Jump to content

Minor Politics & News


Dad

Recommended Posts

 

I was agreeing with you. Read it again. Or are you just purposely misconstruing my words so that you can have some kind of argument? That's not how debates work.

 

The Russia bullshit won't fly. It's not even feasible. And the Feds tapping into the Tower with no evidence proves a lot of people stepped out of line for some bogus allegations. It was sloppy and stupid.


I misunderstood. Sorry.

 

I think it's a dangerous precedent all the same

 

Feds want to investigate Winter for drug smuggling. Court says no. Feds come back and say they want to investigate Winter's 3rd cousin who was caught dealing weed. Court says OK. Feds use a thanksgiving dinner between Cousin and me to get to tail me on drug dealing.

 

Death by association to prove guilty is the def a witch hunt and we should all be scared. Guilty until proven guilty is dangerous. This is what authoritarian states did

 

 

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-switch/wp/2017/03/07/why-the-cia-is-using-your-tvs-smartphones-and-cars-for-spying/?utm_term=.a05deb7a9d9d

 

Maybe this might be what Trump meant, or if it wasn't, he will probably reference it at some point

 


C6WaD2uXMAE384V.jpg

 


It just shows the CIA is out of control, but it has nothing directly to do with Guilty until proven guilty.

 

Dad and I were discussing the wiretapping of Trump tower through association. This might be the mechanism by which they were able to justify it, sure.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 158
  • Created
  • Last Reply
  • 2 weeks later...

http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2017/03/17/steve-bannon-pushed-trump-to-go-full-andrew-jackson.html
 

In an interview with The Hollywood Reporter that ran shortly after Trump’s upset victory in November, (1)Bannon had once again name-checked the president nicknamed Old Hickory.
 
“Like [Andrew] Jackson’s populism, we’re going to build an entirely new political movement,” he said. “It’s everything related to jobs. The conservatives are going to go crazy… It will be as exciting as the 1930s, greater than the Reagan revolution—conservatives, plus populists, in an economic nationalist movement.”

 
It’s also worth noting that, as The Daily Beast reported this week, in college Bannon and his friends would jokingly refer to his regular apartment meetings with other student leaders and activists as “The Kitchen Cabinet.” In the early 19th century, “The Kitchen Cabinet” was a term coined by Jackson’s political enemies to describe his group of unofficial advisers.
 
The parallels between Trump and Jackson are, in many ways, deeply flawed. Jackson brawled with the established elite of the era, whereas Trump has, despite his rhetoric, emboldened them. Jackson came from poverty and was known as a war hero, while Trump was born into wealth and dodged the draft. Trump is a deeply divisive and outwardly bigoted figure; Jackson, however, committed mass murder and ethnic cleansing.
 
But Bannon doesn’t shy away from invoking controversial or despicable role models. In the same Hollywood Reporter interview in which Bannon discussed Jackson and Trump’s populism, (2)the White House chief strategist favorably invoked, among others, the devil.
 
“Darkness is good,” Bannon said. “Dick Cheney. Darth Vader. Satan. That’s power.”


  1. Not suprising. Bannon has been quite the nationalist pusher in the cabinet.
  2. That, on the other hand, is specifically what I would expect to hear from a devil worshipper, not a White House Chief Strategist or any other White House official. (note: this is not meant to make any statements, claims, or accusations purportrating that Bannon follows this or that)
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2017/03/17/steve-bannon-pushed-trump-to-go-full-andrew-jackson.html

 

  1. Not suprising. Bannon has been quite the nationalist pusher in the cabinet.
  2. That, on the other hand, is specifically what I would expect to hear from a devil worshipper, not a White House Chief Strategist or any other White House official. (note: this is not meant to make any statements, claims, or accusations purportrating that Bannon follows this or that)

 

 

>thedailybeast

 

Any other sources bruh?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

TBH from what I know they are an alternative, conservative news station, which I hoped would keep Winter from going on a MSM tirade, while at the same time they seem legit, which I thought would be fine for the rest of you. If any of what I said is incorrect go ahead and call me out on it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...

