Announcement

Collapse

Civics 101 Guidelines

Want to argue about politics? Healthcare reform? Taxes? Governments? You've come to the right place!

Try to keep it civil though. The rules still apply here.
See more
See less

Superbowl interview -Trump's cheek warming exercise with Putin

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #46
    Originally posted by shunyadragon View Post
    Huh!?!?! Trump revealed the nature and origin of confidential sources concerning the information about where the information concerning the use of lap tops as explosive devices.
    um. the news reported that back in March, shuny. That is not classified.



    Laptop ban begins Tuesday in cabins of nine airlines flying non-stop to U.S. from Mideast and Africa
    WASHINGTON — The U.S. government began notifying nine foreign airlines in the Middle East and Africa at 3 a.m. ET Tuesday that personal electronics larger than cellphones will be banned indefinitely in the cabins of about 50 direct flights daily to the U.S.

    The secretary of the Department of Homeland Security, John Kelly, and the acting head of the Transportation Security Administration, Huban Gowadia, decided that greater security was needed based on intelligence about airlines that fly non-stop from 10 airports to the U.S., according to four senior administration officials who spoke to reporters on background to discuss security measures.

    “Evaluated intelligence indicates that terrorists continue to target commercial aviation and are aggressively pursuing innovative methods to undertake their attacks, to include smuggling explosive devices in various consumer items,” said a senior administration official.
    https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/...rica/99433864/

    Comment


    • #47
      Originally posted by Sparko View Post
      um. the news reported that back in March, shuny. That is not classified.



      Laptop ban begins Tuesday in cabins of nine airlines flying non-stop to U.S. from Mideast and Africa
      WASHINGTON — The U.S. government began notifying nine foreign airlines in the Middle East and Africa at 3 a.m. ET Tuesday that personal electronics larger than cellphones will be banned indefinitely in the cabins of about 50 direct flights daily to the U.S.

      The secretary of the Department of Homeland Security, John Kelly, and the acting head of the Transportation Security Administration, Huban Gowadia, decided that greater security was needed based on intelligence about airlines that fly non-stop from 10 airports to the U.S., according to four senior administration officials who spoke to reporters on background to discuss security measures.

      “Evaluated intelligence indicates that terrorists continue to target commercial aviation and are aggressively pursuing innovative methods to undertake their attacks, to include smuggling explosive devices in various consumer items,” said a senior administration official.
      https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/...rica/99433864/
      That is not the problem with the information that Trump gave to the Russians. He gave them classified details as to the source and nature of the intelligence.
      Glendower: I can call spirits from the vasty deep.
      Hotspur: Why, so can I, or so can any man;
      But will they come when you do call for them? Shakespeare’s Henry IV, Part 1, Act III:

      go with the flow the river knows . . .

      Frank

      I do not know, therefore everything is in pencil.

      Comment


      • #48
        Originally posted by shunyadragon View Post
        That is not the problem with the information that Trump gave to the Russians. He gave them classified details as to the source and nature of the intelligence.
        I'll believe you actually care about classified material when you express disgust with Hillary and her private server that exposed classified material.
        Until such time it is impossible to take your objections seriously as they are obviously partisan blather.
        Actually YOU put Trump in the White House. He wouldn't have gotten 1% of the vote if it wasn't for the widespread spiritual and cultural devastation caused by progressive policies. There's no "this country" left with your immigration policies, your "allies" are worthless and even more suicidal than you are and democracy is a sick joke that I hope nobody ever thinks about repeating when the current order collapses. - Darth_Executor striking a conciliatory note in Civics 101

        Comment


        • #49
          Originally posted by shunyadragon View Post
          The question: Who is telling the truth concerning the private meeting between James Comey and Donald Trump?
          Given his record, there's no reason to believe anything Trump says. Everything is coloured by his greed and self-interest.
          Last edited by Tassman; 05-20-2017, 02:23 AM.
          “He felt that his whole life was a kind of dream and he sometimes wondered whose it was and whether they were enjoying it.” - Douglas Adams.

