Notices
Closed Thread
Page 63 of 100 FirstFirst ... 1353616263646573 ... LastLast
Results 1,861 to 1,890 of 2974

Thread: Donald Trump POTUS...unbelievable Jeff!

  1. #1861  
    lfcstlouis is offline Caution advised, may not be actual saint
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Posts
    24,058
    Quote Originally Posted by Acumen View Post
    He's probably running for Gov. That's what I've heard.
    https://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs...=.3037fc7d6b7e

    good article on it. You're right, he hinted at Gov race. But basically says that he was in a no win. Said he was popular when going after Clinton and Obama, but now Trump is in office, he is useless. If he actually did his job, Trump mob would 'pillar' him, but if he didn't the press and Dems and his own constituents would put the focus on it.
    Quick reply to this message   Report Post   

  2. #1862  
    lfcstlouis is offline Caution advised, may not be actual saint
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Posts
    24,058
    Also, did anyone see Exxon ask the government to give them permission to go around the Russian sanctions so they could get oil?

    I mean, it's a little too soon, and obvious, right? Story in WSJ, before anyone says 'fake liberal news.'
    Quick reply to this message   Report Post   

  3. #1863  
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Posts
    32,368
    What an absolute farce.
    I get an infraction for posting a link to a video which clearly identifies the "players" who got Trump into the White House.
    Anyway, on a lighter note, does anybody know who owns 666 Fifth Avenue? It was the home of the Lucifer Trust decades ago but they changed their name to Lucis Trust and are now a publishing house for the United Nations. So, who owns 666 Fifth Avenue?
    Quick reply to this message   Report Post   

  4. #1864  
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Posts
    34,745
    Quote Originally Posted by naturalskill View Post
    What an absolute farce.
    I get an infraction for posting a link to a video which clearly identifies the "players" who got Trump into the White House.
    Anyway, on a lighter note, does anybody know who owns 666 Fifth Avenue? It was the home of the Lucifer Trust decades ago but they changed their name to Lucis Trust and are now a publishing house for the United Nations. So, who owns 666 Fifth Avenue?
    Jared Kuschner bought it for just over a billion.
    Quick reply to this message   Report Post   

  5. #1865  
    Acumen is online now First team regular
    Join Date
    Jun 2003
    Posts
    46,132
    Quote Originally Posted by Coach791 View Post
    Jared Kuschner bought it for just over a billion.
    I bought it from him last week.
    Quick reply to this message   Report Post   

  6. #1866  
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Posts
    34,745
    Quote Originally Posted by Acumen View Post
    I bought it from him last week.
    I can't be certain but highly unlikely you did.
    Quick reply to this message   Report Post   

  7. #1867  
    GrottonRed is online now LFC Forums Moderator
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Posts
    24,347
    Quote Originally Posted by naturalskill View Post
    What an absolute farce.
    I get an infraction for posting a link to a video which clearly identifies the "players" who got Trump into the White House.
    Anyway, on a lighter note, does anybody know who owns 666 Fifth Avenue? It was the home of the Lucifer Trust decades ago but they changed their name to Lucis Trust and are now a publishing house for the United Nations. So, who owns 666 Fifth Avenue?
    You got an infraction for posting a link to a video and page full of racist and anti-semetic content.
    Life President of TEPS...The Ellipsis Preservation Society.
    Quick reply to this message   Report Post   

  8. #1868  
    Acumen is online now First team regular
    Join Date
    Jun 2003
    Posts
    46,132
    Quote Originally Posted by Coach791 View Post
    I can't be certain but highly unlikely you did.
    I did. I'll invite you for drinks some time when I've put the finishing touches on the place.
    Quick reply to this message   Report Post   

  9. #1869  
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Posts
    34,745
    Quote Originally Posted by Acumen View Post
    I did. I'll invite you for drinks some time when I've put the finishing touches on the place.
    I'll politely decline but thank you. I'm not sure given my views I would be safe there or anybody there would be from me
    Quick reply to this message   Report Post   

  10. #1870  
    lfcstlouis is offline Caution advised, may not be actual saint
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Posts
    24,058
    Quote Originally Posted by Acumen View Post
    I have no problem with the University saying person X we're just not feeling you at this time. Clearly Berkeley was initially ok with Coulter speaking as they should be, but they only pulled her due to safety concerns. We've seen the riots in Berkeley they aren't easy to control and these anarchists who come out don't come with the intention of raising awareness, they come with the intention to intimidate.

