I can’t recall any posts of yours, in any threads, where you actually correlate your slurs with facts.
What would qualify as a “fact” for you? Like posting a tweet where Trump openly attacks the idea of rule of law by calling on the DOJ to behave in the most partisan possible manner? Your response to that was that Trump’s tweet was “refreshing.” I’m indulging your little troll game right now, but I won’t for much longer.
FACTS include, but are not limited to ACTIONS, not tweets or campaign rhetoric and exaggerations.
Unlike Comey, Mueller, Rosenstein, and a host of minor co-conspirators in the DOJ, I am not aware of any ACTIONS of the President which violate the rule of law or the appearance of violations of the rule of law. I would also consider the INACTIONS of Jeff Sessions as a FACT ignoring the rule of law.
You haven’t presented one single “fact” indicative of President Trump’s ignoring the rule of law. On the contrary, he’s been obsessive about OBEYING the rule of law. If he was prone to ignore it, he would have ignored the 9th Circus Court’s rulings on such things as the travel ban. He didn’t. He instructed the AG to appeal it, and it went all the way to the SCOTUS which agreed with HIM, 7 to 2. Only THEN did he institute the travel ban he’d proposed earlier. Those are the actions of a man who respects the rule of law…not one who has disdain for it.
I find Trump disagreeable, but others have named altruistic things that Trump has done. I challenge you to come up with any legitimately altruistic deeds from the likes of Bill and Hillary.
I don’t care. I’ll leave the apologizing for the corrupt and immoral to others.
“You can easily judge the character of others by how they treat those who can do nothing for them or to them.”
—from The Sayings of Chairman Malcolm (Forbes)
Besides their obvious financial corruption it is fairly well documented that:
Secret Service agents assigned to Hillary consider it to be “punishment duty”.
Joe Biden delights in taking his morning swim naked in front of the female Secret Service agents.
When Obama was President, his U.S. Marine guards had to be ASSIGNED that duty. After President Trump was elected, there were some 3,500 VOLUNTEERS to be one of his guards. THAT alone should tell you something very important about the two men.
That is a cop out.
I wonder if you understand the term “cop out.”
I’m under no obligation provide evidence of Hillary Clinton’s “altruism,” as I’ve never claimed anything of the sort exists.
I’ve claimed that Hillary Clinton would have done less damage to the country and basic republican values than Trump. Arguments over which of the two immoral lying candidates has done the best job of faking “altruism” is worse than pointless.
And you can’t provide any such evidence because it SIMPLY DOESN’T EXIST, JAnderson. Hillary and Bill are out for themselves and if that means everyone else must suffer, so be it. There’s not an altruistic bone in EITHER of their bodies. They’ve proven that over and over again since graduating from college. You STILL haven’t provided any of us with the FIRST “basic republican value” that President Trump (STILL hurts, doesn’t it?) has “damaged.” That’s actually unsurprising since he’s done nothing of the sort. What ARE “basic republican values” to you? Lower taxes, smaller government, a strong military, fewer burdensome, unnecessary regulations, America-first foreign policies, support for our allies and NOT for our enemies and a growing domestic economy. Can you SERIOUSLY believe that Hillary would have worked to achieve ANY of those “values?” If you do, then you’re nothing short of delusional.
Good grief, what on earth are you on about?
You claimed that Hillary “would have done less damage to basic republican values than [President] Trump.” I’m merely asking you to name ONE “basic republican value” that President Trump has “damaged” in ANY way and what “basic republican value” do you HONESTLY believe Hillary would have espoused. If you think she’d be BETTER for “basic republican values” tell us HOW you think that’s true.
JAnderson can’t answer you question because he has no answers. Sure, he would have preferred Bernie Sanders as president, but Hillary would have do because she was the Democrat candidate. We still don’t know how much damage Hillary did to us with her Uranium One deal because the consequences lie in the future. In the mean time Hillary and Bill have enjoyed their ill gotten gains.
When you have a politician like Hillary who will do anything for a price, it’s impossible to know how much damage she would have done. In the mean JAnderson only makes claims that Trump has done damage to the republic, but he has not specifics other than Democrat boilerplate, like, “Trump colluded with the Russians,” which has not been supported with one piece of evidence. In the mean time there is lots of evidence that Hillary colluded with the Russians in 2016. The “Russian reset button” takes on a new meaning when you consider that.
J. doesn’t like Hillary Clinton folks, not even a little. I didn’t like President Bush the two times I voted for him. Many of you, including PD, didn’t like Donald Trump until after he was elected, but you voted for him. It’s not hard to imagine someone who reaches the opposite conclusion about the lesser of two evils.
Donald Trump, along with a complicit Republican Congress, which could easily stop the lunacy, is in fact damaging the United States. The trade deficit is going to break $1 trillion. No conservative cares. Trump’s trade tax is hurting Americans. Few of you believe that while a few others actually believe hurting Americans a little for some undefined collective gain is worthwhile. Trump is damaging Americans as we speak.
