Our New President - President Donald Trump

Post Reply New Topic

Well, if a narcissistic, pathological liar said the book and all of it's criticisms of him are fake, well it just must be. There's much butthurt going on, but those who oppose Trump aren't the ones experiencing it.

Don't worry, we'll pretend to not hold it against you when this is all over.

i sometimes wonder if certain people's entire personality revolves around sabotaging themselves to derive schadenfreudian joy, rather than daring to share a victory with "another tribe".

they'd let others s**t in their mouths if it meant the "others" could smell it, and this goes for both sides. i have never seen it before on this scale.

Hmm, I don't really understand the "let others sh!t in their mouths" part, however, I did just take my nightly Metamucil.

Now then, this just in today :

U.S. to end special protections for Salvadoran immigrants

https://www.google.com/amp/fox59.com/20 ... rants/amp/

From the article:

WASHINGTON (AP) — The Trump administration is ending special protections for Salvadoran immigrants, forcing nearly 200,000 to leave the country or face deportation, officials said Monday.

This is the start of taking back America.

If you actually want to take the country 'back' from immigrants, care to explain what entitles anyone to it in the first place?

Frynotsureifserious.jpg

"Trump personifies everything the rest of the world despises about America: casual racism, crass materialism, relentless self-aggrandizement, vulgarity on an epic scale. He is the 'Ugly American' in excelsis."
Paul Thomas, New Zealand Morning Herald

I actually don't think that this is fair.

If we want to solve America's problems, we also need to remember that America's social problems also exist in other countries to a certain degree. In terms of his beliefs, Trump is very similar to Nigel Farage, who has been infamous in England for quite some time now.

We should be careful when we talk about how "the rest of the world hates America". This sort of rhetoric can reinforce patriotic mythology ... which is what put Trump into power in the first place.

Overall, we always need to remember that our battle is not about America Vs. the rest of the world or Republican Vs. Democrat. We must always remember that the conflict is about freedom vs. oppression or else we may veer wildly off-course.

Addionally, the biggest problem with Trump is his corporate shilling.

You can call me a "concern troll" if you like. That's just how I feel.

What exactly have those Salvadorans been doing?

... aside from working and raising their kids like normal people?

By the way ...

"And if a stranger sojourn with thee in your land, ye shall not vex him. But the stranger that dwelleth with you shall be unto you as one born among you, and thou shalt love him as thyself; for ye were strangers in the land of Egypt: I am the LORD your God."
- Leviticus 19:33-34

The Religious Demographics of El Salvador
VVV

I TWEETED TRUMP AND TOLD HIM IF HE SIGNS DACA, HE WILL BE A ONE TERM PRESIDENT. I WILL NOT BE VOTING FOR HIM OR ANY REPUBLICAN AGAIN.

Trump Appears to Endorse Path to Citizenship for Millions of Immigrants
www.nytimes.com

President Trump said legislation around an immigration overhaul should come from love, while also pushing for stronger security measures.

By THE NEW YORK TIMES on January 9, 2018. Photo by Doug Mills/The New York Times. Watch in Times Video »
WASHINGTON — President Trump on Tuesday appeared open to negotiating a sweeping immigration deal that would eventually grant millions of undocumented immigrants a pathway to citizenship, declaring that he was willing to “take the heat” politically for an approach that seemed to flatly contradict the anti-immigration stance that charged his political rise.

The president made the remarks during an extended meeting with congressional Republicans and Democrats who are weighing a shorter-term agreement that would extend legal status for undocumented immigrants brought to the United States as children. The 90-minute session — more than half of which played out on national television — appeared to produce some progress: Mr. Trump agreed to a framework for a short-term immigration deal to couple protection for young, undocumented immigrants with border security.

But in suggesting that a broader immigration measure was possible next, Mr. Trump was giving a rare public glimpse of an impulse he has expressed privately to advisers and lawmakers — the desire to preside over a more far-reaching solution to the status of the 11 million undocumented immigrants already living and working in the United States. Passage of a comprehensive immigration law would give Mr. Trump success where Presidents Barack Obama and George W. Bush failed.

The push for an immigration deal with Democrats has the potential to alienate the hard-line anti-immigration activists who powered his political rise and helped him win the presidency, many of whom have described it as amnesty for lawbreakers. If he succeeds, it could be compared to Richard Nixon’s historic trip to China. Only an anti-Communist hard-liner could have made the opening acceptable to his supporters.

If he fails, it would be more like Ronald Reagan in Reykjavik, Iceland, where he suggested eliminating much of the United States and Soviet nuclear arsenal, a momentary glimmer of idealism that was crushed by a backlash from his own party.

Senator Lindsey Graham, Republican of South Carolina, floated the idea of a broader immigration deal during the meeting in the White House Cabinet Room on Tuesday, making clear that it would have to include a pathway to citizenship for undocumented immigrants already in the country.

