Jump to content
IGNORED

Trump 21: Tweeting Us Into the Apocalypse


Destiny

Recommended Posts

2 hours ago, GreyhoundFan said:

John Podesta wrote a quick op-ed about the crap twitler tweeted about him

For some reason, Podesta's response to yet another asinine presidential tweet had me laughing merrily (better than crying, right?).  I loved how Podesta framed his response - he's on a road trip, discovered the whole world was talking about him (according to Trump), and God knows what is next.  It reminded me of how Comey learned he was fired via a newscast. 

Quote

As president, Trump is supposed to be doing his job representing the United States in a respectable fashion to make sure we maintain and enhance our standing around the world. Instead, he has his face glued to his phone. It’s really sad that the U.S. president can’t get his head in the game even at the G-20 summit of world leaders.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 568
  • Created
  • Last Reply

I read somewhere that reservations were made last year by the Obama WH, but after the election, they were cancelled by none other than Uncle Joe! LOL! I would love for that to be true, but I seriously doubt it. But what a great move!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, GreyhoundFan said:

I'm surprised he isn't blaming CNN and/or Hillary. And, you know that if things had gone better in November, her administration would have been organized and made reservations plenty early for this summit.

And I think if Mrs. Clinton went and checked right away and all the luxury hotels in November were booked solid she'd be willing to compromise and go for something that was not quite five stars.  And most definitely not act like a fucking orange toddler.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 hours ago, Cartmann99 said:

Are those pink shoes in the picture of the dress actually in style right now?!?  :kitty-shifty:

From the front, they look like the sort of shoes my grandma had to wear in the 1970s because she had a lot of trouble with her feet. The  heel is kind of interesting, but the view from the front is just too orthopedic looking for me.

https://www.stylebop.com/en-us/women/leather-sandals-271885.html

 $549 for my grandma's old shoes?!? *laughs hysterically*

 

Well, the heels alone on those sandals would be a no-no for me but combined with that front view that makes the foot look...puffy? And the price? Oh, no no no no.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 hours ago, 47of74 said:

This doesn't make sense. Are they saying that Obama intended to leave Hillary without a place to stay for G20? Because, as Trump has said, no one thought he would win. I guess he is insinuating that the reservation needed to be made after the election but before he was in office?

Maybe if they had someone in the White House who actually knows something about management this wouldn't have happened. But since this whine is coming from a man who owns multiple hotels something seems fishy to me.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Not sure if this is the best place to put this but:
Hundreds of voters un-register after Trump voter fraud panel demands info

Quote

Hundreds of voters are responding to the possibility their information will be shared with President Trump’s election integrity panel by withdrawing their voter registration, according to a Friday report.

In Colorado, one of the states that is complying with part of the commission request, two clerks have seen a significant increase in voters withdrawing their voter registration, Denver’s ABC affiliate reported.

In Denver, one clerk has seen a 2,150 percent increase in people withdrawing as voters over the past since July 3 compared to the first non-holiday week before.

Colorado allows voters to withdraw online or make their information confidential by paying a fee.

The Presidential Advisory Commission on Election Integrity last week requested all 50 states to upload publicly available voter information to a federal website. The information requested, in a letter signed by Vice Chair Kris Kobach, includes voter names, birth dates, the last four digits of Social Security numbers and party affiliation.

Colorado Secretary of State Wayne Williams is releasing publicly available voter information including full name, address, party affiliation and date the person registered, phone number, gender identity, birth year and voting history.

The state will not provide Social Security numbers, driver’s license numbers, full date of birth or email addresses.

A majority of states are refusing to supply all or part of the information the commission requested.

Which is what he and his fucking minions want so repugs can win future elections (again with Russia's help) Also doesn't Colorado have a democratic governor?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Is it wrong that the first thought that came to mind when I read the title of this article is, "a childish douchecanoe"? "Who is the real Donald Trump?"

Spoiler

President Trump’s trip to Poland and the Group of 20 summit in Germany is yet another reminder that his presidency has the qualities of a three-ring circus, with activity coming from a variety of directions all at the same time and with no easy way in the moment to decide what is most important or credible.

Two events dominated the president’s European visit: his eagerly anticipated meeting with Russian President Vladimir Putin on Friday and his tone-setting speech about the future of the West a day earlier in Warsaw. Each rightly drew worldwide attention. Both could prove to be potential foundational moments in the Trump presidency.

But there were other discordant moments that distracted from the big set pieces. They were a reminder of how difficult it is to find consistency or predictability in Trump’s presidency. They included the president’s public equivocation about Russian interference in the 2016 election and his dissing of U.S. intelligence capabilities during a news conference in Poland, and then a bizarre and inaccurate tweet on Friday morning about John Podesta and Russian hacking hours before he was to see Putin.

No recent meeting between world leaders came with such advance hype as the session between Trump and Putin. That’s because no relationship has been more fraught for Trump, due to Russia’s efforts to meddle in his behalf during the election backdropped by Trump’s regular expressions of admiration for Putin.

This was more than an opportunity for Trump and Putin to get acquainted and to take a measure of each other, more than a moment for photo ops and handshakes and other trappings that often signify little. Dangers from North Korea’s nuclear pursuits, the war in Syria (where the two agreed to try to enforce a cease-fire in the southwestern part of the country) and the overall fight against the Islamic State demanded serious and presumably frank discussions.

That their meeting lasted far longer than scheduled — at two hours and 15 minutes, it was more than twice as long as planned — was not a surprise. The leaders of the nations with the world’s biggest nuclear arsenals and with clear differences about many issues had a potential agenda that could have kept them together hours longer. The lengthy meeting was a constructive sign, given the state of the relationship.

What isn’t known is what Trump, who is quick to judge the strengths and weaknesses of people, made of Putin. Did he emerge from their two hours of talks and sparring with a different impression of the Russian leader? Secretary of State Rex Tillerson said the two had good chemistry. Trump is susceptible to flattery. Did he leave with a feeling that Putin was more trustworthy or less trustworthy than when he entered the room?

Then, of course, there was the elephant in the room, which was Russia’s role in the U.S. election. Pregame speculation questioned whether Trump would even address it face to face. He did, but there were conflicting accounts of what was said on that topic.

Tillerson said Trump had started the meeting by raising the issue of Russian interference and that Putin had offered what is his standard denial that the Russians did anything nefarious during the 2016 campaign.

Just how forcefully Trump pressed the issue — Tillerson said the president brought it up more than once — is so far unknown. There was no immediate indication of any softening of the sanctions imposed by the Obama administration in retaliation to the hacking, which has been a Russian goal. But the readouts suggested that Trump had no appetite for a sustained argument about Russia’s behavior.

As he has signaled in other interactions with other world leaders, Trump is transactional and therefore willing to look past such things as human rights abuses and other transgressions that have drawn rebukes from previous U.S. administrations as he pursues other goals. Whether that approach will produce desired results hasn’t been given a full test, although it has not prompted the kind of tough action by China toward North Korea that Trump wants.

Tillerson told reporters in Hamburg that neither leader was eager to re-litigate the past, that their differences on Russian meddling were “intractable” and that each was looking for a way to put the relationship between these two adversaries on firmer and more positive footing.

On one key point, the accounts of the meeting were at odds. Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov said Trump had listened to Putin’s denial of interference, had accepted those statements and had dismissed the investigation into Russian interference. Tillerson said Putin, despite the denials, had nonetheless agreed to talks about noninterference in U.S. elections.

What Trump said in response to Putin’s denial is a critical question, given what he said the day before at a news conference. Asked by reporters on Thursday whether he fully accepted U.S. intelligence findings of Russian interference, Trump again declined to give a clear answer. “I think it could very well have been Russia, but I think it could well have been other countries,” he said. He added that “a lot of people interfere” and have been for some time. “Nobody really knows for sure,” he said.

If that is Trump’s true belief, and he has said it often enough over many months to make it seem as though it is what he thinks, then how exactly did he raise the issue directly with Putin, and how forcefully did he press the case when Putin offered his denial? Having raised it with the Russian leader, is that the end of it for the president, at least in terms of what he plans to do either to punish the Russians or aggressively look to prevent a repeat performance in 2018 or 2020?

His true feelings may have come out on Friday morning when he tweeted, “Everyone here is talking about why John Podesta refused to give the DNC server to the FBI and the CIA. Disgraceful!” There are any number of inaccuracies in that tweet, and Podesta, on a road trip with his wife, pointed them out in a response published by The Washington Post. Trump’s tweet was a reminder that, on matters related to Russia and the election, the president continues to look for diversions and digressions, raising more questions about what transpired in his meeting with Putin.

Trump’s speech in Warsaw drew more positive reviews than his address to NATO when he was in Europe in May. In Poland, he unequivocally reaffirmed the U.S. commitment to Article 5 of the NATO treaty dealing with common defense. In May, he pointedly did not.

His speech was nationalistic in tone, yet different from some in the past. Critics found the speech still too dark in tone. The Economist called it a departure from past administrations, and not that far from the “American carnage” language of his inaugural address, a philosophy that champions closed borders and that does not celebrate pluralistic values.

More positively, the Wall Street Journal said that, in his “affirmative defense of the western tradition,” Trump “offered the core of what could become a governing philosophy.” The editorial ended with this statement, “It was an important and, we hope, a defining speech — for the Trump presidency and for Donald Trump himself.”

That, like the question of what Trump truly thinks about Putin, Russia and the interference in American democracy, is the persistent puzzle about this president. Are speeches like the one he gave in Warsaw genuine expressions of his views or more the assembled consensus of his advisers? Are his views expressed best in readouts by advisers from his private discussions with the likes of Putin, or by what he says during his infrequent news conferences or his more frequent tweets? Answers still to come.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm currently trapped at a home with Fox News lovers.  I could seriously start a drinking game using only the words "fake news" and  "liberal."  Some (older white guy) douche was trying to say that the life expectancy for white people is going down because of a rise in suicides and the opioid crisis.  But black people aren't being affected by suicides and the opioid crisis, according to Mr. Douche, who is a professor somewhere (I missed the beginning of the interview, so I don't know what school gets to provide him with a paycheck).  So, he argued, black people's life expectancy is rising, at the cost of the white people.  Seriously??????

And about the whole no-sleeveless outfit for women thing,  Judge Jeanine Pirro (or, as I refer to her, That Loud Woman), is wearing a sleeveless dress while interviewing Jason Chaffetz.  Jason doesn't seem to mind, but he's not in Congress anymore, either.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

"Trump leaves leaders fearing the future as G-20 summit closes"

Spoiler

HAMBURG — President Trump and other world leaders on Saturday emerged from two days of talks unable to resolve key differences on core issues like climate change and globalization, fueling worries that global summits may be ineffective in the Trump era.

The divisions at the Group of 20 summit of world economic powers were most bitter on climate change, where 19 leaders formed a unified front against Trump. But even in areas of nominal compromise like trade, top European leaders said they have little faith that an agreement forged today could hold tomorrow.

The disagreements slapped an exclamation point at the end of this year’s G-20 summit, a venue better known for sleepy bromides about easy-to-agree issues. Even as negotiators made a good-faith effort to bargain toward consensus, European leaders said that a chasm has opened between the United States and the rest of the world.

“Our world has never been so divided,” French President Emmanuel Macron said as the talks broke up. “Centrifugal forces have never been so powerful. Our common goods have never been so threatened.”

Macron said world leaders found common ground on terrorism but were otherwise split on numerous important topics. He also said there were rising concerns about “authoritarian regimes, and even within the Western world, there are real divisions and uncertainties that didn't exist just a few short years ago.”

“I will not concede anything in the direction of those who are pushing against multilateralism,” Macron said, without directly referring to Trump. “We need better coordination, more coordination. We need those organizations that were created out of the Second World War. Otherwise we will be moving back toward narrow-minded nationalism.”

German Chancellor Angela Merkel, who hosted the summit in the port city of Hamburg, said there had been some areas of agreement. But she did little to hide her disappointment about U.S. actions on climate change.

“Wherever there is no consensus that can be achieved, disagreement has to be made clear,” Merkel said at the end of the summit. “Unfortunately, and I deplore this, the United States of America left the climate agreement.” 

“I am gratified to note that the other 19 members of the G-20 feel the Paris agreement is irreversible,” Merkel said.

Perhaps as a way to emphasize global unity – minus the United States – Macron announced there would be another climate summit in Paris in December to mark the two-year anniversary of the climate accord.

On trade, G-20 leaders agreed to try to address what the White House claims is a global steel glut. Trump officials have threatened to restrict steel imports, risking the start of a global trade war, after it has repeatedly alleged that China subsidizes the industry, which helps it lower prices and put U.S. steel jobs at risk. 

The promises to draw up policy changes on steel production were a victory, White House officials said.

But with the U.S. decision to impose steel restrictions still up in the air, Merkel said Saturday’s agreements did little to resolve the future.

“The negotiations remain difficult, but we have been able to get satisfactory results in place,” Merkel said. “Now, what’s going to happen tomorrow or the day after, I cannot make any predictions on.”

One official said that Europeans were sharply unsettled by their encounters with Trump – and they recognized that may be the White House intention.

“It seems clear that President Trump is committed to being less predictable and not necessarily seeing predictability as positive in foreign policy,” said the European official, who requested anonymity in order to candidly assess the White House.

The summit came after Trump softened his opposition to some other multilateral institutions. After challenging the NATO defense alliance, he endorsed its all-for-one, one-for-all principles just ahead of the G-20 summit. And he has agreed to abide by the North American Free Trade Agreement, or NAFTA, so long as it can be renegotiated.

White House officials also saw the potential to draw a win from the Hamburg summit, even if their expectations were measured. They hoped to explain Trump’s priorities and find some compromises, even small ones.

Their assessment of the outcome was sharply different from Merkel and Macron’s cautious tone.

“It’s been a really great success,” a senior White House official who was not authorized to speak on the record said Saturday before Trump departed for the United States. “We are going to get some of the priorities of the administration” out of this summit.”

White House officials pointed to several minor changes to the G-20’s official statement on trade policy, saying it better reflects the Trump administration’s point of view.

“We recognise that the benefits of international trade and investment have not been shared widely enough,” the G-20 countries said in a joint statement. “We need to better enable our people to seize the opportunities.”

Similar language was not in the G-20 agreement in 2016 before Trump’s election.

The White House also won a bitter battle over its desire to include language that promoted U.S. fossils fuels in the final statement — wording that European leaders sharply opposed.

Trump also prodded other countries to intensify a review of the overproduction of steel, something Trump alleges has ravaged the U.S. steel industry because it cannot compete with cheaper prices from countries like China. In response to the White House push, the G-20 agreed to share information about steel production by August and to publish a formal report with recommendations by November. There likely won’t be consequences if the deadlines are missed, but it creates a formal process for the White House to amplify its complaints.

Global steel manufacturing has soared, with China accounting for half the world’s production compared to 15 percent in 2000, although the U.S. imports relatively little from China. Beijing agreed to the new G-20 steel requirements on Saturday.

Although the shifts may constitute short-term victories for Trump, one former senior IMF official said Washington may have incurred long-term losses.

“It comes at a cost of eroding U.S. leadership," said Eswar Prasad, a senior professor at Cornell University. “If even in calm times such rifts are exposed, it could make it more complicated for the group to work together in more complicated circumstances.”

Trump also had the chance to forge one-on-one relationships with leaders as the summit unfolded around him. It included his first face-to-face meeting with Russian President Vladimir Putin, which stretched more than two hours, and also his first post-election meeting with Mexican President Enrique Peña Nieto. 

Relations between the U.S. and Mexico have been strained since Trump took office, in part because of the U.S. leader’s insistence that Mexico would pay for the creation of a new wall along the U.S. border. When reporters were briefly allowed in the room for their meeting on Friday and he was asked whether he still wanted Mexico to pay for the wall, Trump responded “absolutely.”

