AG Yates has been relieved of her position by Trump administration

Status
Not open for further replies.
No one said Obama did it too. I said the countries came from the list he used for HR 158.

And?

The list is taken out of context and serves a completely different purpose under Trump, so why do you keep pointing out that Obama selected those countries?

This is not what they were selected for, and therefore this is not an "extension".
It's a fascist take on something that was effectively in place to improve national security.

Is Trump going to decontextualize select items from Obama bills to justify this madness?
I'm pretty sure Obama did write "war" somewhere in the bills, that doesn't mean you can take that word and add "start a".

EDIT: Aaand he's gone.
 
Doesn't really address his base, just nationally. I'd imagine his base is happy with this.

True I suppose if you;re focusing just on his voter base. But that's kind of irrelevant. They voted for this. Why would they be unhappy? They believe they're safer now with this ban, they believe he's rooting out corruption, they believe he's making US great again. The core supporters aren't seeing anything to be unhappy with I believe.

What matters is the majority realizing the extent of the mistake and throwing aside apathy to do something.
 
His die-hard fans? Nope. Those are the truly scary mofos.

But hopefully the others will see through to what he's doing.
Man, I dunno. I fear that this being a tamer Muslim Ban with a guise of rationality behind the seven countries' selection makes the whole thing more palatable to people who held their nose while voting for him despite him calling for a full on Muslim Ban.
True I suppose if you;re focusing just on his voter base. But that's kind of irrelevant. They voted for this. Why would they be unhappy? They believe they're safer now with this ban, they believe he's rooting out corruption, they believe he's making US great again. The core supporters aren't seeing anything to be unhappy with I believe.

What matters is the majority realizing the extent of the mistake and throwing aside apathy to do something.
If the other half of America that couldn't be bothered to vote gets mobilized politically by this it'll be the only silver lining of his Presidency.
 
True I suppose if you;re focusing just on his voter base. But that's kind of irrelevant. They voted for this. Why would they be unhappy? They believe they're safer now with this ban, they believe he's rooting out corruption, they believe he's making US great again. The core supporters aren't seeing anything to be unhappy with I believe.

What matters is the majority realizing the extent of the mistake and throwing aside apathy to do something.

It's not unimportant though. Of course he has his die hard voters who would go to war for him, but there have to be people who voted for him simply because they always vote Republican right? Because if all of his voters still stand behind him, that is problematic.
 
It's not unimportant though. Of course he has his die hard voters who would go to war for him, but there have to be people who voted for him simply because they always vote Republican right? Because if all of his voters still stand behind him, that is problematic.
I hate to say this but it's not going to be Muslims or any other other that decides those voter's future allegiance but abortion and economics. If he nominates a pro-life judge he's going to get the pro-life Republicans vote locked. Economically he'll have his toughest challenge. Lower taxes personally and for business sounds great to Republicans but if he starts making it so hard to do businesses because he's constantly throwing international markets into turmoil, unilaterally threatening to change existing agreements with little to no notice and singling out company after company to make an example of, well, I think a case could be made for stability over lower taxes for those people. If he stops being so impulse driven in regards to foreign trade and lowers taxes domestically we're in fucking trouble, I'd say he keeps all his voters.
 
I'm glad she stood up for what she believed. Conversely, it is not Yates who has failed the Government, it is the Government who is failing the people.
 
How many can we check off yall?

qk0YlUV.jpg



Every. Single. One.


Seeing how far we are along chills me to the fucking bone. There isn't much time left to stop this.
 
I've said this on other threads, but aren't instances like this EXACTLY the reason America has the second amendment?

If there is an armed uprising, then senate/congress will vote for emergency legislation. So the second amendment is basically the instruction book on "how you create a dictator".

Basically, the second amendment is supposed to be about the outcome (defending the country), rather than the method (owning guns). Over time, the debate about the second amendment has been entirely about "right to bear arms", and no-one bothered to consider "what the [censored] does this accomplish?".
 
I know it's already mentioned but want to note again the danger in the communication here. An administration that paints anyone "not following orders" as a "beytrayer" is walking on very dangerous ground.

It's also a lie as her role isn't actually to automatically back White House and in fact her role is to oppose where necessary based on her sphere of experience and influence.

In short this is discrediting people doing their job correctly when they aren't instead going what they're told and telling the populace it's a good thing when senior officials "do as they're told".

Quite troubling and I'd say very inappropriate language usage. Of course it's all designed to appease existing supporters but it's so obvious it's need attention called to it and strong reaction from opposing factions.

Good for her though not caving in and going out with dignity intact.
 
If there is an armed uprising, then senate/congress will vote for emergency legislation. So the second amendment is basically the instruction book on "how you create a dictator".

Basically, the second amendment is supposed to be about the outcome (defending the country), rather than the method (owning guns). Over time, the debate about the second amendment has been entirely about "right to bear arms", and no-one bothered to consider "what the [censored] does this accomplish?".
Well the States also had militias and the standing Federal Army was small. I imagine it was more about States being able to fight the Federal government than individual citizens fighting the Federal government. With the militias basically being part of the Federal Army now I imagine that scenario's moot now.
 
I almost can't believe those tweets are real.

Fuck everyone that supports this worthless piece of shit.

It really has gotten to the point that the only ones who seem morally salvageable are the handful of people who voted for him because of peer pressure, but don't follow the news or know anything beyond his reality TV show and MAGA.

Beyond that it's slim picking if you want to find one who isn't ethically or empathy deficient.

On a totally unrelated side note, after this week I finally feel confident that he is just an extreme narcissist and not a sociopath. Not like in practice there's a whole hell of a lot of difference though.
 
Good morning everyone, Donald is out of bed. Today will also be an interesting day where the rule of law is kicked into the corner

If the world is a message board Trump is the resident troll. We have to accept that and cease wasting emotions and reactions to his tweets, react to his actions instead.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom