…and Bannon…
Coming from a business environment I can tell you that if an employee of mine disagreed with me publicly on a particular project that I was working on I would immediately fire that individual. It is about building a cohesive team. The time to disagree is before the project launches and the place is behind closed doors.
Obama fired something like 9 or 10 Generals and no one said a thing about it so I…
Hmm… this is the Trump bashing thread isn’t it?..Um… Ha Trump’s skin is orange.
1 Like
Briefly following up on this:
Trump’s team has done a sorta-clever job in pushing the “voter fraud” narrative by publicly beating the drum citing how many people have dual registrations. The problem is that they’re trying to get people to go straight from that into the number of illegal votes cast, although the reality is that most of the dual-registrations are likely harmless (i.e. people that moved and never got removed from their old precinct) and wouldn’t actually affect the election unless they were actually used to vote multiple times. By now, as usmc has pointed out, it’s been shown that, like, all of Trump’s family and advisors were/are registered in multiple states (none of them actually voted twice).
So if Trump et al want to make a big thing about cleaning up the voter rolls, I think that’s fine, and it’s fair to use the number of dual-registered votes to support the reason it’s needed. What’s disingenuous is using that number as part of the “I won the popular vote if you get rid of the millions of illegal votes” argument. There is no evidence that there were millions of illegal votes cast as a result of dual-voter-registration. Odds are that very few of the dual-registered people actually voted twice. Humorously, even the article raj posted to show that there were illegal votes cast explicitly stated that this was the case, and that the number of illegal votes (although not insubstantial) was not even close to making up the difference in the popular vote.
4 Likes
Bannon must be confused about his white supremacy when he hired gays, jews and Pakistanis at breitbart
That would be fine, but just two comments:
-
the government is not a private business
-
more pertinently, on the second topic about disagreeing before the project launches, all indications are that the Department of Justice did not have the chance to review the Executive Order before it was made public.
Trump had the legal right to remove the acting AG; I am not disputing that. Merely clarifying that “the time to disagree is before the project launches” does not work very well if you don’t even see the order before it is announced to the public.
As for “the place is behind closed doors” - from what we have been told publicly, it went down pretty much like this. President Trump wanted something that looked like a Muslim ban. He worked with a few close advisors to throw together something resembling a Muslim ban. He didn’t consult anyone in the government (Speaker Ryan and Major Leader McConnell have both stated that they only saw the final language when reporters saw it; Congressional Republicans didn’t receive talking points from the White House until a day after the order was signed). The fact that he didn’t consult his acting attorney general on an executive order that everyone had to know would be highly controversial and subject to legal challenges suggests pretty directly that he had no interest in her position on the issue anyway, so what good would it have done to go to him behind closed doors?
3 Likes
I’ll leave this here. Douglas Murray has been involved in the European refugee conversation for years now, so it bears considering.
3 Likes
It seems as though he does have a few folks that disagree with him around him though, not all yes men (Mattis in particular.)
This deserves emphasis.
1 Like
I would like to hear your thoughts on Bannon.
1 Like
I’d like to hear anybody’s thoughts about what this place would look like if one of Obama’s closest advisers in the White House – a confidant in such intimate favor as to earn a standing invitational spot among the NSC despite having no** foreign policy experience – had been responsible for this gem:
** No foreign policy experience other than that which may have rubbed off on him while running a campaign that is under investigation for colluding with Russian spies to subvert an American presidential election, I mean.
2 Likes
Agreed that she fell on her sword; ie, she knew exactly what would happen when she took the position she did.
1 Like
@smh_23 wrote
No foreign policy experience other than that which may have rubbed off on him while running a campaign that is under investigation for colluding with Russian spies to subvert an American presidential election, I mean.
He could see Russia from his hotel room? Ha
1 Like
I’d love to know the benefits of foreign policy experience - Hillary Clinton and John kerry have tons of it and how did that turn out?
Frankly there’s not a whole lot of positives in America’s foreign policy post WW2
Do we have any recording of bannon saying he’s a Leninist or just some shitty journalists hearsay?
Wasn’t there supposed to be a Trump tape with him apparently saying nigger?
Unsurprisingly there’s no real evidence for these bold claims
The hypocrisy of it all is what gets me.
Do you remember the long list of Socialist/Communist/Domestic Terrorist and Fire-Brand Black Preachers that supposedly were early influences on Barack Obama…and those influences would eventually lead to the complete collapse of America?
Now…imagine if just ONE of these people was ACTUALLY PUT IN THE WEST-WING OF THE WHITE HOUSE…and actually became a close and trusted ACTIVE confidant of the President…
I don’t think the outcry from the Right could have even been measured…and President Obama would have been impeached.
5 Likes
Who is ready for more liberal tears tonight at 8?
2 Likes
I think Trump has the potential to get 2-3 on the Court.
1 Like
Sorry loppar, I think most of this is manufactured outrage over the travel ban. I would agree, in measure it’s largely symbolic since the first country on the list should have been Saudi Arabia, the largest exporter of actual terrorists in the world. And the execution of the order lacked decorum, especially for those whom were already approved to come.That has largely been corrected, though. But besides that, a 90 day moratorium is really nothing. Nobody cried a blue tear when obama banned refugees from Iraq for 6 months in 2011. Hell, nobody even probably knew.
There were no protests on the travel ban to Cuba that lasted some 50 years.
Of the countries on the list, I don’t think Iran poses an existential threat, not for terror. Syria is pretty self explanatory. Somalia should be permanent at least until a functioning western friendly government is actually governing. Yemen is the same, royally fucked up, permanent.
This retarded notion that travel bans are something new and un-american is simply the function of the uneducated huddled masses ransacking poor people at airports just trying to fly. We’ve had travel bans for one place or another for decades. People acting like this is something new are perhaps too stupid to breath.
Speaking of “too stupid to breathe”
1 Like
lol!!! You got me they’re… ← that was deliberate…