Peña Nieto did not agree to pay for the construction of the wall during the meeting, and a person briefed on the discussions said Trump did not press the issue during their talks.

There were other signs that Trump enjoyed the visit. At a dinner and reception for world leaders and their spouses Friday night, Trump was among the last to leave. At an event Saturday morning to announce an initiative to fund female entrepreneurship, Trump called Merkel “incredible,” Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau “spectacular,” and declared that World Bank President Jim Yong Kim “would be a great appointment.”

Still, Trump did little to celebrate the G-20’s outcome. President Barack Obama typically marked the end of global summits with a news conference, weighing in on issues he and other leaders discussed.

And on Saturday, many other world leaders, including Putin and Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan, held lengthy briefings with reporters in Hamburg. 

Trump had a different plan. When the summit ended, the president and his aides got in their motorcade, went right to the airport and flew back to the United States.

Gee, I'm so glad he enjoyed the visit. I mean, I guess he sees it as a vacation, instead of, oh, I don't know, HIS JOB?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, GreyhoundFan said:

"Trump leaves leaders fearing the future as G-20 summit closes"

  Hide contents

HAMBURG — President Trump and other world leaders on Saturday emerged from two days of talks unable to resolve key differences on core issues like climate change and globalization, fueling worries that global summits may be ineffective in the Trump era.

The divisions at the Group of 20 summit of world economic powers were most bitter on climate change, where 19 leaders formed a unified front against Trump. But even in areas of nominal compromise like trade, top European leaders said they have little faith that an agreement forged today could hold tomorrow.

The disagreements slapped an exclamation point at the end of this year’s G-20 summit, a venue better known for sleepy bromides about easy-to-agree issues. Even as negotiators made a good-faith effort to bargain toward consensus, European leaders said that a chasm has opened between the United States and the rest of the world.

“Our world has never been so divided,” French President Emmanuel Macron said as the talks broke up. “Centrifugal forces have never been so powerful. Our common goods have never been so threatened.”

Macron said world leaders found common ground on terrorism but were otherwise split on numerous important topics. He also said there were rising concerns about “authoritarian regimes, and even within the Western world, there are real divisions and uncertainties that didn't exist just a few short years ago.”

“I will not concede anything in the direction of those who are pushing against multilateralism,” Macron said, without directly referring to Trump. “We need better coordination, more coordination. We need those organizations that were created out of the Second World War. Otherwise we will be moving back toward narrow-minded nationalism.”

German Chancellor Angela Merkel, who hosted the summit in the port city of Hamburg, said there had been some areas of agreement. But she did little to hide her disappointment about U.S. actions on climate change.

“Wherever there is no consensus that can be achieved, disagreement has to be made clear,” Merkel said at the end of the summit. “Unfortunately, and I deplore this, the United States of America left the climate agreement.” 

“I am gratified to note that the other 19 members of the G-20 feel the Paris agreement is irreversible,” Merkel said.

Perhaps as a way to emphasize global unity – minus the United States – Macron announced there would be another climate summit in Paris in December to mark the two-year anniversary of the climate accord.

On trade, G-20 leaders agreed to try to address what the White House claims is a global steel glut. Trump officials have threatened to restrict steel imports, risking the start of a global trade war, after it has repeatedly alleged that China subsidizes the industry, which helps it lower prices and put U.S. steel jobs at risk. 

The promises to draw up policy changes on steel production were a victory, White House officials said.

But with the U.S. decision to impose steel restrictions still up in the air, Merkel said Saturday’s agreements did little to resolve the future.

“The negotiations remain difficult, but we have been able to get satisfactory results in place,” Merkel said. “Now, what’s going to happen tomorrow or the day after, I cannot make any predictions on.”

One official said that Europeans were sharply unsettled by their encounters with Trump – and they recognized that may be the White House intention.

“It seems clear that President Trump is committed to being less predictable and not necessarily seeing predictability as positive in foreign policy,” said the European official, who requested anonymity in order to candidly assess the White House.

The summit came after Trump softened his opposition to some other multilateral institutions. After challenging the NATO defense alliance, he endorsed its all-for-one, one-for-all principles just ahead of the G-20 summit. And he has agreed to abide by the North American Free Trade Agreement, or NAFTA, so long as it can be renegotiated.

White House officials also saw the potential to draw a win from the Hamburg summit, even if their expectations were measured. They hoped to explain Trump’s priorities and find some compromises, even small ones.

Their assessment of the outcome was sharply different from Merkel and Macron’s cautious tone.

“It’s been a really great success,” a senior White House official who was not authorized to speak on the record said Saturday before Trump departed for the United States. “We are going to get some of the priorities of the administration” out of this summit.”

White House officials pointed to several minor changes to the G-20’s official statement on trade policy, saying it better reflects the Trump administration’s point of view.

“We recognise that the benefits of international trade and investment have not been shared widely enough,” the G-20 countries said in a joint statement. “We need to better enable our people to seize the opportunities.”

Similar language was not in the G-20 agreement in 2016 before Trump’s election.

The White House also won a bitter battle over its desire to include language that promoted U.S. fossils fuels in the final statement — wording that European leaders sharply opposed.

Trump also prodded other countries to intensify a review of the overproduction of steel, something Trump alleges has ravaged the U.S. steel industry because it cannot compete with cheaper prices from countries like China. In response to the White House push, the G-20 agreed to share information about steel production by August and to publish a formal report with recommendations by November. There likely won’t be consequences if the deadlines are missed, but it creates a formal process for the White House to amplify its complaints.