I won’t say it’s more than Clinton would have. In fact, with the appointments of Gorsuch and to a lesser degree of Kavanaugh, I count Trump a little more positive. Had Clinton not pivoted on her already strained relationship with free enterprise after she encountered the Bernie Sanders-Donald Trump version of it, I’d say they were neck and neck in terms of value. As it stands, she did pivot into Trump’s and Sanders’ anti-American trade tax and she would have made poor Supreme Court appointments.
Yeah, Trumps red hot economy that has eradicated Obama’s jobless recovery, caused income growth faster than inflation, reduced taxes and regulations and converted record low worker participation rates into record low unemployment in UNDER 2 YEARS is “hurting Americans” because of Trump playing hardball with some tarrifs.
The Trump derangement crowd gets more psychotic every day.
The tariffs are all intertwined with our foreign policy. Since WWII our protection of Europe and our virtually unilateral guarantee of freedom of the seas were geared to be part of our national security objectives in the Cold War era. We allowed the economies of Europe to flourish and freely export their goods to us and the world. We won the Cold War but the next 6 presidential terms, for all intents and purposes, continued the Cold War strategies with no real benefit to the United States. Even the ChiComs benefit from the freedom of the seas. If push comes to shove, their navy is constrained by Japan, Vietnam, South Korea and the Philippines; EVEN IF WE LEAVE THAT THEATER. President Trump is establishing a transactional foreign policy. P.M. Abe of Japan came to the table with $50 billion in infrastructure investment in the U.S. which could result in 700,000 American jobs. Theresa May offered increased intelligence sharing, co-ordination of her two forthcoming super-carriers (the only ones in the world not American) with our navy and a trade deal. Even Xi Jinping came open to negotiations on a host of issues and these negotiations are ongoing, behind closed doors. The tariffs and counter-tariffs (on both sides) are bargaining chips and for political consumption. There is no way they will go to an all out trade war, America would suffer a little, China would be devastated. Angela Merkel came to the table with nothing and got exactly that. President Trump is looking out for America and even if there is a Blue Wave, which I doubt, the democrats will be powerless to stop him.
Like I said. You don’t believe it. But a whole lot of other people, including free market capitalists, agree with me. And we do evaluate the president based on his policies, including this one. You may not believe it, but some folks do think Trump has done damage to our republic. You may be immune to it and indifferent to the challenges others face in this “red hot economy” directly as a result of the president’s pathetic trade policies; but they can and will and do judge him for it. Don’t know how they’ll vote, but some of them will choose another “lesser of two evils.”
And then there’s his character, which of course we’ll note no longer counts, not since Billary was president apparently.
Also, please cite a source for your claim that income is growing faster than inflation.
Also, when it all comes burning down in a couple of years, who will you blame that on? Do you think the economy is healthy? Are you good with $1 trillion deficits? Are you good with banks making risky loans? I can qualify for a mortgage where I couldn’t even make the first payment. It’s absolutely stunning how stupid some things are right now.
Yeah, some things are going all right. The president’s temporary tax cut is pretty good. Should be permanent, but we can wait 10 years and not take responsibility for the built-in tax increase that will result if the tax cuts aren’t extended. Cutting regulations, good. But my point wasn’t ever to list accomplishments but to point out the fact that, yes, Trump is giving us damaged goods too.
Yes, Trump Derangement Syndrome and psychotic define me. Good one! Trump Messiah Syndrome much?
This is the reason for Trump’s tariffs: "“We lost, over the last number of years, $800 billion a year. Not a half a million dollars, not 12 cents. We lost $800 billion a year on trade. Not going to happen. We got to get it back.”
It has nothing to do with national security. That’s just one of a shotgun of reasons he spewed as he began trying to justify his tariffs. The one I just quoted is the one he’s been saying since at least 1979. I don’t intend to derail this into a tariff thread. My point in this thread is that a lot of people have reasons for considering other lousy people to be the superior evil. The fact that so many conservatives are actually excited about a president doesn’t mean good arguments otherwise do not exist.
And I get “Trump Derangement Syndrome” and “psychotic” labels for saying so. That’s how absurd the Trump Messiah Syndrome has gotten. It’s just comical. Free trade economics, the same capitalist economic values as Milton Friedman, get you “Trump Derangement Syndrome” label. LOL’d a lot just now. What a world we live in.
You speak as though Hillary isn’t as bad as Trump even though others have cited arguably altruistic acts attributed to Trump, and attempted no justification for supporting Hillary until I called you on it, and you tried the “fake altruism” dodge. And you haven’t cited fact one (just assumptions) in defense of your position. This does what for the credibility of your Trump bashing?