    Did you see the video of Jake Shields(MMA fighter) who was coming out from dinner and he stopped 3 anarchists who recognized him actually from beating up a guy who may or may not have actually been attending the Milo event? The police stood there and did nothing. So lets not pretend like the police have a control on these mobs because they just don't. This is becoming a tactic and the fact that its happening at Universities where critical thought and thinking is paramount is the most scary part of this.

    This is one issue that I'm more invested in than others because something burns inside me when I see these events being canceled because a portion of the student body is threatening the security of the event in order to stop it from happening.
    The Universities #1 priority should be the safety of their students. So that either means providing more cops/security, or cancelling the event. I'm not disagreeing with you that the violence is terrible. I'm just saying that both sides are in the wrong and it hurts both causes.
    Quick reply to this message   Report Post   

  11. #1871  
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Posts
    32,368
    Quote Originally Posted by GrottonRed View Post
    You got an infraction for posting a link to a video and page full of racist and anti-semetic content.
    I posted a link to a video which clearly identifies Trump's extended "team".
    Like I said, I am not interested in what site it was posted on. I am only interested in sharing the facts presented regarding the "players" engaged in Trump's success.
    And I find it quite astonishing that rather than acknowledge "Jewish" success, folk prefer to run about like headless chickens screaming "anti-semitism" - it's utterly pathetic!
    Quick reply to this message   Report Post   

  12. #1872  
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Posts
    34,745
    Quote Originally Posted by lfcstlouis View Post
    The Universities #1 priority should be the safety of their students. So that either means providing more cops/security, or cancelling the event. I'm not disagreeing with you that the violence is terrible. I'm just saying that both sides are in the wrong and it hurts both causes.
    Reasonable point. Another would be that if somebody is talking at your university and you don't agree with their views, don't go. If you threaten violence and you get your way (cancellation) then wouldn't you be more likely to repeat.

    Then those opposed to your position do the same and then what we have is censorship. That also isn't a good solution to allow violent minorities to censor anybody they don't like.
    Quick reply to this message   Report Post   

  13. #1873  
    Acumen is online now First team regular
    Join Date
    Jun 2003
    Posts
    46,132
    Quote Originally Posted by lfcstlouis View Post
    The Universities #1 priority should be the safety of their students. So that either means providing more cops/security, or cancelling the event. I'm not disagreeing with you that the violence is terrible. I'm just saying that both sides are in the wrong and it hurts both causes.
    It should be, but the problem is the students themselves are part of the onset of violence. They have a choice and the choice they are making is to be a part of the problem.
    Quick reply to this message   Report Post   

  14. #1874  
    GrottonRed is online now LFC Forums Moderator
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Posts
    24,347
    Quote Originally Posted by naturalskill View Post
    I posted a link to a video which clearly identifies Trump's extended "team".
    Like I said, I am not interested in what site it was posted on. I am only interested in sharing the facts presented regarding the "players" engaged in Trump's success.
    And I find it quite astonishing that rather than acknowledge "Jewish" success, folk prefer to run about like headless chickens screaming "anti-semitism" - it's utterly pathetic!
    You are responsible for what you post.
    Life President of TEPS...The Ellipsis Preservation Society.
    Quick reply to this message   Report Post   

  15. #1875  
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Posts
    32,368
    Quote Originally Posted by Coach791 View Post
    Jared Kuschner bought it for just over a billion.
    Is that the kid who recently moved in to and now lives in the White House?

