LSTU#3: Has Trump done anything wrong yet?

[Bruce_T_Laney]

Donald John Trump has made mistakes like every man that has sat in the Oval Office...

Are his mistakes impeachable?

No...

For some Trump could save a baby from a burning building and those that hate him would accuse him putting the baby before saving the building because anything Trump does is wrong...

Then you will have his voters proclaim everything Trump does is perfect and treasonous to question him even when it is clear Trump made a mistake.

It is too early to say Trump is a failure but he has made a few mistakes and hope he learn from them and become better at his job as being President...

 

[Nosmo King]

The only thing "wrong" so far is that he has not purged the federal bureaucracy and jailed Obama.

In the tradition of authoritarian dictatorships. But if that's the system you want, I'm afraid you might just have it.

 

[Iceweasel]

Obama wasn't a great president. Obamacare was a bust, he didn't handle the Middle East well, and he spent most of his time butting heads with congress. That better or do you need more confirmation?

Obama was a failure on many different levels. The man aided Illegals, Immigrants, and Terrorists more than he helped his own people. He spent most of his time Un-Constitutionally BY-PASSING Congress.

Considering Congress (with approval numbers in the high single digits) said they would do nothing, President Obama had no option but to exert his constitutional authority through Executive Orders. Unless you think Executive Orders are unconstitutional. If that's the case, please show how and then defend Trump's use of Executive Orders.

Can't have it both ways, ya know!

Obama just had to do his thing despite the wishes of congress or America? LOL@liberals

 

[Richard-H]

One of the worst fallacies regarding Trump's travel ban is the belief that stopping these refugees help U.S. security. It does not. It undermines U.S. security.

Anyone that has any idea of how our security forces work overseas know that they work thru nationals of the countries where they operate. It is vital that U.S. agents be able to offer refuge to the families of those foreign nationals that collaborate. These foreign nationals are risking their lives by cooperating with U.S. agents, but it is too much too ask them to risk the lives of their families. They need to know that when things go bad, they can send their families to the U.S.

I know a young man from a Latin American country who came to the U.S. wit his mother and sister when he was a child as refugees. His father is working with U.S. anti-drug agents in his home country. He and his family were sent here for protection.

These refugees are our allies in those countries. They desperately need our support.

Yet, ignorant Trumpbots have insisted on the myth that these people - who are thoroughly vetted - are a threat when in fact, not offering them refuge undermines U.S. efforts in these countries tremendously.

 

[Doc1]

They can't stand the fact that he is breathing.

 

[easyt65]

Considering Congress (with approval numbers in the high single digits) said they would do nothing, President Obama had no option

OH BULLSHIT - STOP RIGHT THERE! DON'T EVEN ATTEMPT TO JUSTIFY BARAK OBAMA'S CONSTITUTIONAL VIOLATION OF BY-PASSING CONGRESS!

THE CONSTITUTION AND SEPARATION OF POWERS DOES NOT SAY THE PRESIDENT / EXECUTIVE BRANCH CAN NOT MAKE LAW ... UNLESS THE PRESIDENT DOEWS NOT GET EVERYTHING HE WANTS!

I am sorry Obama did not get to rule as the Emperor he imagined himself to be, but the Constitution was written to prevent such things from happening, and even OBAMA recognized that he simply could not by-pass Congress to make law as he saw fit:



YET THAT IS EXACTLY WHAT HE DID ANYWAY:

"“We’re not just going to be waiting for legislation....I’ve got a pen and I’ve got a phone,” Obama said..."
-- Obama On Executive Actions: 'I've Got A Pen And I've Got A Phone'

 

[Richard-H]

The greatest irony is that their slogan is 'Make America Great again'. That seems to be nothing but a sick joke.

Sick to you maybe. But as a capitalist, I disagree.

If you are truly a capitalist, then you believe in the free-market. SInce illegal immigrants fulfill an market need, you would be against Trump's immigration policies and his positions on free trade.

Apparently, you are not the capitalist that you profess to being. You are a brain washed Trumpbot!

Nope. Strong borders create and safer and more stable economy. Free trade is only possible with fair trade. If we are getting hosed with an international deal there's little a US corporation can do about it.

