Official LRC President Donald J Trump Thread

It must suck to be a person who gets up everyday and have nothing to do but go online and be a d*ck. No friends or job, no hobby but to go online and troll..... how depressing your life must be. The one positive out of your hateful posts is while I read them eating breakfast before I go to work it is comforting to know life is good and I am thankful I am not as miserable as you appear to be. Have a nice day if you can.

What about the facts that the right listed? You don't seem to want to talk about those facts. Yes, your opinion is wrong, thank you sir.

Funny, when Obama was lying, we had to accept it because Shills/Sheeps like you couldn't or just wouldn't see what he was really about...I won't help ya there as you'll never understand. Fight all you want, you'll change nothing, deal with it. I have no clue who you are or how old you are, but you are surely wasting your life away and I do feel some empathy towards you for that. Move on. If Trump does anything that bad, he'd be gone. He's no different than Hillary or Barack, you just don't like him. Oh well.

if by 'agip' you are referring to me, I don't believe I ever said that Trump has no influence. He's the MFing president of the united states. He's not setting the agenda like normal presidents do, but he has influence.

pop_pop!_v2.2.1 wrote:

eric a blair wrote:

The dems are the party of stability and cohesion - think of the peace and international teamwork during the Obama and Clinton admins.

No. Just no way. Obama was a fine president in the tradition of conventional and unconventional Statecraft, proxy wars, and unofficial wars in the name of some common enemy.

Recent indicators suggest Trump has passed most of the previous administration's wars off to the military and has ignored it ever since. While Obama's administration seemed to exert control over who does what, when.

More on the point of stability and cohesion. The Democratic version of "stability and cohesion" is how Democratic voters were betrayed, setting up the Trump win. Obama had 8 years to put "a chicken in every pot." and completely blew it

I'm not following your arguments.

Civilian (meaning presidential) control over the military is how it is done in this country. Obama was completely in the norms of US behavior by acting as commander in chief. I don't understand your argument.

Trump's abandoning that role is strange, dangerous and outside the rules. One more example of how Trump is not normal.

it's true that Obama acted like a neutron bomb - he did not use his popularity and prestige to build a national Democratic party. He failed at that. But you seem to be saying something different - that he somehow impoverished America. That's not a viable argument - the country grew every year, wages are up, living standards are up, we are at full employment. It wasn't economics that elected Trump - it was the culture wars. Immigrants, same sex bathrooms, abortion, racism, etc....

Democracy 4 all Sides wrote:

What about the facts that the right listed? You don't seem to want to talk about those facts. Yes, your opinion is wrong, thank you sir.

Funny, when Obama was lying, we had to accept it because Shills/Sheeps like you couldn't or just wouldn't see what he was really about...I won't help ya there as you'll never understand. Fight all you want, you'll change nothing, deal with it. I have no clue who you are or how old you are, but you are surely wasting your life away and I do feel some empathy towards you for that. Move on. If Trump does anything that bad, he'd be gone. He's no different than Hillary or Barack, you just don't like him. Oh well.

name a fact and we'll debate it.

You certainly were implying it in your post with your one-word Lindsey Graham quote. Fat Hurts then said, "Trump has no power or influence at all." Then Trollminator claims "the party that condemned him is now in unison going along with whatever garbage he wants to sell the people." Again, totally conflicting statements. But all yelling and screaming.

Democracy 4 all Sides wrote:

What about the facts that the right listed?

Were these "alternative" facts?

The business of politics is shaping public opinion.

EPIC Flagpole wrote:

eric a blair wrote:

if by 'agip' you are referring to me, I don't believe I ever said that Trump has no influence. He's the MFing president of the united states. He's not setting the agenda like normal presidents do, but he has influence.

You certainly were implying it in your post with your one-word Lindsey Graham quote. Fat Hurts then said, "Trump has no power or influence at all." Then Trollminator claims "the party that condemned him is now in unison going along with whatever garbage he wants to sell the people." Again, totally conflicting statements. But all yelling and screaming.

For the record, I said he had no influence on Republicans in the senate.

Yes, he's still the president and still wields considerable power.

Proud Liberal wrote:

It must suck to be a person who gets up everyday and have nothing to do but go online and be a d*ck. No friends or job, no hobby but to go online and troll..... how depressing your life must be. The one positive out of your hateful posts is while I read them eating breakfast before I go to work it is comforting to know life is good and I am thankful I am not as miserable as you appear to be. Have a nice day if you can.

Nobody posts here as often as your hero, agip. Glad to trigger you.

Rigged for Hillary wrote:

Proud Liberal wrote:

It must suck to be a person who gets up everyday and have nothing to do but go online and be a d*ck. No friends or job, no hobby but to go online and troll..... how depressing your life must be. The one positive out of your hateful posts is while I read them eating breakfast before I go to work it is comforting to know life is good and I am thankful I am not as miserable as you appear to be. Have a nice day if you can.

Nobody posts here as often as your hero, agip. Glad to trigger you.

LetsRun.com and the Donald will make America great again.