    You really couldn't make this stuff up
    Last edited by naturalskill; 20-4-17 at 18:35.
    Quick reply to this message   Report Post   

  16. #1876  
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Posts
    34,745
    Quote Originally Posted by naturalskill View Post
    Is that the kid who recently moved in to and now lives the White House?
    I'm certain you know the answer to that. I'm not one for believing the whole devil worshipping stuff (though I'm sure in powerful circles they do strange things) but I'm a firm believer the U.S is run by a 3rd party.

    I'm confident Jared Kuschner belongs to that 3rd party and his relationship with Trump's daughter was by design.

    I said that I believed the same political party that controls Israeli government and large sections of the US government could be instigating a coup under Trump. What better cover story to hide the ascent to total control that to done whilst right and left smear each other and everybody thinks the Russians are to blame for everything.

    In all likelihood what Hilary did with setting up emails, Trump contacting Russia they're not going to amount to anything and probably a diversion to what's actually happening politically.

    If you want to instigate a secret coup then what better than a crazy, acting, headline making President? Racism, Russia, Walls, China, North Korea and then when it settles down you realise hang on what actually happened?

    Nothing. Oh but your government was completely taken over with a coup whilst you were arguing over Trump's tweets.
    Last edited by Coach791; 20-4-17 at 18:49.
    Quick reply to this message   Report Post   

  17. #1877  
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Posts
    32,368
    Quote Originally Posted by Coach791 View Post
    I'm certain you know the answer to that. I'm not one for believing the whole devil worshipping stuff (though I'm sure in powerful circles they do strange things) but I'm a firm believer the U.S is run by a 3rd party.

    I'm confident Jared Kuschner belongs to that 3rd party and his relationship with Trump's daughter was by design.

    I said that I believed the same political party that controls Israeli government and large sections of the US government could be instigating a coup under Trump. What better cover story to hide the ascent to total control that to done whilst right and left smear each other and everybody thinks the Russians are to blame for everything.
    It has to be said... you were right ...many were duped by Trump, including some like me who were desperate for an end to the corruption. But yes, you were right, both sides again controlled by the same forces. It is a sad state of affairs but one must admire the sheer brilliance in their trickery...even though it be filled with deceit
    Quick reply to this message   Report Post   

  18. #1878  
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Posts
    34,745
    Quote Originally Posted by naturalskill View Post
    It has to be said... you were right ...many were duped by Trump, including some like me who were desperate for an end to the corruption. But yes, you were right, both sides again controlled by the same forces. It is a sad state of affairs but one must admire the sheer brilliance in their trickery...even though it be filled with deceit
    Most in the UK were fooled by Tony Blair in the same way, me included. Misdirection is one of the oldest tricks. I've said many times Clinton or Trump? It's like asking Punch or Judy? Both puppets controlled by the same master.

    Now the best way to divert people is cause conflict. So the right attack the left, left attack the right, racist white, angry black, Bannon, oh no not Bannon, Hitler's coming back.....................Not quite. While every fool is looking left nobody looked right.

    In walks Trump's son in law, massively influential within the 3rd party that controls most of the U.S and I've no doubt Trump was taking orders from 3rd party all the time but now they don't have to do in secret. His son in law is the conduit.

    Volcker, Greenspan, Yellen, Bernanke, Summers, Rumsfeld, Geithner, Kuschner they always surround the President. The U.S President probably hasn't made a decision in decades.
    Quick reply to this message   Report Post   

  19. #1879  
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Posts
    32,368
    Quote Originally Posted by Coach791 View Post
    Most in the UK were fooled by Tony Blair in the same way, me included. Misdirection is one of the oldest tricks. I've said many times Clinton or Trump? It's like asking Punch or Judy? Both puppets controlled by the same master.

    Now the best way to divert people is cause conflict. So the right attack the left, left attack the right, racist white, angry black, Bannon, oh no not Bannon, Hitler's coming back.....................Not quite. While every fool is looking left nobody looked right.

    In walks Trump's son in law, massively influential within the 3rd party that controls most of the U.S and I've no doubt Trump was taking orders from 3rd party all the time but now they don't have to do in secret. His son in law is the conduit.

    Volcker, Greenspan, Yellen, Bernanke, Summers, Rumsfeld, Geithner, Kuschner they always surround the President. The U.S President probably hasn't made a decision in decades.
    yep...I think the grave he recently visited could reveal where he is coming from
    Quick reply to this message   Report Post   

  20. #1880  
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Posts
    9,847
    Quote Originally Posted by naturalskill View Post
    It has to be said... you were right ...many were duped by Trump, including some like me who were desperate for an end to the corruption. But yes, you were right, both sides again controlled by the same forces. It is a sad state of affairs but one must admire the sheer brilliance in their trickery...even though it be filled with deceit
    Pray tell, who are these "forces" that are so full of trickery and deceit?
    Quick reply to this message   Report Post   

  21. #1881  
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Posts
    8,838
    Quote Originally Posted by Vortigen View Post
    Pray tell, who are these "forces" that are so full of trickery and deceit?
    The third party, whomever they may be.
    Quick reply to this message   Report Post   

  22. #1882  
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Posts
    32,368
    Quote Originally Posted by Vortigen View Post
    Pray tell, who are these "forces" that are so full of trickery and deceit?
    I once heard them described as "zio-anglo-american imperialism" but be careful some folk might decide such an expression is "anti-semitic"
    Quick reply to this message   Report Post   

  23. #1883  
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Posts
    9,847
    Quote Originally Posted by naturalskill View Post
    I once heard them described as "zio-anglo-american imperialism" but be careful some folk might decide such an expression is "anti-semitic"
    Ah, yes. The wicked anglo-American zionists. I'll leave you to have fun with Coach then. That's right up his alley. And if you really want to make a friend, bring up Obama's dead ma. He'll love that.
    Quick reply to this message   Report Post   

  24. #1884  
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Posts
    32,368
    ...
    Last edited by GrottonRed; 20-4-17 at 20:06. Reason: insult
    Quick reply to this message   Report Post   

  25. #1885  
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Posts
    9,847
    Quote Originally Posted by lfcstlouis View Post
    Also, did anyone see Exxon ask the government to give them permission to go around the Russian sanctions so they could get oil?

    I mean, it's a little too soon, and obvious, right? Story in WSJ, before anyone says 'fake liberal news.'
    Exxon lost something in the neighborhood of $100 million when Russia was sanctioned. It was expected that they would make this request, but maybe not so soon. On the other hand, what have they got to lose? They're not the ones who have to run for re-election in '18 and '20.
    Quick reply to this message   Report Post   

  26. #1886  
    Join Date
    Apr 2015
    Posts
    3,497
    Matt Taibbi is always pretty good, a really interesting piece on the new book Shattered, about the Clinton campaign...

    http://www.rollingstone.com/politics...aign=042017_16

    Here it is, if you can't click links

    There is a critical scene in Shattered, the new behind-the-scenes campaign diary by Jonathan Allen and Amie Parnes, in which staffers in the Hillary Clinton campaign begin to bicker with one another.

    At the end of Chapter One, which is entirely about that campaign's exhausting and fruitless search for a plausible explanation for why Hillary was running, writers Allen and Parnes talk about the infighting problem.

    "All of the jockeying might have been all right, but for a root problem that confounded everyone on the campaign and outside it," they wrote. "Hillary had been running for president for almost a decade and still didn't really have a rationale."

    Allen and Parnes here quoted a Clinton aide who jokingly summed up Clinton's real motivation:

    "I would have had a reason for running," one of her top aides said, "or I wouldn't have run."

    The beleaguered Clinton staff spent the better part of two years trying to roll this insane tautology "I have a reason for running because no one runs without a reason" into the White House. It was a Beltway take on the classic Descartes formulation: "I seek re-election, therefore I am... seeking re-election."

    Shattered is sourced almost entirely to figures inside the Clinton campaign who were and are deeply loyal to Clinton. Yet those sources tell of a campaign that spent nearly two years paralyzed by simple existential questions: Why are we running? What do we stand for?

    If you're wondering what might be the point of rehashing this now, the responsibility for opposing Donald Trump going forward still rests with the (mostly anonymous) voices described in this book.

    What Allen and Parnes captured in Shattered was a far more revealing portrait of the Democratic Party intelligentsia than, say, the WikiLeaks dumps. And while the book is profoundly unflattering to Hillary Clinton, the problem it describes really has nothing to do with Secretary Clinton.

    The real protagonist of this book is a Washington political establishment that has lost the ability to explain itself or its motives to people outside the Beltway.

    In fact, it shines through in the book that the voters' need to understand why this or that person is running for office is viewed in Washington as little more than an annoying problem.


    In the Clinton run, that problem became such a millstone around the neck of the campaign that staffers began to flirt with the idea of sharing the uninspiring truth with voters. Stumped for months by how to explain why their candidate wanted to be president, Clinton staffers began toying with the idea of seeing how "Because it's her turn" might fly as a public rallying cry.

    This passage describes the mood inside the campaign early in the Iowa race (emphasis mine):

    "There wasn't a real clear sense of why she was in it. Minus that, people want to assign their own motivations at the very best, a politician who thinks it's her turn," one campaign staffer said. "It was true and earnest, but also received well. We were talking to Democrats, who largely didn't think she was evil."

    Our own voters "largely" don't think your real reason for running for president is evil qualified as good news in this book.
    The book is filled with similar scenes of brutal unintentional comedy.

    In May of 2015, as Hillary was planning her first major TV interview an address the campaign hoped would put to rest criticism Hillary was avoiding the press over the burgeoning email scandal communications chief Jennifer Palmieri asked Huma Abedin to ask Hillary who she wanted to conduct the interview. (There are a lot of these games of "telephone" in the book, as only a tiny group of people had access to the increasingly secretive candidate.)

    The answer that came back was that Hillary wanted to do the interview with "Brianna." Palmieri took this to mean CNN's Brianna Keilar, and worked to set up the interview, which aired on July 7th of that year.

    Unfortunately, Keilar was not particularly gentle in her conduct of the interview. Among other things, she asked Hillary questions like, "Would you vote for someone you didn't trust?" An aide describes Hillary as "staring daggers" at Keilar. Internally, the interview was viewed as a disaster.

    It turns out now it was all a mistake. Hillary had not wanted Brianna Keilar as an interviewer, but Bianna Golodryga of Yahoo! News, an excellent interviewer in her own right, but also one who happens to be the spouse of longtime Clinton administration aide Peter Orszag.

    This "I said lunch, not launch!" slapstick mishap underscored for the Clinton campaign the hazards of venturing one millimeter outside the circle of trust. In one early conference call with speechwriters, Clinton sounded reserved:

    "Though she was speaking with a small group made up mostly of intimates, she sounded like she was addressing a roomful of supporters inhibited by the concern that whatever she said might be leaked to the press."

    This traced back to 2008, a failed run that the Clintons had concluded was due to the disloyalty and treachery of staff and other Democrats. After that race, Hillary had aides create "loyalty scores" (from one for most loyal, to seven for most treacherous) for members of Congress. Bill Clinton since 2008 had "campaigned against some of the sevens" to "help knock them out of office," apparently to purify the Dem ranks heading into 2016.

    Beyond that, Hillary after 2008 conducted a unique autopsy of her failed campaign. This reportedly included personally going back and reading through the email messages of her staffers:

    "She instructed a trusted aide to access the campaign's server and download the messages sent and received by top staffers. She believed her campaign had failed her not the other way around and she wanted 'to see who was talking to who, who was leaking to who,' said a source familiar with the operation."

    Some will say this Nixonesque prying into her staff's communications will make complaints about leaked emails ring a little hollow.

    Who knows about that. Reading your employees' emails isn't nearly the same as having an outsider leak them all over the world. Still, such a criticism would miss the point, which is that Hillary was looking in the wrong place for a reason for her 2008 loss. That she was convinced her staff was at fault makes sense, as Washington politicians tend to view everything through an insider lens.