No, fair trade and free trade are two different things. Fair trade implies government interference in the market to insure fair trade. It implies that government gets to determine what is and is not fair trade. It's as statist as statist gets.

Free trade means no government interference in the markets. Maybe you should read up on Milton Friedman's beliefs on free trade.

No, if you believe in government intervention in the markets, then you are against free trade and you are not a capitalist.

You apparently are a Trumpbot and a statist living under the delusion that you are a capitalist.

You don't know what you're babbling about. If a country slaps import duties on the US and we don't have a business savvy government we are going to take it in the shorts. You're just eager to get your hate on.

If a country slaps a tariff on our exports, then it is no longer 'free-trade'. Your strawman falls apart. NAFTA & TPP are free trade in both directions. We export billions of dollars of goods to both Canada & Mexico.

 

[Richard-H]

Ahhh, your rhetorical question.

Did hillary lie about anything?

Did Obama create the list of countries that Trump used?

Did bill sign the Iraq Liberation Act for WMDs before Booooosh took office?

Who signed the Commodity Futures Modernization Act which exempted credit-default swaps?

Ahhhhh, this is fun.

Was that too many questions? Ok, just answer one.

Did hillary lie about anything?

So, instead of replying honestly and actually answering a polite question, you got your jollies being a troll? Is your life really that sad and empty?

But what the hell. Did Hillary lie about anything? Repeatedly.
All False statements involving Hillary Clinton | PolitiFact

Your argument against Clinton is childish. Everyone on the planet has lied, especially every politician. Yes, I'm sure that even Bernie has lied.

Has Clinton broken any laws? No. She and her husband have been under constant investigation since the 1990s, yet no prosecutable offenses have been found. Bill Clinton was impeached, but the Senate found that he was not guilty of anything worth removing him from office.

On the other hand, Trump has been lying constantly and shamelessly. He also hasn't been found guilty of any prosecutable offenses worth removing him from office...YET.

He certainly has been sued and found guilty in so many civil suits it's incredible.

They have been in control of the law enforcement arm in every office they have held...he used to be the Attorney General of ARkansas.......he was the Governor...then President.....they have used their powers to keep any investigation from indicting them....

So your saying that the FBI Director Comey was biased towards Clinton? That the Benghazi commission was baised in Clinton's favor?

Holy crap are you delusional!!!!

 

[Iceweasel]

Sick to you maybe. But as a capitalist, I disagree.

If you are truly a capitalist, then you believe in the free-market. SInce illegal immigrants fulfill an market need, you would be against Trump's immigration policies and his positions on free trade.

Apparently, you are not the capitalist that you profess to being. You are a brain washed Trumpbot!

Nope. Strong borders create and safer and more stable economy. Free trade is only possible with fair trade. If we are getting hosed with an international deal there's little a US corporation can do about it.

No, fair trade and free trade are two different things. Fair trade implies government interference in the market to insure fair trade. It implies that government gets to determine what is and is not fair trade. It's as statist as statist gets.

Free trade means no government interference in the markets. Maybe you should read up on Milton Friedman's beliefs on free trade.

No, if you believe in government intervention in the markets, then you are against free trade and you are not a capitalist.

You apparently are a Trumpbot and a statist living under the delusion that you are a capitalist.

You don't know what you're babbling about. If a country slaps import duties on the US and we don't have a business savvy government we are going to take it in the shorts. You're just eager to get your hate on.

If a country slaps a tariff on our exports, then it is no longer 'free-trade'. Your strawman falls apart. NAFTA & TPP are free trade in both directions. We export billions of dollars of goods to both Canada & Mexico.

Yep, and they reciprocate. No tariffs. I think you're getting it.

We do have a massive trade imbalance with Mexico though so we need better negotiators.

 

[Richard-H]

If you are truly a capitalist, then you believe in the free-market. SInce illegal immigrants fulfill an market need, you would be against Trump's immigration policies and his positions on free trade.

Apparently, you are not the capitalist that you profess to being. You are a brain washed Trumpbot!

Nope. Strong borders create and safer and more stable economy. Free trade is only possible with fair trade. If we are getting hosed with an international deal there's little a US corporation can do about it.

No, fair trade and free trade are two different things. Fair trade implies government interference in the market to insure fair trade. It implies that government gets to determine what is and is not fair trade. It's as statist as statist gets.