MAGA

I can see kids falling for Trump's load of bull. He demeans the office on a daily basis. He name calling, his labeling all news accounts critical of him as fake, his constant lying and then contradicting himself is behavior unheard of from presidents.

Is there any one over the age of 55 here, who respects Trump? I pick that age because they have experienced different presidents.

I can't see any mature experienced person thinking his behavior is ok.

old and wise wrote:

I can see kids falling for Trump's load of bull. He demeans the office on a daily basis. He name calling, his labeling all news accounts critical of him as fake, his constant lying and then contradicting himself is behavior unheard of from presidents.

Is there any one over the age of 55 here, who respects Trump? I pick that age because they have experienced different presidents.

I can't see any mature experienced person thinking his behavior is ok.

Review what I said previously. This sort of response to Trump has only backfired. The liberals overreact and wall-to-wall coverage becomes about this single tweet. Notice how the Trump admin. is doing other things today, like immigration laws and speech's speech on energy reform agenda. The mainstream media will ignore these, and MOST ppl will say "stupid tweet by trump, but what about x/y/z???"

Like I've said a million times, and I'll say a million more (just to watch you still not "get it"), liberals OVERREACT. Your party is crumbling. You still don't "get it." Trump makes you think you're winning with his supposed Twitter stupidity, then slips crucial pieces of his agenda by you.

Very hard to tell what is "a statement of fact" and what is your opinion.You opine statements of facts.Take this one for example:"honestly don't understand how a GOP senator could vote for this bill knowing that next year it would leave 15 million people without health insurance"Is this a statement of fact? It sure sounds like it. Not only do you portray this as a fact, but you double down and claim only a moron would understand it.All your statements are like this.

eric a blair wrote:

1. All of my statements of fact are true. My opinions may be wrong. You will not find any statements of fact from me that are wrong. If you do, I will give money to charity and retract them immediately.

'opine statements of facts'????? WTF man. Are you the guy who didn't understand that a newspaper editorial wasn't meant to be a balanced news story? 'opine statements of facts.' Huh. Anyone know what that means?So disagree with my opinions, but no one should say I tell lies or falsehoods. as for this particular quote, it was a plea for enlightenment. I honestly think I *should* understand why they would vote for it. And to be honest, from reading, I've come closer to understanding. -repubs don't want to fail at a promise to repeal obamacare-repubs don't want to be challenged from the right in primaries-some repubs are genuinely worried about the cost of medicaid and want to cut it-some repubs feel that more market based systems would lower costsThat said...a yes vote on this thing, throwing 22 million off insurance...I dont' see how that can be a moral vote.

itsbaddude wrote:

Very hard to tell what is "a statement of fact" and what is your opinion.

You opine statements of facts.

Take this one for example:

"honestly don't understand how a GOP senator could vote for this bill knowing that next year it would leave 15 million people without health insurance"

Is this a statement of fact? It sure sounds like it. Not only do you portray this as a fact, but you double down and claim only a moron would understand it.

All your statements are like this.

eric a blair wrote:

1. All of my statements of fact are true. My opinions may be wrong. You will not find any statements of fact from me that are wrong. If you do, I will give money to charity and retract them immediately.

col·lu·sion

kəˈlo͞oZHən/

noun

secret or illegal cooperation or conspiracy, especially in order to cheat or deceive others.

https://www.wsj.com/articles/gop-operative-sought-clinton-emails-from-hackers-implied-a-connection-to-flynn-1498770851

so this new story. In the WSJ. Sounds like this.

Smith worked for Michael Flynn on the trump campaign. Smith told hackers that he wanted to get the illegally hacked hillary emails and would give them to Flynn. Who would then presumably give them to the Trump campaign.

So that might be two crimes:

1) encouraging hacking is a crime. Presumably the hackers were russian but I don't know.

2) Trump repeatedly trying to get the FBI to stop its investigation of Flynn would clearly be obstruction if Trump knew Flynn was the key to the connection between hackers and the trump campaign.

It fills in a major hole: why did Trump work so hard trying to get the investigation of Flynn to stop.

And it shows why Trump is losing is sh)t lately as the investigations close in.

correction: not clear what the relationship was between Smith and Flynn. Smith wasn't working for him, but Smith kept dropping Flynn's name.

I still maintain that Trump was elected when it was already known that he was indebted to the Russians, so it seems over-the-top to focus on it so much.

Also, Flynn's "secret" (that everybody tried to warn Trump about) was that he was a Turkish agent, not a Russian agent.

I'll concede that it's unfortunate that the Russians were able to hack the election, and it's unfortunate that we have a president indebted to the Russians, but the President is not traditionally (nor constitutionally) held accountable to laws. The system is configured so he is above the law (unless he is impeached), so I think all the effort of pinning down what crimes, or "crimes" he might have committed, is mostly a waste of time.

I'll add the third part of the new story in the WSJ:

3) the IC has emails from russian hackers saying essentially 'ok if we have material how do we get it to the trump campaign?'

and a response was 'we have an intermediary'

so who was the intermediary? Now it sounds like it was this Smith character.

pieces are fitting together....