Mega-Thread: Trump Focused Discussion

[solinari6]

The taxes are akin to sin taxes. If it were legalized federally, those taxes would still be in place.

Yeah, and right now it's just state taxes. In CA, it's something like 35% tax. When it's legalized, I'd assume there would be a federal tax on TOP of that.

[Beefhammer]

The taxes yes, but the ability to mass produce it and bring down the costs are also there. When you have those large tobacco producers getting into it, you will see the prices drop. It will never be truly "cheap" but it will drop in price. Right now they are still niche and specialty because of their legal status.

I'm skeptical on the mass production. Here in Michigan, it's legal, but many cities are banning places from selling. I'm sure that may face similar obstacles fro production elsewhere. But then like said above, once legal on a federal level, you know there will be federal taxes and regulations that will keep the prices above street level.

[Fugus]

I'm skeptical on the mass production. Here in Michigan, it's legal, but many cities are banning places from selling. I'm sure that may face similar obstacles fro production elsewhere. But then like said above, once legal on a federal level, you know there will be federal taxes and regulations that will keep the prices above street level.

That, I can definitely see, but at that point, they will also try and attacking the street sellers as well at that point too. They will have those areas that refuse to sell it just like dry cities and alcohol.

Eventually, the street sellers would be pushed to closer to like people selling homemade moonshine now.

[Beefhammer]

That, I can definitely see, but at that point, they will also try and attacking the street sellers as well at that point too. They will have those areas that refuse to sell it just like dry cities and alcohol.

Eventually, the street sellers would be pushed to closer to like people selling homemade moonshine now.

I heard an interview with s pro pot lobbying group in Colorado who knows they will never compete with street level sellers. But they can offer a better product that is clean of other stuff. People will pay a premium, but not 2.5+ times the amount. He was saying if they could get within $5-7 of street range then more people would venture in to stores. Just need to stop sin taxing them basically.

[Fugus]

I heard an interview with s pro pot lobbying group in Colorado who knows they will never compete with street level sellers. But they can offer a better product that is clean of other stuff. People will pay a premium, but not 2.5+ times the amount. He was saying if they could get within $5-7 of street range then more people would venture in to stores. Just need to stop sin taxing them basically.

Pretty much, I figure either that will die down in time or they will still have the street sellers they will futilely chase hoping to stamp them out.

But when it is finally legalized, you know it will be taxed to hell and back out the gate from all the groups still fighting it for either religious or financial reasons.

[omerome]

To anyone who doesn't believe that supporters of the resident in the White House are basically a cult, look at this.

More than 60 percent of respondents who support President Trump say they support him no matter what, according to a new survey.

The Monmouth University poll released Tuesday found that 62 percent of Trump supporters said they could not think of "anything that Trump could do, or fail to do, in his term as president that would make [them] disapprove of the job he is doing." The sample size for the question was 401 adults age 18 and older.

https://thehill.com/homenews/adminis...could-do-would

These people would jump off a mountain if he tells them to.

[Edge-]

To anyone who doesn't believe that supporters of the resident in the White House are basically a cult, look at this.



https://thehill.com/homenews/adminis...could-do-would

These people would jump off a mountain if he tells them to.

So he could shoot someone on 5th avenue and still have majority support within his party.

Cool. Cool cool, cool cool cool cool. Cool, cool.

[Fugus]

So he could shoot someone on 5th avenue and still have majority support within his party.

Cool. Cool cool, cool cool cool cool. Cool, cool.

Well, he already has a victim of Epstein finger him as one of her rapists and they still back him, so honestly do think they will support him even if their own god came down and came out against him.

[cubby]

To anyone who doesn't believe that supporters of the resident in the White House are basically a cult, look at this.

More than 60 percent of respondents who support President Trump say they support him no matter what, according to a new survey.

The Monmouth University poll released Tuesday found that 62 percent of Trump supporters said they could not think of "anything that Trump could do, or fail to do, in his term as president that would make [them] disapprove of the job he is doing." The sample size for the question was 401 adults age 18 and older.

https://thehill.com/homenews/adminis...could-do-would

These people would jump off a mountain if he tells them to.

Almost the definition of a cult. Unbelievable. Admitting something like that should be an automatic disqualification for voting.

[solinari6]

Almost the definition of a cult. Unbelievable. Admitting something like that should be an automatic disqualification for voting.

I wonder, when their Cult leader finally instructs them to "drink their kool aid", what that will actually entail?