Free trade means no government interference in the markets. Maybe you should read up on Milton Friedman's beliefs on free trade.

No, if you believe in government intervention in the markets, then you are against free trade and you are not a capitalist.

You apparently are a Trumpbot and a statist living under the delusion that you are a capitalist.

You don't know what you're babbling about. If a country slaps import duties on the US and we don't have a business savvy government we are going to take it in the shorts. You're just eager to get your hate on.

If a country slaps a tariff on our exports, then it is no longer 'free-trade'. Your strawman falls apart. NAFTA & TPP are free trade in both directions. We export billions of dollars of goods to both Canada & Mexico.

Yep, and they reciprocate. No tariffs. I think you're getting it.

We do have a massive trade imbalance with Mexico though so we need better negotiators.

A trade imbalance does not mean that they put tariffs on our goods. You seem to mix up terms quite often.

A trade imbalance is always going to happen in a free trade/ free market.

Once again, your desire for government intervention in the markets is statist, anti-capitalist and anti-free market.

 

[2aguy]

Ahhh, your rhetorical question.

Did hillary lie about anything?

Did Obama create the list of countries that Trump used?

Did bill sign the Iraq Liberation Act for WMDs before Booooosh took office?

Who signed the Commodity Futures Modernization Act which exempted credit-default swaps?

Ahhhhh, this is fun.

Was that too many questions? Ok, just answer one.

Did hillary lie about anything?

So, instead of replying honestly and actually answering a polite question, you got your jollies being a troll? Is your life really that sad and empty?

But what the hell. Did Hillary lie about anything? Repeatedly.
All False statements involving Hillary Clinton | PolitiFact

Your argument against Clinton is childish. Everyone on the planet has lied, especially every politician. Yes, I'm sure that even Bernie has lied.

Has Clinton broken any laws? No. She and her husband have been under constant investigation since the 1990s, yet no prosecutable offenses have been found. Bill Clinton was impeached, but the Senate found that he was not guilty of anything worth removing him from office.

On the other hand, Trump has been lying constantly and shamelessly. He also hasn't been found guilty of any prosecutable offenses worth removing him from office...YET.

He certainly has been sued and found guilty in so many civil suits it's incredible.

They have been in control of the law enforcement arm in every office they have held...he used to be the Attorney General of ARkansas.......he was the Governor...then President.....they have used their powers to keep any investigation from indicting them....

So your saying that the FBI Director Comey was biased towards Clinton? That the Benghazi commission was baised in Clinton's favor?

Holy crap are you delusional!!!!

Comey cleared clinton.....twice...he soaked up the coverage of her collapse, and took over the coverage the week before the election...and then cleared her again..........moron.

And the Bhengazi commission...didn't even talk to the survivors.....

I am talking about their ability to control investigations into criminal activity. Did bill the rapist meet with the Attorney General while his wife was under investigation for federal crimes? Did the FBI put hilary under oath or record their interview with hilary? Did they go back, after it was apparent she lied to congress on multiple times and arrest her for making false statements to congress? Or to them under oath?

 

[easyt65]

So your saying that the FBI Director Comey was biased towards Clinton? That the Benghazi commission was baised in Clinton's favor? Holy crap are you delusional!!!!

I do not know what 'you' should call it; however, violations of the law were completely ignored.
- Violating FOIA and the Federal Records Act
- Having access to Top Secret Info AFTER having left the State Department and her Clearance Deactivated
- Giving access to classified info to persons without any or the right security clearance levels (Her IT Tech, the company that kept her server in their bathroom, her lawyers, HER MAID)
- etc....

Yes, yes we know Obama and his 'owned' USAGs never pressed charges, but that's like Bonnie never pressing charges against Clyde. ANYONE with any experience with classified, handling classified, security procedures, etc recognized the obvious crimes / laws broken the moment they heard the laundry list of what she had done.

There's an Ex-USN enlisted member sitting in jail for having far, FAR less that what Hillary did - a complete comparative travesty of justice, and Hillary is out free, considering her 3rd (failed) attempt at running for President in 2020...when she should be in jail.

