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

WHISLEBLOWER: Trump manipulating intelligance

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

  • #31
    Originally posted by Ronson View Post
    When he begins attacking the Constitution is when I'd like to see him ousted.
    Not true. He's already done that in multiple ways, and here you are.
    He will reply, ĎTruly I tell you, whatever you did not do for one of the least of these, you did not do for me."

    "So in everything, do to others what you would have them do to you, for this sums up the Law and the Prophets"

    Comment


    • #32
      Originally posted by Mountain Man View Post
      No, ox, they are merely things you claim he has done, filtered through your own twisted prism. You have repeatedly exposed yourself as someone who has little respect for truth.
      I wonder where we find the emoluments clause. Trump has violated that over and over again.

      https://www.theusconstitution.org/li...uments-clause/

      There is no doubt his eshewing of mask wearing and dragging his feet on testing and lock downs has killed 100,000 plus. We simply need to look at other countries that have not followed his example. We've all seen the graphs of our own failed policies vs those of Europe. we are ahead of all European countries in terms of cases/million, we are ahead of all except the UK (boris is a Trump wanna be) in deaths/million. We have more cases than any other nation, more total deaths. We are finally above Europe on tests/million (but then again, we are still seeing over 30,000 new cases/day, and most in the world yeasterday at 1200 deaths)



      The washington post has a clock that estimates the Trump covid death toll

      https://www.washingtonpost.com/outlo...death-counter/

      right now it sits above 112,000


      As for lies to the american people - have you not been watching the news this week? The Woodward tapes. He's been lying all along about covid-19 while his blind followers invented conspiracty theories and insane stories to try to counter the truth about it. He started lying on the day of the inauguration and has not stopped since. And he's been counting on people like you to buy into his lies and give them life - just like you did day 1.


      And as for undermining the election. The purposed sabotage of the postal mail sorting systems is exhibit A, and his encouragement of voters to vote twice (once by mail, then down at the polling booth) - an illegal act - is exhibit B.

      These are all real events, real acts, real violations of law and principle. The only thing not real here is your continued denial of the facts.
      He will reply, ĎTruly I tell you, whatever you did not do for one of the least of these, you did not do for me."

      "So in everything, do to others what you would have them do to you, for this sums up the Law and the Prophets"

      Comment


      • #33
        Originally posted by JimL View Post
        From your link: "Most of these have come in the form of an ill-conceived tweet and havenít actually led to any policy changes, but that doesnít change the fact that the man sitting in the Oval Office has a total disregard for the founding charter of our national government."

        Comment


        • #34
          Originally posted by Ronson View Post
          From your link: "Most of these have come in the form of an ill-conceived tweet and havenít actually led to any policy changes, but that doesnít change the fact that the man sitting in the Oval Office has a total disregard for the founding charter of our national government."
          Right. I even found a libertarian source, just for you.

          Comment


          • #35
            Originally posted by JimL View Post
            Right. I even found a libertarian source, just for you.
            OK, I'll try unpacking some of this, since obviously you haven't.

            Donald Trump is a lot of things; a fan of the Constitution isnít one of them. Throughout his relatively short time as president Donald Trump has verbally assaulted no less than five amendments. Most of these have come in the form of an ill-conceived tweet and havenít actually led to any policy changes, but that doesnít change the fact that the man sitting in the Oval Office has a total disregard for the founding charter of our national government.

            The amendment that the president seems to have the most trouble with is the First. This is quite odd considering he is the type of person that benefits from the right to express oneself.

            In November of 2016, Donald Trump stated that flag burning should be illegal and that offenders should either lose their citizenship or serve jail time.
            In a 5-to-4 decision, the Court held that Johnson's burning of a flag was protected expression under the First Amendment, decided 1989. I agree with that decision, but I haven't seen Trump make any motions to have it reexamined.

            The President seems to struggle with the concept of freedom of the press as well, as he has tweeted that he would like to take away press credentials for organizations that give him negative coverage. These tweets show a pattern of complete disregard for our constitutional amendments.
            Poorly stated. Trump wanted to remove some "White House" press credentials to people like Jim Acosta, who refused to surrender the White House microphone to the moderator. CNN can give Acosta all the credentials they want.

            President Trumpís disrespect for the Constitution goes even further and gets even more insidious.
            Geez, a rather hysterical bit of hype.

            He has gone so far as to pardon authorities that violated the Constitutional rights of U.S. citizens.
            Which is a constituionally-protected action on Trump's part.
            Sheriff Joe Arpaio was found guilty of violating the Fourth Amendment through racial profiling and unlawful searches and seizures. Itís extremely dangerous for the president of the United States to pardon someone of such crimes and to normalize this behavior. The president should uphold the Constitution and seek to remove those that violate it, not pardon them or reward them.
            It was not unconstitutional for Trump to pardon Arpaio - despite the author's opinions on the matter.

            After the Parkland shootings, the president stated that he would like to ďtake the guns first, go through due process secondĒ. What heís saying is that he would like to waive due process, which would violate the Fifth Amendment, and take peopleís guns away without a conviction of any crime. Taking someoneís firearms away without any due process would be stripping them of their Second Amendment rights.


            OK, I'm done. This OP-ED is stupid. It is taking off-the-cuff comments from Trump that run 180-degrees contrary to his known positions in support of the Constitution. Namely, his fervent support for the Second Amendment.

            Also, "elephant hurling" usually indicates a ton of padding to make some argument look impressive. I might be interested in exploring one or two of these, but this guy obviously hates Trump first, and loves the Constitution second, because he isn't making a strong case.

            Comment


            • #36
              Originally posted by oxmixmudd View Post
              I wonder where we find the emoluments clause. Trump has violated that over and over again.

              https://www.theusconstitution.org/li...uments-clause/

              There is no doubt his eshewing of mask wearing and dragging his feet on testing and lock downs has killed 100,000 plus. We simply need to look at other countries that have not followed his example. We've all seen the graphs of our own failed policies vs those of Europe. we are ahead of all European countries in terms of cases/million, we are ahead of all except the UK (boris is a Trump wanna be) in deaths/million. We have more cases than any other nation, more total deaths. We are finally above Europe on tests/million (but then again, we are still seeing over 30,000 new cases/day, and most in the world yeasterday at 1200 deaths)



              The washington post has a clock that estimates the Trump covid death toll

              https://www.washingtonpost.com/outlo...death-counter/

              right now it sits above 112,000


              As for lies to the american people - have you not been watching the news this week? The Woodward tapes. He's been lying all along about covid-19 while his blind followers invented conspiracty theories and insane stories to try to counter the truth about it. He started lying on the day of the inauguration and has not stopped since. And he's been counting on people like you to buy into his lies and give them life - just like you did day 1.


              And as for undermining the election. The purposed sabotage of the postal mail sorting systems is exhibit A, and his encouragement of voters to vote twice (once by mail, then down at the polling booth) - an illegal act - is exhibit B.

              These are all real events, real acts, real violations of law and principle. The only thing not real here is your continued denial of the facts.
              No evidence that Trump has violated the emoluments clause. The case has been pretty much thrown out due to lack of merit with the prosecutors attempting one last "Hail Mary" appeal to the Supreme Court.

              Trying to blame Trump for even a single China flu death is simply disgusting. You should be above that sort of thing, but sadly, you're not.

              As for Trump's lies, yes, he lies. He's only human, after all, but I have seen nothing to convince me that he lies any more frequently or egregiously than the average politician. On the honesty scale, I would rank him well above Adam Schiff and Nancy Pelosi and about equal to Obama. That is admittedly a low bar, but there you go.

              The supposed mail system "sabotage" had nothing to do with Trump and was simply the implementation of a budget policy that was put into place while Obama was still in office. And, seriously, you're going to criticize Trump for making an obvious joke?

              You, sir, are an enemy of truth.
              Some may call me foolish, and some may call me odd
              But I'd rather be a fool in the eyes of man
              Than a fool in the eyes of God


              From "Fools Gold" by Petra

              Comment


              • #37
                Originally posted by Mountain Man View Post
                Let's excise the fluff and summarize your post thusly: "There is no evidence that Trump has done anything wrong."
                A question for you, would you apply your comment concerning Mr Trump and the lack of evidence of his wrong-doing to anyone where no documented evidence exists that they have been directly involved in an event?
                "Religion is regarded by the common people as true, by the wise as false, and by the rulers as useful" Attrib. Seneca 4 BCE - 65 CE

                Comment


                • #38
                  Originally posted by oxmixmudd View Post
                  No there isn't. There is nothing he could do that you would not classify as "rumors, hearsay, hoaxes, meritless accusations, or a failed attempt to remove him from office".

                  His irresponsibilty has killed over 100,000 people since march, and here you are.

                  He has violated the emoluments clause, bribed governments, and here you are.

                  He has lied to the American people nearly on a daily basis, and here you are.

                  He is actively, purposefully doing everything he can to undermine the 2020 election, and here you are.

                  And so on.
                  No you are wrong. Trump caused 942,301,232 people to die since march. duhhh.

                  And it is not the 2020 election he is undermining. He is undermining the 2120 election. hmmmphh.
                  Last edited by mikewhitney; 09-10-2020, 08:23 PM.