Mr. Trump replied: “If you want to take it that further step, I’ll take the heat. I will take all the heat. You are not that far away from comprehensive immigration reform.”

Lawmakers from both parties were taken aback by the president’s words.

“My head is spinning with all the things that were said by the president and others in that room in the course of an hour and a half,” said Senator Richard J. Durbin, Democrat of Illinois, who has been leading the talks.

The president has been known to make conflicting or contradictory statements on complex policy issues, only to walk them back or change his mind. White House officials declined to provide specifics about what kind of immigration overhaul the president would favor, saying he was focused on the shorter-term measure that would shield undocumented immigrants brought to the country as children from deportation, in exchange for more border agents and a down payment on a border wall.

Hours after the meeting, Mr. Trump appeared to harden his insistence on the wall, writing on Twitter, “As I made very clear today, our country needs the security of the Wall on the Southern Border, which must be part of any DACA approval.”

But the comments earlier Tuesday were a remarkable break with the divisive messaging that propelled Mr. Trump to the White House and the harsh policies that have defined his first year in office, marked by efforts to demonize and deport immigrants who have entered the country illegally.

The administration has also moved to curtail legal channels for immigration like refugee resettlement and temporary protections for vulnerable groups, including Salvadorans who have been allowed to live and work legally in the United States after earthquakes struck their country in 2001.

Instead, the president presented himself on Tuesday as a deal maker eager to find common ground and unconcerned with — if not blithely unaware of — the political perils of immigration debates. The phrase “comprehensive immigration reform” is detested by anti-immigration activists.

“I don’t think it’s going to be that complicated,” Mr. Trump told lawmakers assembled around his cabinet table of a broad immigration measure.

Republican senators were deeply skeptical.

“I don’t think comprehensive reform is as imminent as he would think it could be,” Senator Charles E. Grassley of Iowa said after returning from the White House.

Senator David Perdue, Republican of Georgia, cautioned against talk of a far-reaching deal. “I don’t like the word ‘comprehensive,’” he said. “That hasn’t worked as it relates to immigration.”

Mr. Trump’s call for a comprehensive solution came just after Mr. Graham had said he was a proponent of “a pathway to citizenship for 11 million people,” and then predicted “a drumbeat” of vitriol against such an approach. “Right-wing radio and talk show hosts are going to beat the crap out of us,” he said “It’s going to be ‘amnesty’ all over again.”

Mr. Trump seemed almost to relish such a fight.

“My whole life has been heat,” he shrugged. “I like heat, in a certain way.”

The White House meeting itself was extraordinary, an extended negotiating session that was broadcast by the news channels at a time when questions about Mr. Trump’s mental acuity and fitness for his job have been dominating the headlines.

The president appeared to signal a willingness to compromise with Democrats on the border security provisions that he says must be part of a near-term agreement to codify the protections created under DACA, or Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals, the Obama-era program that he has moved to end by March that shields from deportation those brought to the United States illegally as children.

He called it a “bill of love,” echoing the language of Jeb Bush, one of his rivals for the Republican nomination in 2016 whom he once ridiculed. On Tuesday, Mr. Bush praised the president for seeking a bipartisan solution, while immigration hard-liners ridiculed Mr. Trump for sounding like the former Florida governor.

“Donald J. Trump,” read one slogan circulated by a prominent anti-immigration expert, Mark Krikorian, showing a scene from Tuesday’s meeting. “(The “J” is for ¡Jeb!)”

pic.twitter.com/uQiMm3Z0Yx

— Mark Krikorian (@MarkSKrikorian) Jan. 9, 2018
Nearly 800,000 young undocumented immigrants were shielded from deportation under the DACA program, which granted them renewable two-year work permits. Immigrant rights advocates say 14,000 of the young people have already lost their protected status because their permits have expired, and they have been unable to renew them.

Lawmakers returning from the White House meeting said Democrats and Republicans had agreed on four topics to be negotiated as part of a narrower DACA deal: the fate of beneficiaries of the program, border security, family-based immigration and the visa lottery. A handful of Democrats and Republicans have been meeting for months to try to hammer out a deal along those lines, and the president’s backing of that scope was a startling shift for them.

“I was pleasantly surprised,’’ said Senator Jeff Flake, Republican of Arizona, who has participated in those negotiations. “It was a better meeting than I expected. You can’t negotiate that much with that many people but the president expressed flexibility.’’

Still, Congress has a lot of work ahead on these areas before lawmakers come to a deal that everyone can agree on.

During the session, Mr. Trump repeatedly went back to his call for a broad and comprehensive immigration bill, even as Democratic and Republican lawmakers cautioned him of the failures of the past. Some Republicans pointedly said Mr. Trump was being too ambitious. Even Democrats worried that more immediate immigration matters might fail to pass with the broader package now on the table.

“The fierce urgency of now is for these 800,000 Dreamers,” said Senator Robert Menendez, Democrat of New Jersey, referring to the nickname for the young immigrants now in limbo.

Democrats have insisted that protections for those immigrants be part of any agreement to fund the government beyond Jan. 19, when current funding expires.

But the president said action on the more ambitious immigration measure would be possible as soon as the next day.

“We can do DACA and start comprehensive reform the following afternoon,” Mr. Trump said. “We will take an hour off and start.”

Previous attempts to enact such a broad bipartisan immigration compromise during the Bush and Obama presidencies proved politically impossible. After months of arduous negotiations, comprehensive immigration bills passed the Senate in 2006 and in 2013 only to be stymied in the House.

“You created an opportunity here, Mr. President,” Mr. Graham said to Mr. Trump, “and you need to close the deal.”

The president’s pivot drew swift rebukes from conservatives and immigration activists who have been among Mr. Trump’s staunchest supporters.

Roy Beck, the executive director of NumbersUSA, which pushes for reducing immigration, said the deal that Mr. Trump envisioned, like previous grants of amnesty, would bolster both illegal and legal immigration levels, flooding the American labor market.

“Amnesty-now and enforcement/reform-later agreements always fail the American people,” Mr. Beck said in a statement. “President Trump must hold fast to his compact with American workers to greatly reduce both the illegal and legal competition from mass migration.”

The president said he would insist on strict new immigration limits as part of any such measure, although he seemed to concede that his call for a “wall” might not entail the kind of physical barriers that many Democrats have viewed as a nonstarter.

He conceded that “We don’t need a 2,000-mile wall” because parts of the border are impassible and noted that Democrats had voted for border fencing in the past. Afterward, Republicans and Democrats both said they believed Mr. Trump was using the term “wall” to describe border security, not necessarily a giant physical barrier.

I don't believe any of that for a number of reasons.

1. Most white house staffers are not this technologically saavy.
2. The ones who are technologically saavy probably just deal in basic webcasts, teleconferences, video conferences and basic audio visual things.

4. You would not need to construct a transmission tower to beam anything to a TV when they can just hook his TV up to a computer and stream gorilla vidoes on youtube.

5. It would actually take weeks to find, watch and edit 17 hours of gorilla videos.

6. Gorillas don't really fight much.

7. Even if he were an idiot, he wouldn't be that much of one.

What are the causes of these things though? One must be careful not to blindly attribute changes in employment, jobs, and crime rate, to a sitting president without evidence to indicate it can accurately be attributed to that person. These are often multivariable issues with significant lag between cause and effect.

even i could tell that darmok was making a mockery of this report.
i find it difficult to believe the report even exists as news, let alone the efficacy of it

HOLY MOSES! WHAT IS GOING ON IN SEATTLE???! !!


Seattle attempts to impose morality with ridiculously high taxes on sugary drinks
rare.us

Seattle has decided to impose a 1.75 cent per ounce tax on all sugary beverages within the city with the hopes of raising a $15 million revenue stream that it will use for programs to help people “have better access to fresh fruits and vegetables,” as Seattle station KIRO 7 explains. The price of Gatorade Frost Variety Pack at Costco, usually $15.99, with the $10.34 tax, shot up to $26.33, leaving customers with sticker-shock.

There’s more than a few problems with the new tax scheme, which a sign right next to the Gatorade in Costco helpfully demonstrates.

As with all excise taxes, this one is easily avoided: customers can visit Costco stores in nearby Tukwila or Shoreline and skip paying the City of Seattle’s Sweetened Beverage Tax. Customers are less likely to make extra inconvenient trips if the price changes are barely noticeable–but with such a steep price change, many residents will likely take the extra trip.

Some are saying they will switch to diet soda instead, which city officials say is “the point,” according to KIRO7. “Not necessarily to switch to diet soda, but getting consumers to go for healthier options.”

The position the tax advocates take is oddly contradictory, as Scott Drenkard of the Tax Foundation summarized on Twitter:

“First they interview people at the Costco who are rightfully shocked at how high prices on soda and sports drinks are now (they are almost doubled). Then they interview a public health advocate who says ‘that’s right! We want these prices to change people’s behavior and slow sales!’ Then they talk to the consumer, ‘think you’ll change your behavior, maybe even shop somewhere else?’ And she’s like, ‘ya the Tukwila store is close enough.’ Then they ask a city council member if this will hurt local [business], who says ‘there is no data’ suggesting that. Then the SAME public health advocate says that people won’t respond to price increases, shopping elsewhere because it isn’t ‘worth their while.”

If advocates are truly concerned about public health and want people to change their behavior by consuming sugarless beverages then the tax will indeed slow sales and hurt local businesses. It has to because that’s the only way it will actually induce people to lower their calories; assuming you believe that this model works.

But the government doesn’t actually want everyone to switch away from sugary drinks or it won’t be able to collect that $15 million it’s hoping for. That’s why using the tax code to punish or reward behavior is tragically short-sighted.

Government attempts to disincentive certain behavior often have subversive effects (beyond forcing people to take longer trips or purchase sugar-free brands.) The point of these policies is to drastically reduce usage; but while the pricing cuts demand, it also fuels smuggling and black markets.

A steep soda tax opens up the way for an illegal underground trade in soda. Before you laugh, realize that’s exactly the problem that arose in Philadelphia when similar taxes were introduced. In New York, these types of sin taxes led to stratospheric taxes on cigarettes, which buoyed an underground black market in “loosie” cigarettes. Tragically, police enforcement of the tax also led to the death of Eric Garner on Staten Island, who died in police custody after allegedly resisting arrest.

His action, selling loose cigarettes, was only a crime because of these types of policies. Governments, including the City of Seattle, should avoid creating similar situations.

^ Just creating more Trump voters.

and the GOPTP crowd are busy creating more anti-GOPTP voters as well.

PROJECT VERITAS OUTS TWITTER ON SENDING PRESIDENT TRUMPS PRIVATE PERSONAL TWEETS TO THE DOJ

https://www.projectveritas.com/2018/01/ ... ms-to-doj/


UNDERCOVER VIDEO: Sr Network Security Engineer Reveals Twitter Ready to Give Trump’s Private DMs to DOJ

Undercover Video of Twitter Engineer Clay Haynes Saying “We’re more than happy to help the DOJ with their little investigation”
Content Disclosed to DOJ Includes: “Even the ones he’s deleted, any direct messages”
Engineer is Self-Proclaimed “Bleeding-Heart Liberal” Stating “It comes with the territory [at Twitter]”
Goes on to Explain Additional “Big Brotherish” Practices at Twitter

(San Francisco) A Project Veritas undercover investigation has revealed a senior network security engineer at Twitter stating that his company is “more than happy” to turn over the private communications and deleted tweets of President Donald Trump to the Department of Justice. If true, it is yet unknown whether Twitter is voluntarily disclosing this sensitive information or acting under a court order. Twitter is currently in the midst of defending itself from left-leaning criticism that President Trump hasn’t been removed from the enormous media platform for violations of Twitter’s Terms of Service.

According to his LinkedIn profile, Clay Haynes has been employed by Twitter since September 2016. On January 3, 2018, he met with a Project Veritas undercover journalist (UCJ) at Stookeys Club Moderne in San Francisco. Using a hidden video camera, the Veritas UCJ captures Haynes stating that “we’re more than happy to help the DOJ with their little investigation” of President Trump.

When prompted by the UCJ, Mr. Haynes provides additional details, “Basically, giving them every single tweet that he’s posted. Even the ones he’s deleted, any direct messages, any mentions…”

“…he’s dangerous, I don’t like him and he’s a terrible human being and I want to get rid of him,” the self-described bleeding-heart liberal Haynes says in the video about President Trump. “In fact, we had internal reviews about that…”

On January 7, 2018, James O’Keefe himself went undercover with Haynes at Morton’s Steakhouse in San Francisco to confirm if Twitter was working with the Department of Justice to hand over Trump’s tweets and DMs. When pressed about looking at Donald Trump’s messages, Haynes explained “We have a subpoena process for that very reason.” The conversation continued:

James O’Keefe: “Are you working with DOJ currently on that?”

Clay Haynes: “I can’t comment, even if I knew, I wouldn’t comment.”

“The fact is, even if Haynes was just speculating about helping Justice, his admission shows a clear and dangerous political bias at the highest levels of Twitter,” says Project Veritas founder and President James O’Keefe in the video.

“The question is: by Twitter giving private information about the President to the Justice Department, are they breaking the law, betraying a trust, following an official request or satisfying a political agenda by leading a crusade against the President.”

Describing himself as the bouncer of the network, Mr. Haynes also details the level of information Twitter retains in its databases about their hundreds of millions of users.

The Project Veritas Twitter investigation is the fourth installment of its American Pravda series. In Part I, Veritas disclosed that CNN’s Russia coverage is driven by ratings and a political agenda, but in reality, using the words of CNN Political Commentator Van Jones, is just a “nothing burger.” Part II disclosed a political bias at The New York Times which forced executive responses and an immediate change of their social media policy. Part III exposed political bias at The Washington Post and brought to light that the far-reaching narratives of the paper’s editorial board are not rooted in the factual findings of their subject-matter expert reporters. Project Veritas will be releasing additional Twitter-related videos over the next several days.


PS: MEN, DON'T TWEET ANY DICK PICS - TWITTER SAVES EVERY ONE AND SELLS THEM.