 

[Richard-H]

O.K. Trumpbots, I got some news for you regarding Clinton's emails and why she did nothing illegal:

As Secretary of state she has the final say in what is and is not classified information regarding matters of the department of state. Only the President of teh United States has the authority to over ride her.

Those people who decide that information is classified are subordinate to the Secretary of State and the decision to declassify is the prerogative of the Secretary of State.

So by means of the fact that Clinton had the final authority as to what is and is not classified, she was not breaking the law by sending emails that some subordinate had classified.

Or do you not understand the concept of seniority?

 

[Theowl32]

O.K. Trumpbots, I got some news for you regarding Clinton's emails and why she did nothing illegal:

As Secretary of state she has the final say in what is and is not classified information regarding matters of the department of state. Only the President of teh United States has the authority to over ride her.

Those people who decide that information is classified are subordinate to the Secretary of State and the decision to declassify is the prerogative of the Secretary of State.

So by means of the fact that Clinton had the final authority as to what is and is not classified, she was not breaking the law by sending emails that some subordinate had classified.

Or do you not understand the concept of seniority?

You are a loser. Can't argue with a mindless parrot. Pauly want a cracker?

Oh loooook!!! Over theeeere!!!!

It's the global warming!!!!!

Ahhhhhh!!!

 

[Richard-H]

So your saying that the FBI Director Comey was biased towards Clinton? That the Benghazi commission was baised in Clinton's favor? Holy crap are you delusional!!!!

I do not know what 'you' should call it; however, violations of the law were completely ignored.
- Violating FOIA and the Federal Records Act
- Having access to Top Secret Info AFTER having left the State Department and her Clearance Deactivated
- Giving access to classified info to persons without any or the right security clearance levels (Her IT Tech, the company that kept her server in their bathroom, her lawyers, HER MAID)
- etc....

Yes, yes we know Obama and his 'owned' USAGs never pressed charges, but that's like Bonnie never pressing charges against Clyde. ANYONE with any experience with classified, handling classified, security procedures, etc recognized the obvious crimes / laws broken the moment they heard the laundry list of what she had done.

There's an Ex-USN enlisted member sitting in jail for having far, FAR less that what Hillary did - a complete comparative travesty of justice, and Hillary is out free, considering her 3rd (failed) attempt at running for President in 2020...when she should be in jail.

It's apparent that you know nothing about security clearance or servers:

First, security clearancse are never deactivated. Anyone that has a security clearance has it for life. They are limited by the 'need to know' clause. Once they no longer server in a job where they 'need to know' classified information to do their job, they should no longer be receiving classified information. So if Clinton was receiving classified information after her tenure as Secretary of State, it's the individuals who sent her that material that are guilty, not her.

Second, no one keeps servers in anybody's bathroom. I don't know where you got that piece of misinformation or whether you just made it up, but servers are EXTREMELY susceptible to humidity. They are kept in temperature and humidity controlled rooms. If Clinton's server was kept in a bathroom it would stop working in a matter of a few days.

Third, you have no idea whether the techs that worked her servers had security clearances. Given the millions of tech workers that have security clearances, most probably they did. I doubt anyone is allowed near the Clintons without extreme vetting.

Fourth, if your so concerned with this issue why haven't you insisted that Colin Powell and Condolessa RIce be investigated? They also had private email servers. For that matter why should each and every person with a security clearance and a private email account be investigated? When Clinton's server data was subpoenaed there was no evidence of wrong doing. All that was known was that she had a private email server nothing more.

Finally, the reason why Comey did not recommend prosecution was that there was no reason to prosecute.

 

[Richard-H]

O.K. Trumpbots, I got some news for you regarding Clinton's emails and why she did nothing illegal:

As Secretary of state she has the final say in what is and is not classified information regarding matters of the department of state. Only the President of teh United States has the authority to over ride her.

Those people who decide that information is classified are subordinate to the Secretary of State and the decision to declassify is the prerogative of the Secretary of State.

So by means of the fact that Clinton had the final authority as to what is and is not classified, she was not breaking the law by sending emails that some subordinate had classified.

Or do you not understand the concept of seniority?

You are a loser. Can't argue with a mindless parrot. Pauly want a cracker?

Oh loooook!!! Over theeeere!!!!

It's the global warming!!!!!

Ahhhhhh!!!