Global steel manufacturing has soared, with China accounting for half the world’s production compared to 15 percent in 2000, although the U.S. imports relatively little from China. Beijing agreed to the new G-20 steel requirements on Saturday.

Although the shifts may constitute short-term victories for Trump, one former senior IMF official said Washington may have incurred long-term losses.

“It comes at a cost of eroding U.S. leadership," said Eswar Prasad, a senior professor at Cornell University. “If even in calm times such rifts are exposed, it could make it more complicated for the group to work together in more complicated circumstances.”

Trump also had the chance to forge one-on-one relationships with leaders as the summit unfolded around him. It included his first face-to-face meeting with Russian President Vladimir Putin, which stretched more than two hours, and also his first post-election meeting with Mexican President Enrique Peña Nieto. 

Relations between the U.S. and Mexico have been strained since Trump took office, in part because of the U.S. leader’s insistence that Mexico would pay for the creation of a new wall along the U.S. border. When reporters were briefly allowed in the room for their meeting on Friday and he was asked whether he still wanted Mexico to pay for the wall, Trump responded “absolutely.”

Peña Nieto did not agree to pay for the construction of the wall during the meeting, and a person briefed on the discussions said Trump did not press the issue during their talks.

There were other signs that Trump enjoyed the visit. At a dinner and reception for world leaders and their spouses Friday night, Trump was among the last to leave. At an event Saturday morning to announce an initiative to fund female entrepreneurship, Trump called Merkel “incredible,” Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau “spectacular,” and declared that World Bank President Jim Yong Kim “would be a great appointment.”

Still, Trump did little to celebrate the G-20’s outcome. President Barack Obama typically marked the end of global summits with a news conference, weighing in on issues he and other leaders discussed.

And on Saturday, many other world leaders, including Putin and Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan, held lengthy briefings with reporters in Hamburg. 

Trump had a different plan. When the summit ended, the president and his aides got in their motorcade, went right to the airport and flew back to the United States.

Gee, I'm so glad he enjoyed the visit. I mean, I guess he sees it as a vacation, instead of, oh, I don't know, HIS JOB?

It's only a vacation if he gets to play golf (or "not" play golf, depending on who is reporting on the trip).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

He really is a creepy fuck. 

Putin looks decidedly uncomfortable and is probably very glad he hasn't got a pussy...

 

He's also a sad little fuck whom nobody wants to associate with.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Oh. Did not see this coming. At all.

 >end sarcasm<

 

 

 

Tom-Jan Meeus, a Dutch journalist, tweeted:
"Trump and Putin working together in cyber security is like the FBI working with Pablo Escobar to combat cocaine trafficking."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

He is seriously one of the stupidest men alive. Although his sycophants are even worse

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Raging Rufus!

This is his latest tweet:

I'm adding a screenshot of a part of the comments. Somebody got up his craw, that's for sure :pb_lol:

59622a1e6942d_screenshottttweet.thumb.png.a2b22a4d4c9667a0bb21f010134a2b35.png

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, bashfulpixie said:

He is seriously one of the stupidest men alive. Although his sycophants are even worse

Not Fake News!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Aussie journalist has a brutal take down of the presidunce:

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, bashfulpixie said:

He is seriously one of the stupidest men alive. Although his sycophants are even worse

Reminds me of Pat Robertson. Still in the public eye, going on and on with ridiculous statements, LONG after family should have removed him from the public eye.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 hours ago, JMarie said:

And about the whole no-sleeveless outfit for women thing,  Judge Jeanine Pirro (or, as I refer to her, That Loud Woman), is wearing a sleeveless dress while interviewing Jason Chaffetz.  Jason doesn't seem to mind, but he's not in Congress anymore, either.

Oh, it's okay for him to see wemenz in sleeveless dresses now, he's at Faux where the short shift rules! Or should I say short shrift?

3 hours ago, fraurosena said:

Oh. Did not see this coming. At all.

 >end sarcasm<

 

 

 

Tom-Jan Meeus, a Dutch journalist, tweeted:
"Trump and Putin working together in cyber security is like the FBI working with Pablo Escobar to combat cocaine trafficking."

OMG, again with the Obama shit? :pb_rollseyes: 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Wait.Wait. Wait. Where did this MAGA song come from?! Why is this real life?! I just watched the video with wide-eye saying what the fuck over and over again. Though I wish that was a real response but it doesn't have the blue check plus it said trumpr.

Did he even speak at the G20? Cause he didn't make it to meetings.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@candygirl200413 -- he gave a few scripted remarks.

"Trump vows to ‘move forward in working constructively with Russia’ after Putin denied election hacking"

Spoiler

President Trump vowed Sunday to “move forward in working constructively with Russia,” including forming a cybersecurity unit between the two countries, after Russian President Vladimir Putin denied any interference in the 2016 U.S. election.

Trump's pledge to partner with Putin on cybersecurity drew swift and stern denunciations from both Democratic and Republican officials, who described the U.S. president as dangerously naive for trusting his Russian counterpart.

Trump said he “strongly pressed” Putin twice about Russian meddling in the election during their Friday meeting in Germany and that Putin “vehemently denied it.”

U.S. intelligence agencies have concluded definitively that Russian authorities tried to influence the election in Trump's favor with illegal hacking and propaganda and other activities. But Trump's public comments on the matter have been far less definitive, varying widely from tepid acknowledgment to outright doubt about Russia's role.