[Wyrt]

I wonder, when their Cult leader finally instructs them to "drink their kool aid", what that will actually entail?

Shooting liberals most likely. He's basically done everything but outright say it so far.

[Breccia]

Well, in all fairness, all political implications aside, if the US military would start picking off the drug cartel I wouldn't object to that.

This sounds like Hollywood logic. You probably wouldn't mind if a vigilante in downtown Big US City killed 100 crack dealers. Problem is, that's not how it's supposed to work.

The US military is not supposed to go to other countries and solve crimes. We already know Trump wants the troops he put on the border to shoot at unarmed civilians, but there's a reason they aren't allowed to do that. Loopholing that by telling them to cross the border and shoot at who they think are armed criminals isn't on the military's to-do list. The US has law enforcement and intelligence agencies for days and legit, diplomatic relationships through which they are used, Giuliani's transgressions notwithstanding.

The US President sending troops to invade Mexico is not supposed to happen. That's not their job.

[cubby]

I wonder, when their Cult leader finally instructs them to "drink their kool aid", what that will actually entail?

I greatly fear for this country when that moment arrives. And when Trump is on the outs, and the Impeachment Conviction has been secured, or when he loses the 2020 election, we'll see the true horror of his cult. I know I'm being dramatic, but I'm also being realistic - we haven't seen the true depths of what Trump is capable of when he's cornered, because he's never been cornered before.

[Mayhem]

I greatly fear for this country when that moment arrives. And when Trump is on the outs, and the Impeachment Conviction has been secured, or when he loses the 2020 election, we'll see the true horror of his cult. I know I'm being dramatic, but I'm also being realistic - we haven't seen the true depths of what Trump is capable of when he's cornered, because he's never been cornered before.

Just wait when the supreme court decides the president is above the law.

[Julez]

So he could shoot someone on 5th avenue and still have majority support within his party.

Depends on the person he shot.

- - - Updated - - -

I greatly fear for this country when that moment arrives. And when Trump is on the outs, and the Impeachment Conviction has been secured, or when he loses the 2020 election, we'll see the true horror of his cult.

Just asking, what are you going to do when Trump is not impeached and is reelected in 2020?

I am not being sarcastic, I am genuinely curious.

[Belize]

Either way it would be murder, you absolute toad.

Don't be silly, everyone knows Democrats aren't people.

They're Reptoids! It's not murder when you shoot a Reptoid.

/s in case anyone is wondering

[Breccia]

So the troops Trump said were coming home, abandoning our Kurdish allies, that suddenly weren't coming home, but were still abandoning our Kurdish allies and instead protecting oil that isn't even ours?

Oh, it gets better.

President Donald Trump has approved an expanded military mission to secure an expanse of oil fields across eastern Syria, raising a number of difficult legal questions about whether U.S. troops can launch strikes against Syrian, Russian or other forces if they threaten the oil, U.S. officials said.

The decision, coming after a meeting Friday between Trump and his defense leaders, locks hundreds of U.S. troops into a more complicated presence in Syria, despite the president’s vow to get America out of the war. Under the new plan, troops would protect a large swath of land controlled by Syrian Kurdish fighters that stretches nearly 90 miles (150 kilometers) from Deir el-Zour to al-Hassakeh, but its exact size is still being determined.

Officials said many details still have to be worked out. But, Trump’s decision hands commanders a victory in their push to remain in the country to prevent any resurgence of the Islamic State group, counter Iran and partner with the Kurds, who battled IS alongside the U.S. for several years. But it also forces lawyers in the Pentagon to craft orders for the troops that could see them firing on Syrian government or Russian fighters trying to take back oil facilities that sit within the sovereign nation of Syria.

Trump’s order also slams the door on any suggestion that the bulk of the more than 1,200 U.S. troops that have been in Syria will be coming home any time soon, as he has repeatedly promised.

So of course, he's a big fatass hypocrite. But we knew that.

Now things get interesting, and by interesting, I mean ugly.

By what authority is Trump leaving troops there?

See, the Authorizations for Use of Military Force that was crafted to let W go after ISIS no matter where ISIS was, including Iraq in case Congress didn't vote on it, was pretty handy when, say, going after ISIS no matter where ISIS was, including Syria. But according to Trump, we're not going after ISIS. Nor are we at war with any of the forces involved. And Syria sure as hell doesn't want us there, which rules that argument out.

And before anyone tries to wave the National Security Lol flag, the question is "why is Syrian oil we're not allowed to take in our national security?" I mean, I get the idea of keeping terrorists from blowing it up, even though I question why we'd use our troops to defend it, see also Saudi Arabia. But that idea is rejected when Trump hangs "Mission Acom Accompo Accounting We Bigly Win" banner from an aircraft carrier using goddam steam and uses "we defeated ISIS forever" as a reason he said he was abandoning the Kurds in the first place.

Is this some kind of Shroedinginer's ISIS? Open the box, and we both have and have not bombed the shit out of them? It sounds a lot like Trump's Shroedinger's Taxes Under Audit. Maybe that's why we can't see them, he's terrified the world would end if they were observed.

Which brings up the next problem: Russia, which to continue that metaphor Trump claims both did and didn't help him, making them Shroedinger's Election Interference.

We flat-out abandoned the Kurds, and no, I don't think "it's okay, we'll protect anyone who happens to be near this oil" is good enough. The Kurds are working with Assad and Putin now, because otherwise they'd die. So what happens when Russia comes for the oil? I mean, in theory, the Kurds are the ones selling it, and Russia loves them some oil. Now here comes Russian trucks to pick up the oil and it's surrounded by US troops.

Logically, US troops paid by US taxpayers under US orders will watch as Russia takes the oil we're guarding and leaves with it.

Awesome.

But this is Trump's tenure, so let's go illogically. What happens when someone shoots someone? I don't even fucking care who starts it.

We're not welcome there, we're not wanted there, and we have nothing of our own to defend there. Because Trump. So what happens if, say, some Russian oil truck driver says "Hmm, we outnumbers these Americans and they have no backup of any kind. Let's just call thousands of Assad's troops to show up and see what happens." Trump's sending tanks out there, tanks Assad presumably wants.

This has the potential of going very poorly very quickly. Hopefully that's not the case, as instead, the US soldiers Trump claims to love so much serve as free (to the Russians) protection for their oil, in possibly the most extreme socialist result the US has ever intentionally enabled.

[Julez]

But that idea is rejected when Trump hangs "Mission Acom Accompo Accounting We Bigly Win" banner from an aircraft carrier using goddam steam and uses "we defeated ISIS forever" as a reason he said he was abandoning the Kurds in the first place.

When did Trump ever do any of that? He never said that we defeated ISIS forever, he said we defeated the caliphate. We did defeat the caliphate. No one can defeat an ideology forever, and no one is trying to claim that is the case. Certainly not Trump.

We did win bigly.

[Breccia]

So it occurs to me that

I will tell you this though: We defeated ISIS. And when I wanted to — when we were at 96 and 95 and 97 percent, I sort of said, “Let the other countries in the area finish it off.” And I was met with a lot of anger from some people in our country. I said, “All right. I’ll finish it off.” And I got together with our generals. I flew to Iraq. I got together. And we did it very quickly. Far quicker than any general from here told us we could do it. We have some great people over there. They did it quickly.

And I said to the European countries, “You’ve got to take your ISIS…” You know we have 60,000, maybe even 70,000 people — that includes families, that includes wives of fighters that were killed. We have many fighters that were killed in the battles. And we took it. Over 100 percent of the caliphate, I took over quickly. Nobody else was — it was a mess when I came to office. And I think most of you would agree to that. It was a real mess.

Whoops, that's Trump's exact words showing up for no reason. How did that happen?

So it occurs to me that, there might be some people out there that aren't sure if we were pulling the troops out because we defeated ISIS, or if we left the troops behind to defend against ISIS. That's completely valid. Whether Trump, saying that Syria wasn't our problem and ISIS was defeated, did or didn't mean "all of ISIS" or "just the caliphate", or "all of Syria" or "just the parts of Syria containing oil we can't keep", doesn't actually matter.

If ISIS is a threat, we shouldn't be pulling troops out. If they're not a thread, we shouldn't be keeping troops there. It can't be both. One of those is a lie.

If the troops are leaving Syria, they shouldn't be staying in Syria. Those two claims are self-contradictory.

There is no defense. Trump has made it impossible.

[Orbitus]

Depends on the person he shot.

- - - Updated - - -



Just asking, what are you going to do when Trump is not impeached and is reelected in 2020?

I am not being sarcastic, I am genuinely curious.

First off, defending murder? Not really surprising from a Trump supporter.

And it would take a miracle for Trump to win in 2020, if he is still in office.