Mexico, something I see doesn't appear to concern you? The Dow Jones has broken record after record (remember it was going to go into freefall and never recover on the day he was inaugurated). Ultimately the American public has learned an awful lot about their country under Donald Trump, things which were kept hidden all of their lives by so-called statesmen politicians. He has broken the mould for politicians going forward - I would think that none of them (Democrat or Republican) will be allowed to get away with concealing such things ever again. BUT HE'S A FAILURE?? I will be as charitable as I can to you and say that you are likely much more well versed in Irish politics than you are in those of the American variety, by virtue of the fact that you live in Ireland (correct me if I'm wrong).