...

Trump did not say whether he accepted Putin's denial, stating only, “I've already given my opinion.” Putin and Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov have said that Trump believed Putin's assurances that Russia did not interfere in the election.

White House chief of staff Reince Priebus disputed Putin and Lavrov's accounts. “It's not true,” Priebus, who did not attend the Trump-Putin meeting, said on “Fox News Sunday.” “The president absolutely did not believe the denial of President Putin.”

Under questioning from Fox host Chris Wallace, Preibus showed varying degrees of certainty about whether Trump believes Russia meddled in the election.

“He said they probably meddled in the election. They did meddle in the election,” Priebus said, seeming to grow more certain. But, then, Priebus seemed to back off: “Yes, he believes that Russia probably committed all of these acts that we've been told of. But he also believes that other countries also participated in this activity.”

Trump's Sunday morning statements came in a defiant tweets he issued from the White House, to which he returned late Saturday after a three-day visit to Hamburg, where he met with Putin and other world leaders on the sidelines of the Group of 20 summit.

In his tweets, Trump repeated his false accusation that President Barack Obama did “NOTHING” after first learning of Russia's role in hacking Democratic email servers to influence the outcome of the election. He also chided the news media, among other statements.

John Brennan, who served as CIA director under Obama and ran the agency's response to Russia's election interference, chastised Trump on Sunday for repeatedly casting doubt on the conclusions of the intelligence community, including at a news conference last week in Poland.

“I seriously question whether or not Mr. Putin heard from Mr. Trump what he needed to about the assault on our democratic institutions,” Brennan said on NBC's “Meet the Press.”

Brennan added of Trump, “He said it’s an 'honor' to meet President Putin. An honor to meet the individual who carried out the assault against our election? To me, it was a dishonorable thing to say.”

...

Trump's pledge to work with Putin on cybersecurity came as U.S. government officials told The Washington Post that Russian government hackers were behind recent intrusions into the systems of U.S. nuclear power and other energy companies.

...

Trump also said on Twitter on Sunday that the United States would not lift sanctions on Russia “until the Ukranian & Syrian problems are solved,” a reference to Russia's intervention in Ukraine and role in the Syrian civil war.

...

Trump said the issue of sanctions was not discussed in his meeting Friday with Putin, apparently contradicting Secretary of State Rex Tillerson, who was in attendance and later told reporters that Trump did discuss sanctions.

Tillerson told reporters that Trump “took note” of congressional efforts to push for additional sanctions against Russia but that he and Putin focused their discussion on “how do we move forward from here.” Tillerson added, “It's not clear to me that we will ever come to some agreed-upon resolution of that question between the two nations.”

Trump signaled Sunday that he was turning the page on U.S.-Russia relations, pleading to “move forward in working constructively” and boasting about an “impenetrable Cyber Security unit” he and Putin discussed forming “so that election hacking, & many other negative things, will be guarded.”

...

Tillerson told reporters Sunday that the United States and Russia agreed “to explore a framework under which we might begin to have agreement on how to deal with these very complex issues of cyberthreats, cybersecurity, cyber intrusions.”

Traveling in Kiev, Ukraine, Tillerson told reporters that the United States faces cyberthreats from many countries. “This is a challenge, obviously, for us globally,” he said. “So Russia's not the only nation.”

Trump's suggestion of cybersecurity partnership drew strong criticism. Sen. Marco Rubio (R-Fla.) said partnering with Putin to address cybersecurity threats was akin to partnering with Syrian President Bashar al-Assad on chemical weapons. Rubio said Putin “will never be a trusted ally or a reliable constructive partner.”

...

Sen. Lindsey O. Graham (R-S.C.) said that Trump's meeting with Putin was “disastrous” and that partnering with Russia on cybersecurity is “not the dumbest idea I've ever heard, but it's pretty close.”

“When it comes to Russia, he’s got a blind spot,” Graham said on NBC's “Meet the Press.” “To forgive and forget when it comes to Putin regarding cyberattacks is to empower Putin, and that’s exactly what he’s doing.”

...

Another Russia hawk, Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.), lamented Sunday that Russia has faced “no penalty whatsoever” by the Trump administration for its hacking attempt.

“We know that Russia tried to change the outcome of our election last November, and they did not succeed, but there was really sophisticated attempts to do so,” McCain said on CBS's “Face the Nation.” “So far, they have not paid a single price for that.” Invoking the language of Trump's tweet, McCain added, “Yes, it's time to move forward, but there has to be a price to pay.”

McCain criticized Tillerson's leadership and said he was a weak advocate for American values abroad. Asked by host John Dickerson whether he regrets his Senate vote to confirm Tillerson as secretary of state, McCain said, “Sometimes I do. But I'm still torn by the fact that the American people chose this president, and he ought to be able to have his team.”

Former defense secretary Ashton B. Carter, who served under Obama at the time of Russia's interference in the election, said Trump working with Putin to combat cyberattacks “is like the guy who robbed your house proposing a working group on burglary.”

Carter said on CNN's “State of the Union”: “This isn't just a matter of looking backward. This is a matter of looking forward. We're going to have elections in a year and a half. There are state elections, municipal elections, as well as national elections. There are elections in other countries. It's important that there be consequences for the Russians in regard to this.”