          Comment


          • #50
            Originally posted by Meh Gerbil View Post
            I'll believe you actually care about classified material when you express disgust with Hillary and her private server that exposed classified material.
            Until such time it is impossible to take your objections seriously as they are obviously partisan blather.
            Here we go again. I can’t defend Trump so I’ll attack Hillary..
            “He felt that his whole life was a kind of dream and he sometimes wondered whose it was and whether they were enjoying it.” - Douglas Adams.

            Comment


            • #51
              Originally posted by Tassman View Post
              Here we go again. I can’t defend Trump so I’ll attack Hillary..
              I don't actually care to defend either one.
              The problem is that you care about classified information A but not classified information B.
              It makes me think you're using classified information as a tool of personal destruction rather than being concerned for the country.

              Nothing wrong with you preferring Hillary over Trump - but lets not pretend the handling of classified material is a real issue with you.
              It isn't. You value political ideologues over the protection of classified data.
              That's fine, I'm just not buying the act.
              Actually YOU put Trump in the White House. He wouldn't have gotten 1% of the vote if it wasn't for the widespread spiritual and cultural devastation caused by progressive policies. There's no "this country" left with your immigration policies, your "allies" are worthless and even more suicidal than you are and democracy is a sick joke that I hope nobody ever thinks about repeating when the current order collapses. - Darth_Executor striking a conciliatory note in Civics 101

              Comment


              • #52
                Originally posted by Meh Gerbil View Post
                I'll believe you actually care about classified material when you express disgust with Hillary and her private server that exposed classified material.
                Until such time it is impossible to take your objections seriously as they are obviously partisan blather.
                This a thread about the problems with Donald Trump, if you wish to start a thread about Hilary please do so, but please stay on topic.

                There is a distinct problem with the history of Trumps double standard concrening Obama and Trumps presidency.

                (1) He repeatedly criticized Obama for playing too much golf, but Trump plays at least three times a much time playing golf then Obama.

                (2) Criticizied Mrs. Obama for not wearing a head covering scarf when visiting Saudi Arabia, because it endangered relations and America's image. Low and behold when he visits Saudi Arabia his wife did not wear a head covering scarf.
                Glendower: I can call spirits from the vasty deep.
                Hotspur: Why, so can I, or so can any man;
                But will they come when you do call for them? Shakespeare’s Henry IV, Part 1, Act III:

                go with the flow the river knows . . .

                Frank

                I do not know, therefore everything is in pencil.

                Comment


                • #53
                  Originally posted by shunyadragon View Post
                  This a thread about the problems with Donald Trump, if you wish to start a thread about Hilary please do so, but please stay on topic.

                  There is a distinct problem with the history of Trumps double standard concrening Obama and Trumps presidency.

                  (1) He repeatedly criticized Obama for playing too much golf, but Trump plays at least three times a much time playing golf then Obama.

                  (2) Criticizied Mrs. Obama for not wearing a head covering scarf when visiting Saudi Arabia, because it endangered relations and America's image. Low and behold when he visits Saudi Arabia his wife did not wear a head covering scarf.
                  Golf and scarves?
                  You muckraker, you.

                  *checks list of top 10,000 issues that worry Americans*

                  Nope... don't see either one the list... and the two scopes of Ice Cream managed to land on the list at 9348.
                  Actually YOU put Trump in the White House. He wouldn't have gotten 1% of the vote if it wasn't for the widespread spiritual and cultural devastation caused by progressive policies. There's no "this country" left with your immigration policies, your "allies" are worthless and even more suicidal than you are and democracy is a sick joke that I hope nobody ever thinks about repeating when the current order collapses. - Darth_Executor striking a conciliatory note in Civics 101

                  Comment


                  • #54
                    Originally posted by Meh Gerbil View Post
                    I don't actually care to defend either one.
                    The problem is that you care about classified information A but not classified information B.
                    It makes me think you're using classified information as a tool of personal destruction rather than being concerned for the country.