                  Comment


                  • #39
                    Originally posted by Hypatia_Alexandria View Post
                    A question for you, would you apply your comment concerning Mr Trump and the lack of evidence of his wrong-doing to anyone where no documented evidence exists that they have been directly involved in an event?
                    It's very simple: innocent until proven guilty.
                    Some may call me foolish, and some may call me odd
                    But I'd rather be a fool in the eyes of man
                    Than a fool in the eyes of God


                    From "Fools Gold" by Petra

                    Comment


                    • #40
                      Originally posted by Ronson View Post
                      OK, I'll try unpacking some of this, since obviously you haven't.

                      Donald Trump is a lot of things; a fan of the Constitution isn’t one of them. Throughout his relatively short time as president Donald Trump has verbally assaulted no less than five amendments. Most of these have come in the form of an ill-conceived tweet and haven’t actually led to any policy changes, but that doesn’t change the fact that the man sitting in the Oval Office has a total disregard for the founding charter of our national government.

                      The amendment that the president seems to have the most trouble with is the First. This is quite odd considering he is the type of person that benefits from the right to express oneself.

                      In November of 2016, Donald Trump stated that flag burning should be illegal and that offenders should either lose their citizenship or serve jail time.
                      In a 5-to-4 decision, the Court held that Johnson's burning of a flag was protected expression under the First Amendment, decided 1989. I agree with that decision, but I haven't seen Trump make any motions to have it reexamined.

                      The President seems to struggle with the concept of freedom of the press as well, as he has tweeted that he would like to take away press credentials for organizations that give him negative coverage. These tweets show a pattern of complete disregard for our constitutional amendments.
                      Poorly stated. Trump wanted to remove some "White House" press credentials to people like Jim Acosta, who refused to surrender the White House microphone to the moderator. CNN can give Acosta all the credentials they want.

                      President Trump’s disrespect for the Constitution goes even further and gets even more insidious.
                      Geez, a rather hysterical bit of hype.

                      He has gone so far as to pardon authorities that violated the Constitutional rights of U.S. citizens.
                      Which is a constituionally-protected action on Trump's part.
                      Sheriff Joe Arpaio was found guilty of violating the Fourth Amendment through racial profiling and unlawful searches and seizures. It’s extremely dangerous for the president of the United States to pardon someone of such crimes and to normalize this behavior. The president should uphold the Constitution and seek to remove those that violate it, not pardon them or reward them.
                      It was not unconstitutional for Trump to pardon Arpaio - despite the author's opinions on the matter.

                      After the Parkland shootings, the president stated that he would like to ¬ďtake the guns first, go through due process second¬Ē. What he¬ís saying is that he would like to waive due process, which would violate the Fifth Amendment, and take people¬ís guns away without a conviction of any crime. Taking someone¬ís firearms away without any due process would be stripping them of their Second Amendment rights.


                      OK, I'm done. This OP-ED is stupid. It is taking off-the-cuff comments from Trump that run 180-degrees contrary to his known positions in support of the Constitution. Namely, his fervent support for the Second Amendment.

                      Also, "elephant hurling" usually indicates a ton of padding to make some argument look impressive. I might be interested in exploring one or two of these, but this guy obviously hates Trump first, and loves the Constitution second, because he isn't making a strong case.
                      As was expected, the Trumpster will always find an excuse. Had you read on, which I'm sure you probably did, you'd have read: "The presidents defenders may say that his words are harmless, that they are only words, not policies. This is a very shortsighted way of thinking. President Trumps words show his intent."

                      And btw, that an action by the president isn't illegal, such as pardoning an authority who themselves violated the constitution and the civil rights of others, pardoning him simply because he is a political ally, which, not being illegal seems to be your defense of Trump, doesn't make that action right. It simply shows that he has no respect for the Constitution and will, if he has the power, if there is no one left to stop him, violate it at will.

                      By his words, the president shows his intent, shows his disdain for the law as applied to himself. He shows disdain for democracy itself and if he gets 4 more years, you'll see those words, you'll see that intent, become his policy, and then you can kiss democracy as you know it goodbye.
                      Last edited by JimL; 09-11-2020, 12:23 AM.

                      Comment


                      • #41
                        Originally posted by Mountain Man View Post
                        It's very simple: innocent until proven guilty.
                        That is not what I asked you and it does not apply to what you originally wrote to me.

                        You stated quite emphatically that "There is no evidence that Trump has done anything wrong." [my emphasis]

                        [As an aside: Let us be clear there was no evidence apart from tax evasion to convict Al Capone. However, I doubt many would declare that Capone was an otherwise entirely innocent and upstanding member of American society.]