Since this thread left off with discussion about Stephen Bannon, I think this is the best place to share that he's been removed from the National Security Council.
 
https://www.nytimes.com/2017/04/05/us/politics/national-security-council-stephen-bannon.html

"His allies said privately that Mr. Bannon had been put on the principals committee to keep an eye on Mr. Trump’s first national security adviser, Michael T. Flynn, a retired three-star general who lasted just 24 days before being forced out for misleading Vice President Mike Pence and other White House officials about what he had discussed with Russia’s ambassador. With Mr. Flynn gone, these allies said, there was no need for Mr. Bannon to remain, but they noted that he had kept his security clearance."
 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Since this thread left off with discussion about Stephen Bannon, I think this is the best place to share that he's been removed from the National Security Council.

 

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/04/05/us/politics/national-security-council-stephen-bannon.html

 

"His allies said privately that Mr. Bannon had been put on the principals committee to keep an eye on Mr. Trump’s first national security adviser, Michael T. Flynn, a retired three-star general who lasted just 24 days before being forced out for misleading Vice President Mike Pence and other White House officials about what he had discussed with Russia’s ambassador. With Mr. Flynn gone, these allies said, there was no need for Mr. Bannon to remain, but they noted that he had kept his security clearance."

 

 

Good move to fire Bannon from the NSC, but from what I know, he still isn't blocked from the meetings. I ask you, why would you let anyone into a NSC meeting if they aren't part of the NSC (anymore)?

 

EDIT:

 

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/04/06/us/politics/neil-gorsuch-supreme-court-senate.html?_r=0

 

RIP the 60-vote threshold on Supreme Court nominees. Senate should bring it back when possible

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

Good move to fire Bannon from the NSC, but from what I know, he still isn't blocked from the meetings. I ask you, why would you let anyone into a NSC meeting if they aren't part of the NSC (anymore)?

 

EDIT:

 

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/04/06/us/politics/neil-gorsuch-supreme-court-senate.html?_r=0

 

RIP the 60-vote threshold on Supreme Court nominees. Senate should bring it back when possible

You're not Trump's constituency. He needs me to vote for him again, not give you morsels of approval

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You're not Trump's constituency. He needs me to vote for him again, not give you morsels of approval

I would be inclined to think that as President, the whole country is his constituency, just as an entire state is a senator's constituency, etc. At least in the case of foreign affairs

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I would be inclined to think that as President, the whole country is his constituency, just as an entire state is a senator's constituency, etc. At least in the case of foreign affairs

Seems nice in theory. But never happens. Vast majority of what President Obama was more for his rabidly progressive base than for me.

 

Trump had nothing to gain from catering to you, as Obama didn't from me.

 

There are two Americas

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Seems nice in theory. But never happens. Vast majority of what President Obama was more for his rabidly progressive base than for me.

Trump had nothing to gain from catering to you, as Obama didn't from me.

There are two Americas

I thought you wanted unity? Why divide us?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I opened by saying it seems nice in theory, but that's not reality anymore

 

partisanship is a thing

 

Roxas and Craft are likely never going to vote for Trump, or any Republicans. He needs swing voters. 

 

I think Charlie Baker and Charlie Dent (or whoever leads the Tuesday Group) are relatively good (at least compared to the more extreme wing of the GOP)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Enough to vote for one?

 

This doesn't matter. In a race between a democrat and  TG republican, I'd actually be quite willing to vote for the TGR

 

Isn't that how voting works?  Voting for your preferred party / representatives regardless of the race?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yeah, go on, so why should Trump try to cater to Craft or Roxas? It's a wasted effort that's gonna piss of people who might actually give him a fair shot

 

We already touched on this.  Partisanship.  He should try to cater to Craft or Roxas by actually taking an interest in their points of view.  That's typically how you win a vote.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

We already touched on this.  Partisanship.  He should try to cater to Craft or Roxas by actually taking an interest in their points of view.  That's typically how you win a vote.

And he's gonna lose me if he starts backing abortion or throwing a fit about Russia like they want

 

Given I'm more inclined to vote for him, he's gonna be running a net less trying to cater to them

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.


×
×
  • Create New...