Trump's Last Line of Defense

  • Thread starter Thread starter EasterJoy
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Not sure who myou have in mind? But it is a good goal for all - even Scaramucci. Trump, however, is POTUS That comes with a heightened responsibility.
Any liberal will do. Otherwise, it’s just the same “well, it’s fine if my guy/girl does it, because we are in the same party”.

I would like to see Trump dial some things down. And he’s had to somewhat because he’s trying to fix the mess he inherited from Obama/Biden and the do-nothing establishment.
 
You don’t think Lisa and Susan are women and John McCain is not a veteran?
Strawman.

And a huge miss. 😊

BTW, since you are playing the identity politics game…why didn’t you mention John McCain’s gender?
 
Any liberal will do. Otherwise, it’s just the same “well, it’s fine if my guy/girl does it, because we are in the same party”.
Well, when it comes up, we’ll see.

I would like to see Trump dial some things down…
Good.
 
Nor does any liberal in the house or senate.
Immediately coming to mind, two Dems: Bernie Sanders and Elizabeth Warren have a similar approach of hyperbolism and insulting opponents as Donald Trump is prone to. There are a few others. It’s the Ted Kennedy School of Rhetoric.
 
Feel free to stop with the identity politics at any time. Whether someone is a veteran or a woman voting in the Senate is utterly meaningless, but I know people have to play that game if they don’t have substance-----or think they owe the federal government everyone else’s freedom because they were raised by a single Mom or had a personal tragedy in life.

Also, it’s pretty obvious to me how the left really feels about veterans by their spitting on them when they came back from Vietnam and saying “go insurgents go kill all USA soldiers”. For women, well, they don’t like to talk about the negative effects of abortion, but we know you’ve got that covered with the lame excuse “Christians who just believe differently”, which I guess means then that slave ships are fair game again?

And no, Sy Noe, 52 votes is not enough to get things done in the Senate. The chamber has a series of financial procedures among other things in the checks and balances of the system. It’s not the same when the Democrats crammed down a bill unilaterally with bipartisan OPPOSITION when they had 60 votes due to their ability to fool Alaskan voters over Ted Stevens and the shenanigans of the Al Franken campaign who I still think was not legitimately elected to his first term.
Look at it this way. The Republicans in the Senate at the time were able to obstruct with just 41 votes. And they did just that.
 
What they did is totally irrelevant. The point was this: what is the evidence to support your claim for Trump?
Can you back up your claim? Deflecting to Ford and Nixon doesn’t cut it.
Something so well known publicly hardly needs demonstrating. But as to the source of his wealth, “Fortune” magazine puts it this way:

“How did Trump amass that fortune? In the end it had little to do with TV paychecks and steak royalties. Rather, it came primarily via the business he grew up in: real estate. A booming market has greatly increased the value of Trump’s key property holdings. He has also profited from an overlooked business in which he thrives—the unglamorous work of overseeing property development and management for other developers. Trump has reaped rich fees in that role on such projects as the current transformation of Washington, D.C.’s historic Old Post Office Building into a luxury hotel, alongside private equity firm Colony Capital.”
 
Good point. He is neither liberal nor conservative. He is chaotic wild card.
In some ways he’s a wild card. But I don’t think he’s an ideologue at all. He’s pure function. He undoubtedly seems to some not to function well, given the occasional white house shakeup. But that’s a pattern one often sees when a new CEO comes into a company that has not been run well. It seems as if the bloodletting will never end, but then it suddenly does.
 
Something so well known publicly hardly needs demonstrating. But as to the source of his wealth, “Fortune” magazine puts it this way:

“How did Trump amass that fortune? In the end it had little to do with TV paychecks and steak royalties. Rather, it came primarily via the business he grew up in: real estate. A booming market has greatly increased the value of Trump’s key property holdings. He has also profited from an overlooked business in which he thrives—the unglamorous work of overseeing property development and management for other developers. Trump has reaped rich fees in that role on such projects as the current transformation of Washington, D.C.’s historic Old Post Office Building into a luxury hotel, alongside private equity firm Colony Capital.”
I am not sure that much of that speaks to business skill, nor is it well-informed by actual financial records. But it is a much better response than illogical deflection to irrelevant persons like Ford and Nixon.
 
Give me one example of how Trump is reckless with the law.
The Fox News Channel and a wealthy supporter of President Trump worked in concert under the watchful eye of the White House to concoct a story about the murder of a young Democratic National Committee aide, according to a lawsuit filed Tuesday.

The explosive claim is part of the lawsuit filed against Fox News by Rod Wheeler, a longtime paid commentator for the news network. The suit was obtained exclusively by NPR.

Wheeler alleges Fox News and the Trump supporter intended to deflect public attention from growing concern about the administration’s ties to the Russian government. His suit charges that a Fox News reporter created quotations out of thin air and attributed them to him to propel her story.

npr.org/2017/08/01/540783715/lawsuit-alleges-fox-news-and-trump-supporter-created-fake-news-story
 
I am not sure that much of that speaks to business skill, nor is it well-informed by actual financial records. But it is a much better response than illogical deflection to irrelevant persons like Ford and Nixon.
Ford and Nixon are not irrelevant to a complaint by you that Trump doesn’t disclose his business records. Prior to Nixon, no president did. Nixon was the first. But after that, Ford didn’t either.

Acting as if somehow that’s required of a president or that Trump is the first one who didn’t, is deceptive.
 
Ford and Nixon are not irrelevant to a complaint by you that Trump doesn’t disclose his business records. Prior to Nixon, no president did. Nixon was the first. But after that, Ford didn’t either.

Acting as if somehow that’s required of a president or that Trump is the first one who didn’t, is deceptive.
Were Ford and Nixon sitting atop a vast business empire? I don’t think this an apples to apples comparison here.
 
Ford and Nixon are not irrelevant to a complaint by you that Trump doesn’t disclose his business records. …
The question was about evidence for his business acumen, not a generic demand for the record. That is why, as already stated, Nixon and Ford are irrelevant.
 
The question was about evidence for his business acumen, not a generic demand for the record. That is why, as already stated, Nixon and Ford are irrelevant.
Why this improvisation? You said:

“Would be nice to kn ow the actual history of the Trump business rather than just assuming. But Trump has not been exaclty forthcoming.”

The second sentence is a slap at Trump for not disclosing his financial affairs. Do you really deny that?

I followed up saying that before Nixon, no president did such disclosures and neither did Ford. Not irrelevant to your statement at all.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top