                    Nothing wrong with you preferring Hillary over Trump - but lets not pretend the handling of classified material is a real issue with you.
                    It isn't. You value political ideologues over the protection of classified data.
                    That's fine, I'm just not buying the act.
                    This a thread about the multiple problems of Donald Trump. It's just plain boring that every-time he is critiqued his proponents pivot directly to Hillary or Obama. Clearly Trump is indefensible.
                    “He felt that his whole life was a kind of dream and he sometimes wondered whose it was and whether they were enjoying it.” - Douglas Adams.

                    Comment


                    • #55
                      Originally posted by Tassman View Post
                      This a thread about the multiple problems of Donald Trump. It's just plain boring that every-time he is critiqued his proponents pivot directly to Hillary or Obama. Clearly Trump is indefensible.
                      Here is what your attacks on Trump look like to me:

                      1: Trump mishandled classified material.
                      2: Mishandling classified material means a person is unfit to be President.
                      3: Therefore, Trump is unfit to be President.

                      Now to destroy your argument all I have to do is show that either #1 or #2 is factually incorrect.
                      I can show that #2 is factually incorrect because you don't hold that Hillary mishandling classified data disqualifies her from the position.
                      In short, if you don't believe your own premises there is no reason for me to consider your argument to be valid.

                      A very simple fix for the problem is to embrace the rule of law.
                      If you'd like an example of this working consider that the Bill O'Reilly thread lasted less than a week.
                      The reason you cannot throw Bill O'Reilly in my face is because I maintain that if he did the crime he needs to do the time.
                      My response to his sexual crimes is exactly the same as it was with Bill Clinton - opponents and allies alike.

                      Consistency.
                      End. Of. Story

                      The very simple fix (assuming you are for the rule of law) is to put this in your signature:

                      "Hillary mishandled classified data, she lied to the FBI, and the rule of law should be enforced such that if she is found guilty in a court of law she should be punished as would any common man or woman."

                      Anytime people throw Hillary in your face you point to your signature line and say, "I agree, she's filth, but we're talking about Donald Trump in this thread." You'll find that you're in a much stronger position when you're consistent. You'll get much better debate, because frankly, people who change the application of the law based on partisanship are very boring and entirely unworthy of respect in a debate.
                      Actually YOU put Trump in the White House. He wouldn't have gotten 1% of the vote if it wasn't for the widespread spiritual and cultural devastation caused by progressive policies. There's no "this country" left with your immigration policies, your "allies" are worthless and even more suicidal than you are and democracy is a sick joke that I hope nobody ever thinks about repeating when the current order collapses. - Darth_Executor striking a conciliatory note in Civics 101

                      Comment


                      • #56
                        Originally posted by Meh Gerbil View Post
                        Here is what your attacks on Trump look like to me:

                        1: Trump mishandled classified material.
                        2: Mishandling classified material means a person is unfit to be President.
                        3: Therefore, Trump is unfit to be President.

                        Now to destroy your argument all I have to do is show that either #1 or #2 is factually incorrect.
                        I can show that #2 is factually incorrect because you don't hold that Hillary mishandling classified data disqualifies her from the position.
                        In short, if you don't believe your own premises there is no reason for me to consider your argument to be valid.
                        That is of course given that the two situations compare. One could easily make the case that they do not. Let's just go for the following example: A friend asks me to take care of his watch and I agree to do so. Then let's go for the following two scenarious:

                        1) I promised to keep it safe but instead I leave the watch visible in my appartment and someone breaks in and steals it. Generally I had bad security in my house, so it was an easy steal.

                        2) I give the watch to someone else.

                        In both cases I have not done what I promised to do. However if I was the owner of that watch I would feel better about the first scenario than the last.
                        "Yes. President Trump is a huge embarrassment. And it’s an embarrassment to evangelical Christianity that there appear to be so many who will celebrate precisely the aspects that I see Biblically as most lamentable and embarrassing." Southern Baptist leader Albert Mohler Jr.

                        Comment


                        • #57
                          Originally posted by Charles View Post
                          That is of course given that the two situations compare. One could easily make the case that they do not. Let's just go for the following example: A friend asks me to take care of his watch and I agree to do so. Then let's go for the following two scenarious:

                          1) I promised to keep it safe but instead I leave the watch visible in my appartment and someone breaks in and steals it. Generally I had bad security in my house, so it was an easy steal.

                          2) I give the watch to someone else.

                          In both cases I have not done what I promised to do. However if I was the owner of that watch I would feel better about the first scenario than the last.
                          Is either person fit to act as caretaker for a watch?
                          (I couldn't bring myself to type: Is either person fit to watch a watch?)

                          Don't get me wrong, I've absolutely no problem with a person supporting Hillary Clinton for President. I also have absolutely no problem with a person arguing that Trump is unfit to be President (I'd agree); however, if you're trying to sell me on your viewpoint using criteria you clearly do not apply to your own candidate I'm just going to point at you, laugh, and fling boogers in your general direction.

                          BTW, I think you sugar coated the Hillary scenario in your example. In item #1 I'd add: Left watch on an open window sill and then maintained you've never given her the watch, that windows don't exist, and that she was unclear on the meaning of the word 'stealing'. Any further inquiries into the matter means that you are persecuting her, you hate women, and that the Russian took it. A week later you'd be 'robbed', which in Washington speak means 'assassinated'. (Ignore that last paragraph, I wrote it for my amusement)
                          Actually YOU put Trump in the White House. He wouldn't have gotten 1% of the vote if it wasn't for the widespread spiritual and cultural devastation caused by progressive policies. There's no "this country" left with your immigration policies, your "allies" are worthless and even more suicidal than you are and democracy is a sick joke that I hope nobody ever thinks about repeating when the current order collapses. - Darth_Executor striking a conciliatory note in Civics 101

                          Comment


                          • #58
                            Originally posted by Meh Gerbil View Post
                            Is either person fit to act as caretaker for a watch?
                            (I couldn't bring myself to type: Is either person fit to watch a watch?)

                            Don't get me wrong, I've absolutely no problem with a person supporting Hillary Clinton for President. I also have absolutely no problem with a person arguing that Trump is unfit to be President (I'd agree); however, if you're trying to sell me on your viewpoint using criteria you clearly do not apply to your own candidate I'm just going to point at you, laugh, and fling boogers in your general direction.

                            BTW, I think you sugar coated the Hillary scenario in your example. In item #1 I'd add: Left watch on an open window sill and then maintained you've never given her the watch, that windows don't exist, and that she was unclear on the meaning of the word 'stealing'. Any further inquiries into the matter means that you are persecuting her, you hate women, and that the Russian took it. A week later you'd be 'robbed', which in Washington speak means 'assassinated'. (Ignore that last paragraph, I wrote it for my amusement)
                            Now, I did not try to sell you anything. And I am not a supporter of Trump nor Hillary. My only point was to challenge you on whether the two situations were actually comparable.
                            "Yes. President Trump is a huge embarrassment. And it’s an embarrassment to evangelical Christianity that there appear to be so many who will celebrate precisely the aspects that I see Biblically as most lamentable and embarrassing." Southern Baptist leader Albert Mohler Jr.

                            Comment

                            Related Threads

                            Collapse

                            Topics Statistics Last Post
                            Started by little_monkey, 03-27-2024, 04:19 PM
                            16 responses
                            160 views
                            0 likes
                            Last Post One Bad Pig  
                            Started by whag, 03-26-2024, 04:38 PM
                            53 responses
                            400 views
                            0 likes
                            Last Post Mountain Man  
                            Started by rogue06, 03-26-2024, 11:45 AM
                            25 responses
                            114 views
                            0 likes
                            Last Post rogue06
                            by rogue06
                             
                            Started by Hypatia_Alexandria, 03-26-2024, 09:21 AM
                            33 responses
                            198 views
                            0 likes
                            Last Post Roy
                            by Roy
                             
                            Started by Hypatia_Alexandria, 03-26-2024, 08:34 AM
                            84 responses
                            379 views
                            0 likes
                            Last Post JimL
                            by JimL
                             
                            Working...
                            X