So, you have nothing intelligent to say, no way of refuting my arguments, so you resort to childish insults...typical Trumpbot.

 

[Richard-H]

BTW comrades - Your efforts to undermine America by faking the election of your Manchurian candidate are falling apart quickly.

Good try though! All is fair in love and cold war, right?

I'm going to lunch now. Enjoy your Vodka!

 

[easyt65]

It's apparent that you know nothing about security clearance or servers: First, security clearancse are never deactivated.

Ok, I stopped reading your ignorant BULLSHIT at this very 1st point, as you proved everything else you had to say is WORTHLESS!

Aside from the standard reasons - Clearance becomes inactive once your service ends or having it revoked....

Hillary Clinton, as Secretary of State, ha a Security Clearance with the authority to access classified information due to her position. The moment she walked out the door, no longer as Secretary of State, she had a VALID Security Clearance that was not 'Active', meaning she no longer had ZERO authority to have any access to any classified, as she use to have.

The REASON she was required to law to turn in ALL classified in her possession before she stepped out that door was because she no longer had legal authority to acquire, obtain, or POSSESS that classified information. She no longer had a 'Need to Know' - she was an ordinary civilian just like you and I. The 'Non-Disclosure' document she signed just before she became that civilian was her acknowledging this fact and that she would not possess, talk about, or SHARE any of this information, even as a civilian.

As Secretary of State Hillary was also 'Read Into' highly classified program ABOVE even TOP SECRET. Before she left her position she was 'Read OUT' of those programs - her clearance to access those program was 'de-activated' / 'terminated'.
-- Interestingly enough during the investigation the WH declared they would not release some information found on Hillary's Personal Server because it was 'so classified that it would cause grave danger to our national security'. THE VERY POSSESSION OF THIS INFORMATION BY HILLARY CLINTON AFTER SHE HAD LEFT THE STATE DEPARTMENT WAS A CRIME! (And it is damn-well illegal for Hillary to have her freakin' MAID printing out CLASSIFIED documents! For THIS alone her Security Clearance should have been pulled, deactivated, terminated, NEVER to be given back to her again!)

Have a nice day....

 

[Iceweasel]

Nope. Strong borders create and safer and more stable economy. Free trade is only possible with fair trade. If we are getting hosed with an international deal there's little a US corporation can do about it.

No, fair trade and free trade are two different things. Fair trade implies government interference in the market to insure fair trade. It implies that government gets to determine what is and is not fair trade. It's as statist as statist gets.

Free trade means no government interference in the markets. Maybe you should read up on Milton Friedman's beliefs on free trade.

No, if you believe in government intervention in the markets, then you are against free trade and you are not a capitalist.

You apparently are a Trumpbot and a statist living under the delusion that you are a capitalist.

You don't know what you're babbling about. If a country slaps import duties on the US and we don't have a business savvy government we are going to take it in the shorts. You're just eager to get your hate on.

If a country slaps a tariff on our exports, then it is no longer 'free-trade'. Your strawman falls apart. NAFTA & TPP are free trade in both directions. We export billions of dollars of goods to both Canada & Mexico.

Yep, and they reciprocate. No tariffs. I think you're getting it.

We do have a massive trade imbalance with Mexico though so we need better negotiators.

A trade imbalance does not mean that they put tariffs on our goods. You seem to mix up terms quite often.

A trade imbalance is always going to happen in a free trade/ free market.

Once again, your desire for government intervention in the markets is statist, anti-capitalist and anti-free market.

When did I say a trade balance meant a tariff was in place. Pop your head out of your ass.

"We do have a massive trade imbalance with Mexico though so we need better negotiators."

No, a trade imbalance on that massive scale isn't a given, especially when many US companies have fled there. They don't have the regulations we do.
Whatever point you're trying to make isn't cutting it, capitalism doesn't mean we have to operate unevenly.

 

[wjmacguffin]

BTW comrades - Your efforts to undermine America by faking the election of your Manchurian candidate are falling apart quickly.

Good try though! All is fair in love and cold war, right?

I'm going to lunch now. Enjoy your Vodka!

Hey Richard, how about you fuck off and derail someone else's thread? Seriously, while I appreciate your liberal side, go start your own thread to argue this stuff.