Nikki Haley, the U.S. ambassador to the United Nations, defended her boss's cooperation with Putin, saying that “we won't ever trust Russia” but that working with Russia on cybersecurity will “keep them in check.”

“From a cyber standpoint, we need to get together with Russia, we need to tell them what we think should happen, shouldn’t happen, and if we talk to them about it, hopefully, we can cut this out and get them to stop,” Haley said Sunday on “State of the Union.”

She continued: “It doesn’t mean we’ve ever taken our eyes off of the ball. It doesn’t mean we ever trust Russia. We can’t trust Russia and we won’t ever trust Russia. But you keep those that you don’t trust closer, so that you can always keep an eye on them and keep them in check, and I think that’s what we’re trying to do with Russia right now.”

...

Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin praised the idea of a U.S.-Russian cybersecurity partnership, likening it to military exercises conducted with U.S. allies. Mnuchin did not mention that — according to U.S. intelligence agencies — Russia is not an ally but an adversary in cyberspace, probing U.S. defenses for weakness.

“This is a very important step forward,” Mnuchin said on ABC's “This Week With George Stephanopoulos.” The goal, he said, is “we make sure that they never interfere with any democratic elections or conduct any cybersecurity. And this is like any other strategic alliance, whether we're doing military exercises with our allies or anything else. This is about having capabilities to make sure that we both fight cyber together, which I think is a very significant accomplishment for President Trump.”

Rep. Adam B. Schiff (Calif.) — the top Democrat on the House Intelligence Committee, which is investigating Russian interference in the election — accused Trump of undermining the U.S. position in his talks with Putin.

“To say, okay, it's been resolved now, we can move on — I don't think we can move on,” Schiff said on “State of the Union.” “And I don't think we can expect the Russians to be any kind of a credible partner in some cybersecurity unit. I think that would be dangerously naive for this country. If that's our best election defense, we might as well just mail our ballot boxes to Moscow.”

Rep. Mike Gallagher (R-Wis.) wrote in tweets Sunday morning that Trump was “glossing over” Russia's behavior in Ukraine and Syria and its cyberaggression.

...

Here are all of Trump's Russia-related tweets issued Sunday, in chronological order:

...

So, some Repugs have strong words, but when it really matters, they buckle to the orange menace. SAD!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, candygirl200413 said:

Where did this MAGA song come from?! 

It's from that "Celebrate Freedom" rally he attended on July 1st.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Trump says time to work 'constructively' with Russia

Quote

US President Donald Trump said Sunday he wanted to work "constructively" with Russia, including on cyber security, despite confronting Vladimir Putin over alleged meddling in last year's American elections.

And 47of74 says Putinfluffer should go and fornicate himself. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

LOL -- it looks like he's not keeping his promises to Putin: "Trump reverses course on working with Russia on cybersecurity"

Spoiler

About 12 hours after tweeting about possibly working with President Vladimir Putin and Russia on cybersecurity, President Donald Trump tweeted that he does not expect it to actually happen.

"The fact that President Putin and I discussed a Cyber Security unit doesn't mean I think it can happen. It can't-but a ceasefire can,& did!," the president tweeted Sunday night, referencing a cease-fire that was negotiated for part of Syria. As of Sunday night, the ceasefire was still in place.

Trump did not explain his rapid-fire flip-flop.

Earlier Sunday, amid a flurry of tweets related to the G-20 summit in Germany, Trump had said: "Putin & I discussed forming an impenetrable Cyber Security unit so that election hacking, & many other negative things, will be guarded.. ...and safe."

Trump's suggestion that he would work with Russia was met with widespread skepticism, including by suggestions that it was akin to hiring a burglar who had broken into your house as your security guard.

“It’s not the dumbest idea I’ve ever heard, but it’s pretty close," Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) said on NBC’s “Meet the Press.”

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Oh, for pity sake: "Trump accuses Comey of illegally leaking classified information"

Spoiler

President Trump accused former FBI director James B. Comey of illegally leaking classified information to the media, part of an angry, early morning tweet storm Monday as the president faces new allegations about his 2016 campaign's contact with the Russians.

“James Comey leaked CLASSIFIED INFORMATION to the media,” Trump wrote, referring to the FBI director he fired in May. “That is so illegal!”

...

Testifying before Congress last month, Comey revealed that a tweet by the president — incorrectly suggesting he may have had taped his conversations with Comey — prompted the former FBI director to ask a close friend to leak to the news media private memos he had kept recounting his interactions with Trump.

The president also used Twitter to push out several a “Fox & Friends” clips Monday morning, including one accusing Comey of having his friend leak top secret information, and another accusing the media of not representing half of the country.

And later in the morning, he retweeted a missive by Fox News host Sean Hannity, which attacked Hillary Clinton, seeming to refer to her private email server as secretary of state and saying, “HRC mishandles and destroys classified info-NO PROBLEM!”

Trump's frustrated, frenzied tweets — at times, he basically seemed to be live-tweeting “Fox & Friends” — came amid reports in the New York Times this weekend that the president's oldest son, Donald Trump Jr. — as well as his son-in-law Jared Kushner and former campaign manager Paul J. Manafort — met with a Russian lawyer with Kremlin ties during the 2016 campaign, after being promised damaging information on Clinton.

The president then urged lawmakers to pass legislation to repeal and replace President Obama's signature health-care bill before leaving for the August recess.

“I cannot imagine that Congress would dare to leave Washington without a beautiful new HealthCare bill fully approved and ready to go!” he wrote. 

...

Senate Republicans left for the July 4 holiday after failing to hold a vote on Republican heath-care legislation. The White House has signaled that if Republicans cannot successfully pass a new health-care plan, the administration will pressure lawmakers to simply repeal the current health-care law — and then, possibly, work with Democrats to write replacement legislation.

Later, Trump's tweets veered in an entirely different direction: defending his daughter Ivanka, who prompted international backlash at the Group of 20 summit on Saturday when she briefly filled in for her father at a table of world leaders when he left the room.

“When I left Conference Room for short meetings with Japan and other countries, I asked Ivanka to hold seat,” Trump wrote. “Very standard. Angela M agrees!”

...

Trump asserted that if Chelsea Clinton had been a similar situation, the reaction from the media would have been calls for Chelsea herself to run for president.

“If Chelsea Clinton were asked to hold the seat for her mother, as her mother gave our country away, the Fake News would say CHELSEA FOR PRES!” Trump wrote.

...

German Chancellor Angela Merkel — or “Angela M” in Trump parlance — earlier this year hosted Ivanka at a summit focused on women empowerment in Berlin, and did defend the president's daughter to reporters.

“Ivanka Trump belonged to the American delegation, so that is in line with what other delegations do,” Merkel said Saturday. “And it is known that she works at the White House and carries responsibility for certain initiatives.’’

He must be terrified by the revelations about Junior's meetings with Jared and that Russian lawyer.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Another entry in the "You couldn't make this shit up" sweepstakes: "The Trump White House keeps mixing up the names of Asian countries and their leaders’ titles"

Spoiler

...

Shortly after President Trump's bilateral meeting with Chinese President Xi Jinping at the Group of 20 summit, a White House news release misidentified Xi as the leader of “the Republic of China.”

Xi is the president of the People's Republic of China.

...

Tsai Ing-wen is the president of the Chinese nationalist government on the island of Taiwan, which claims to be the Republic of China.

On Monday, China's Foreign ministry spokesman Geng Shuang said China received an apology from the United States. Geng told reporters in Beijing that U.S. officials described the mistake as a technical error.

On the surface, this may seem to be just a minor oversight. But considering Trump's previous wavering on the one-China policy long held by Washington, this could be taken as an offense by Beijing.

...

It was the White House press shop's second flub of the day. Earlier Saturday, they incorrectly referred to Prime Minister Shinzo Abe as “President Abe of Japan” in a news release detailing Trump’s meeting with the Japanese leader. However, Trump did correctly refer to the leader of Japan as prime minister during his remarks.

Saturday's gaffes aren't the first time the White House press team has misidentified world leaders since Trump took office.

In January, the White House misspelled British Prime Minister Theresa May’s first name, leaving out the letter “h,” in a memo and official schedule sent to the press.

The White House promptly corrected the error but not before several news outlets noted the misspelling was the name of a different, um, public figure: former adult film star Teresa May.

In February, White House press secretary Sean Spicer referred to Canada’s Prime Minister Justin Trudeau as “Joe” during a news conference.

“Yesterday the president had an incredibly productive set of meetings and discussions with Prime Minister Joe Trudeau of Canada focusing on our shared commitment to close cooperation in addressing both the challenges facing our two countries and the problems throughout the world,” he said.

Prime Minister Trudeau made light of the gaffe during his remarks at the annual Parliamentary Press Gallery Dinner in June. Trudeau poked fun at his well-practiced and “normal” handshake — a reference to Trump's notoriously overly firm handshake — suggesting it may have contributed to Spicer’s mistake.

“You were all in Washington, you saw,” he said, addressing the reporters in attendance. “That handshake was so damn normal, Sean Spicer even forgot my name.”

The Trump administration has flubbed the titles of its own, too. In an April news release, it identified Steven Mnuchin as “Secretary of Commerce.” Mnuchin is the treasury secretary.

And during an interview with the Wall Street Journal in April, Trump said that “Korea actually used to be a part of China.” But as The Washington Post's Fact Checker noted, Korea was never under direct and official control by China, despite repeated Chinese invasions.

But gaffes and misspellings happen. President Barack Obama's press office misspelled President Ronald Reagan twice in a release in 2014.

The White House's recent gaffes come as the United States' ties with China have become more complicated.

Just last month, the Treasury Department announced new sanctions on a Chinese bank accused of laundering money for North Korean companies. The United States also approved a $1.4 billion arms sales package for Taiwan — a move seen by Chinese officials as an affront to China's sovereignty. Meanwhile, Trump has shown signs of losing faith in China's ability to pressure North Korea to halt its nuclear weapons program.

Last March, Trump's top trade negotiator, Robert E. Lighthizer, promised to forge a stronger relationship with Taiwan, saying in a statement that he “intend to develop a trade and investment policy that promotes a stronger bilateral relationship with Taiwan.”

Shortly after Trump's election, a controversial phone call between him and Taiwan's president, Tsai Ing-wen, risked upsetting the United States' relationship with China, which sees Taiwan as a renegade province.

The United States has, for years, had formal ties with China rather than Taiwan, and has acknowledged China's position that there's only one Chinese government. But Trump's phone call went against decades of diplomatic protocol under what's known as the “one China” policy.

Maybe if he had professionals working for him, the errors wouldn't be as frequent or as blatant.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Destiny locked this topic

Archived

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

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.



×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.