                        So let me ask you again "would you apply your comment concerning Mr Trump and the lack of evidence of his wrong-doing to anyone where no documented evidence exists that they have been directly involved in an event?" [Again my emphasis]
                        "Religion is regarded by the common people as true, by the wise as false, and by the rulers as useful" Attrib. Seneca 4 BCE - 65 CE

                        Comment


                        • #42
                          Originally posted by Hypatia_Alexandria View Post
                          That is not what I asked you and it does not apply to what you originally wrote to me.

                          You stated quite emphatically that "There is no evidence that Trump has done anything wrong." [my emphasis]

                          [As an aside: Let us be clear there was no evidence apart from tax evasion to convict Al Capone. However, I doubt many would declare that Capone was an otherwise entirely innocent and upstanding member of American society.]

                          So let me ask you again "would you apply your comment concerning Mr Trump and the lack of evidence of his wrong-doing to anyone where no documented evidence exists that they have been directly involved in an event?" [Again my emphasis]
                          I'm not sure why you find "innocent until proven guilty" so difficult to understand.
                          Some may call me foolish, and some may call me odd
                          But I'd rather be a fool in the eyes of man
                          Than a fool in the eyes of God


                          From "Fools Gold" by Petra

                          Comment


                          • #43
                            Originally posted by Mountain Man View Post
                            I'm not sure why you find "innocent until proven guilty" so difficult to understand.
                            I am not sure why you find a question premised precisely on what you exactly originally wrote, is so hard to answer directly.

                            Was Capone innocent of racketeering, murder, bribery, and corruption?

                            Given that there was no evidence that could directly connect him to those crimes, it follows, from your comment, that he had done nothing wrong [apart from evading paying his taxes].
                            "Religion is regarded by the common people as true, by the wise as false, and by the rulers as useful" Attrib. Seneca 4 BCE - 65 CE

                            Comment


                            • #44
                              Originally posted by JimL View Post
                              As was expected, the Trumpster will always find an excuse. Had you read on, which I'm sure you probably did, you'd have read: "The presidents defenders may say that his words are harmless, that they are only words, not policies. This is a very shortsighted way of thinking. President Trumps words show his intent."
                              If that author said "vanilla ice cream is the best" would that make it true too? What is a "shortsighted" way of thinking is this author ignoring Trump's fervent defense of the Second Amendment and then basing an argument on a off-the-comment he made at one time that was contrary. In fact, it is dishonest, IMO. Leftists are more concerned with words and illusion than with action, as is readily displayed with the Navalny event.

                              And btw, that an action by the president isn't illegal, such as pardoning an authority who themselves violated the constitution and the civil rights of others, pardoning him simply because he is a political ally, which, not being illegal seems to be your defense of Trump, doesn't make that action right. It simply shows that he has no respect for the Constitution and will, if he has the power, if there is no one left to stop him, violate it at will.
                              But Trump didn't violate anything. Obama pardoned cocaine smugglers, bank fraudsters, and identity thieves. That didn't make Obama guilty of those crimes, but only that he thought the sentences were too harsh or the charges were cooked up.

                              By his words, the president shows his intent, shows his disdain for the law as applied to himself. He shows disdain for democracy itself and if he gets 4 more years, you'll see those words, you'll see that intent, become his policy, and then you can kiss democracy as you know it goodbye.
                              I see. So he was just playing coy the first four years, and his ultimate plan is to dismantle our democracy in the second four years?
                              Last edited by Ronson; 09-11-2020, 08:18 AM.

                              Comment


                              • #45
                                Originally posted by Ronson View Post
                                If that author said "vanilla ice cream is the best" would that make it true too? What is a "shortsighted" way of thinking is this author ignoring Trump's fervent defense of the Second Amendment and then basing an argument on a off-the-comment he made at one time that was contrary. In fact, it is dishonest, IMO. Leftists are more concerned with words and illusion than with action, as is readily displayed with the Navalny event.



                                But Trump didn't violate anything. Obama pardoned cocaine smugglers, bank fraudsters, and identity thieves. That didn't make Obama guilty of those crimes, but only that he thought the sentences were too harsh or the charges were cooked up.



                                I see. So he was just playing coy the first four years, and his ultimate plan is to dismantle our democracy in the second four years?
                                but the people you speak of obama pardoning were not his personal friends who acted illegally on his behalf and where the only basis for that pardon was their loyalty in not implicating him.

                                The dishonesty required to try to equate the two is really quite disturbing.

                                I will add this: the misuse of the presidential pardon is wrong any time it is misused. And every person posting here that condemned obama or Bill clinton for suspected misuse of that power that is not condemning Trump in his misuse of that pardon power is acting hypocritically wrt that issue.
                                Last edited by oxmixmudd; 09-11-2020, 08:45 AM.
                                He will reply, ĎTruly I tell you, whatever you did not do for one of the least of these, you did not do for me."

                                "So in everything, do to others what you would have them do to you, for this sums up the Law and the Prophets"

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X