If Trump can’t get his golf in, I think in a few days they will roll him out on a cart, while he screams... “Beefy!!!!!”... we elected cartman as president...
- - - Updated - - -
But, it doesn’t. The secret service was never in danger, so claiming Trump was scared, proves everyone else’s point. The fact that this stopped before Trump went into hiding, is just gravy.
Folly and fakery have always been with us... but it has never before been as dangerous as it is now, never in history have we been able to afford it less. - Isaac Asimov
Every damn thing you do in this life, you pay for. - Edith Piaf
The party told you to reject the evidence of your eyes and ears. It was their final, most essential command. - Orwell
No amount of belief makes something a fact. - James Randi
Here's the thing: I'm fine with Trump hiding in a bunker. I want his dumb, racist ass to be alive to face endless trials once he's no longer protected by the GOP. But if he's just going to Tweet insults and incite violence from within that bunker then I hope the ventilation system craps out and he's forced to deal with exactly how bad his shit stinks.
Trump being escorted to a bunker by the Secret Service is rational, prudent and expected...especially when they were taking substantial injuries and unsure whether or not they could maintain the WH perimeter.
And for the life of me, of all things Trump, I can't understand why people would profanely criticize the secret service and Trump for this particular action when Trump's life was potentially in danger. If one doesn't like Trump (and I would agree with them in some respects)...that's fine...but for those people who let their hatred consume their ability to be reasonably rational...they need to be confronted and exposed for their inability to think rationally imo.
"Never get on the bad side of small minded people who have a little power." - Evelyn (Gifted)
The exact quote is "Big crowd, professionally organized, but nobody came close to breaching the fence. If they had they would have been greeted with the most vicious dogs, and most ominous weapons, I have ever seen." Amongst other things in the four or five tweet thread.
The tweet was sent May 30, 8AM. In other words, after he spent the night crying himself to sleep in his bunker.
Yes, he said "professionally organized". Other than white nationalists getting involved, he has no evidence.
RCP says Biden has a steady lead in PA, for example, and more concerningly, he's ahead in FL. Trump is lying, or more concerning, is being lied to about his standing.
- - - Updated - - -
Perhaps you forgot the time Trump said he would run into a school shooting, without a weapon? So, the issue is someone who claimed to be brave, hiding in a bunker from unarmed protesters, while also blaming the police who showed up for not showing up.
I've posted personally about both, recently. Maybe you have me on ignore? But the issue, as it often is, is Trump being a liar and a hypocrite.
Because:
1. His life was never in danger.
2. Trump is the one to have claimed he'd be the first to run into a school shooting to stop the shooter.
And yet, when you have some people shouting while holding cardboard signs behind multiple layers of barricades, he pussies out and goes to hide.
Trump is a small handed coward. Period.
Hmmmm.
If the injuries were substantial I'm sure we'd see quite a bit about it...
Eleven Secret Service employees were transported to the hospital with non-life threatening injuries.
I don't think most people would call that "substantial injuries". Not a single person in critical condition and less than 20% of the injuries required medical care.
EDIT -- I don't really understand this line of attack on Trump. My understanding is that this isn't even Trump's decision. If there is a threat to the president he gets moved to a safe location even if he doesn't want to go. I mean -- why call him a coward over this? It doesn't track for me. There is a WHOLE lot more here from him posting Qanon links to again siding with white supremacists to make pretend that ANTIFA is some organized nefarious group.
"Never get on the bad side of small minded people who have a little power." - Evelyn (Gifted)
Do you have a source that any of those 11 people were admitted to the hospital? Because many (if not all) of them could have been treated and released. For instance if someone needed 4 stitches. Which again, I wouldn't call a substantial injury.
- - - Updated - - -
From the same article I posted (which indicates Doc didn't read it...surprise surprise):
The Secret Service said no one crossed the White House fence and no one being protected was ever in danger.
So what i gather from this the alt-right including their President are weak cowardly men and the left in the US is now the big manly threat, considering how antifa is suddenly a terrorist organization.
So in short they all just declared themselves cucks? Simply using their lingo against them.
Argue semantics until you turn blue as far as I'm concerned. It's an incredibly weak argument imo. The fact that they needed to go to the hospital in the first place is reasonably indicative that they sustained a substantial injury.
Tell me something, how many needed to be substantially injured (in your opinion) of even killed perhaps until their actions to protect the President were justified in your mind?
"Never get on the bad side of small minded people who have a little power." - Evelyn (Gifted)
Alternatively you could not try to over-exaggerate what happened.
No, it isn't. Apparently you don't know how on-site treatment and assessment works. Either that or your bar for "substantial injury" is so low as to be meaningless.The fact that they needed to go to the hospital in the first place is reasonably indicative that they sustained a substantial injury.
That's not really a valid question, at least not to me. I don't have any issues with the actions the secret service took to protect the president. There should always be a bias towards being overly cautious when making decisions about the president's safety.Tell me something, how many needed to be substantially injured (in your opinion) of even killed perhaps until their actions to protect the President were justified in your mind?
I just have issues with your overstating the facts to push your agenda.
Oh I am fine with Trump staying away from protestors. Nothing good could happen if they actually came in close contact.
The problem is that Trump keeps fanning the flames on this. Further endangering everyone involved for his own ends. The Secret Service that have been injured are being injured because Trump keeps provoking the crowds. Granted, that is not an excuse for attacking innocent people, I am not endorsing attacks on anyone. However the fact that the President is completely unable and unwilling to deescalate things is a serious problem.
Trump is doing this for a reason, as usual he needs to secure his base. His complete mishandling of the epidemic has seriously shaken his standing with many, some remain loyal, but his margins are razor thin in the best conditions, and too many are tired of holding their noses. Trump has a lot to gain from this, it is a rallying cry for his base. From their perspective, scary black people are threatening the social order, we need a strong President to put them all back in their place with guns and dogs and hoses. This will get them out to vote, while Trump continues to erode Democratic enthusiasm in Biden. This has a very good chance of working. Although far more Americans want Biden to be President then Trump, Biden votes tend to be less enthusiastic about Biden (Although many are enthusiastic about beating Trump). So what Trump has to do is shore up all the scared white people vote, keep his turnout high, and repress/discourage democratic voters.
Trump has nothing to lose from inflaming this, none of the protestors were going to vote for him anyway. Decency isn't a factor here, he will make this as bad as he possibly can. Because seeing America in flames, riddled with disease, a crashing economy, racked with violence and hate isn't a problem for him. Not if he can win.
I think this Reuters article is also worth discussion. Mostly because it is yet another "Breccia is wrong" post.
Please, actually read it before replying.
Quick interruption here: a lot of people in the Bull Market Over! thread said exactly this. So if you were one of them, congrats, you called it perfectly.U.S. President Donald Trump has little choice but to stick with his Phase 1 China trade deal despite his anger at Beijing over the coronavirus pandemic, new Hong Kong security rules, and dwindling hopes China can meet U.S. goods purchase targets, people familiar with his administration’s deliberations say.
The U.S.-China trade negotiations took more than two years, heaped tariffs on $370 billion of Chinese products, whipsawed financial markets and dimmed global growth prospects well before the coronavirus outbreak crushed them.
In recent weeks, suggestions that Trump may cancel the deal have emanated from the White House almost daily, and businesses, investors, and China trade watchers are hanging on to every word and tweet.
But on Friday, when Trump said the United States would start dismantling trade and travel privileges for Hong Kong, he did not mention the deal. Stock markets heaved a sigh of relief, with the S&P 500 reversing losses.
So much bolding for emphasis.Talking tough on China and criticizing the Obama administration's more measured approach is a key part of Trump's re-election strategy. Sticking with the pact may mean accepting that China is likely to fall short of purchase commitments for U.S. agricultural goods, manufactured products, energy and services - goals that many said were unrealistic here even before the pandemic.
Canceling the deal, though, would reignite the nearly two-year U.S.-China trade war at a time U.S. unemployment is at its worst since the 1930s Great Depression.
The next U.S. step would likely be reviving previously planned but canceled tariffs on some $165 billion worth of Chinese consumer goods, including Apple cellphones and computers, toys and clothing - all ultimately paid by U.S. companies and passed on to consumers. Beijing would retaliate with tariffs on U.S. goods, fueling more market turmoil and delaying recovery.
“He’s stuck with a lemon. He gets an empty agreement if he sticks with it, and he gets more actions that create an economic drag and more volatility if he abandons it,” said one person briefed on the administration’s trade deliberations.
U.S. goods exports here to China in the first quarter were down $4 billion from the trade war-damaged levels a year earlier, according to U.S. Census Bureau data.
The Peterson Institute of International Economics estimates here that during the first quarter, China made only about 40% of the purchases it needed to stay on target for a first-year increase of $77 billion over 2017 levels, implying an extremely steep climb in the second half.
Leaving the deal now would not buy a lasting political bounce for Trump in manufacturing-heavy swing states with five months to go before the presidential election, analysts say.
So I've been saying Phase One is dead, and I even cited -- today -- China cancelling purchases. What I failed to consider, was that Trump might not have a choice. If he raises tariffs any further, he puts salt on his own gaping wound. So while China isn't fulfilling their obligations, Trump might still need to.
Now, as we've seen, just because something is a bad idea doesn't prove Trump won't do it. We're talking about a guy who hid in a bunker because of a few dozen unarmed civilians who didn't breach the gates, for example. But where I've said there was no choice, I was wrong, there are two choices but they're both bad.
1) Stick with Phase One as the article suggests, hoping (as the WH is claiming) that despite heated political disagreement trade somehow rises to the point where it actually looks good, or
2) Dump Phase One as I've been suggesting, knowing full well China won't live up to their own end of the bargain anyhow, and at least claim a moral victory while, yep, kicking your own economy while it's down.
That's some Prisoner's Dilemna shit right there. The only real "win" is if Trump continues Phase One and hopes for a miracle on China's end. I don't think that's realistic, but I have to concede it's an option.
- - - Updated - - -
That's because you're not following the conversation. Please post constructively.
How do you think trump will legally "declare antifa a terrorist orginzation"
he usually says one thing like " ban all muslims" but his advisers tell him its unconstitutional and it turns into like "targeted restriction of travel between specific countries in the middle east"
one thing we can look to history for is the sedition act when there was anarchist and socialist led protets riots
which lead to the arrest of eugene debs and palmer raids in wich anti war activist and socialist were arrested under orders of attorney general mitchell palmer.
https://www.fbi.gov/history/famous-cases/palmer-raids
barr reminds of palmer alot, i wonder if he does plan to run as trumps sucessor in 2024