    Most don't see elections as organic movements within populations of millions, but as dueling contests of "whip-smart" organizers who know how to get the cattle to vote the right way. If someone wins an election, the inevitable Beltway conclusion is that the winner had better puppeteers.

    The Clinton campaign in 2016, for instance, never saw the Bernie Sanders campaign as being driven by millions of people who over the course of decades had become dissatisfied with the party. They instead saw one cheap stunt pulled by an illegitimate back-bencher, foolishness that would be ended if Sanders himself could somehow be removed.


    "Bill and Hillary had wanted to put [Sanders] down like a junkyard dog early on," Allen and Parnes wrote. The only reason they didn't, they explained, was an irritating chance problem: Sanders "was liked," which meant going negative would backfire.

    Hillary had had the same problem with Barack Obama, with whom she and her husband had elected to go heavily negative in 2008, only to see that strategy go very wrong. "It boomeranged," as it's put in Shattered.

    The Clinton campaign was convinced that Obama won in 2008 not because he was a better candidate, or buoyed by an electorate that was disgusted with the Iraq War. Obama won, they believed, because he had a better campaign operation i.e., better Washingtonian puppeteers. In The Right Stuff terms, Obama's Germans were better than Hillary's Germans.

    They were determined not to make the same mistake in 2016. Here, the thought process of campaign chief Robby Mook is described:

    "Mook knew that Hillary viewed almost every early decision through a 2008 lens: she thought almost everything her own campaign had done was flawed and everything Obama's had done was pristine."

    Since Obama had spent efficiently and Hillary in 2008 had not, this led to spending cutbacks in the 2016 race in crucial areas, including the hiring of outreach staff in states like Michigan. This led to a string of similarly insane self-defeating decisions. As the book puts it, the "obsession with efficiency had come at the cost of broad voter contact in states that would become important battlegrounds."

    If the ending to this story were anything other than Donald Trump being elected president, Shattered would be an awesome comedy, like a Kafka novel a lunatic bureaucracy devouring itself. But since the ending is the opposite of funny, it will likely be consumed as a cautionary tale.

    Shattered is what happens when political parties become too disconnected from their voters. Even if you think the election was stolen, any Democrat who reads this book will come away believing he or she belongs to a party stuck in a profound identity crisis. Trump or no Trump, the Democrats need therapy and soon.
    Quick reply to this message   Report Post   

  27. #1887  
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Posts
    8,740
    Quote Originally Posted by jaredb_7 View Post
    Matt Taibbi is always pretty good, a really interesting piece on the new book Shattered, about the Clinton campaign...

    http://www.rollingstone.com/politics...aign=042017_16

    Here it is, if you can't click links

    Existential problems eh? The plague of career rather than conviction politicians. Bet Bernie Saunders camp didn't have that problem.

    Success formula:
    Success = Know what you want + Know how to get it + Know the price you'll have to pay.
    Quick reply to this message   Report Post   

  28. #1888  
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Posts
    11,790
    Quote Originally Posted by GrottonRed View Post
    You got an infraction for posting a link to a video and page full of racist and anti-semetic content.
    It was to you tube I thought?
    Quick reply to this message   Report Post   

  29. #1889  
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Posts
    17,799
    Quote Originally Posted by jaredb_7 View Post
    Matt Taibbi is always pretty good, a really interesting piece on the new book Shattered, about the Clinton campaign...

    http://www.rollingstone.com/politics...aign=042017_16

    Here it is, if you can't click links
    One could argue that it is not just limited to the Washington beltway. It is happening around the world whether it is the champagne socialists, the metropolitan elite or mainstream political parties who believe the electorate are either extremists, are not voicing concerns of the silent majority or don't just get the direction of the policies.

    As we have seen in various nations there tends to be a backlash that surprises the political elite
    Quick reply to this message   Report Post   

  30. #1890  
    White Star Line is online now Academy prospect
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Posts
    10,026
    I guess Trump isn't a fan of Wikileaks anymore.
    Quick reply to this message   Report Post   



Posting Permissions
  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •