Donald Trump


Recommended Posts

Fifteen million during an "off year!"

From Hank Rearden Quotes. “He, the man of violent energy and passionate ambition, the man of achievement, lighted by the flame of his success and flung into the midst of those pretentious ashes who called themselves an intellectual elite, the burned-out remnants of undigested culture, feeding on the afterglow of the minds of others, . . . end quote.

Daaaamn! Hank Rearden is our President. I tried to send President Trump a support letter but it wouldn’t go through to the White House.

From Robert Tracinski’s new book available in paperback or as an E Book: “So Who Is John Galt, Anyway? My Reader's Guide to Ayn Rand's Atlas Shrugged Is Now Available at Amazon.” Chapter 9: The Novel That Prevented Itself from Becoming Prophetic.  The ways in which Atlas Shrugged has become a historical novel rooted in a particular 20th Century cultural and political context--yet still manages to remain timely. end quote

Obviously, “Atlas Shrugged” has had that impact even if only one in ten Americans have ever read it. Those who read it rationally and understood its message, judge President Trump rationally. We are freer, safer, better off, and happier. We the Readers, have had an influence but America would not have risen to this level without Donald Trump and Ayn Rand. Peter    

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 4/29/2016 at 7:29 PM, Robert Campbell said:

Jon,

If all that is anti-Trump is uninterested in truth, then anyone who is anti-Trump is ipso facto impossible to convert (unless Donald Trump has custom-designed some falsehoods for that specific purpose).

And any statement by Donald Trump becomes immune to challenge, because a challenge is, well, anti-Trump.

Whatever.

The evident problem with Trump's statement quoted above is that keeping up the "cycle of hostility" might be Vladimir Putin's notion of what is best for Vladimir Putin.

If Putin so views it, what next?

Even though appeasement (Hillary's "reset") hasn't been working, Trump didn't rule it out.

What kind of confrontation is he willing to engage in?  What costs does he think are worth paying?

Do you know what he thinks?

For that matter, does he?

Robert

Billy, you are so cute in your pathetic spinelessness.

You walked away from Jonathan and others at your pathetic climate doom hysteria blog. You are losing, so you left. You're been wrong about everything for three years. Everything.

So now you console yourself by hunting down and liking posts of anyone you can find who ever said something mildly sassy to me. Three and a half years old. god you are a loser.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 9/27/2019 at 2:41 PM, Michael Stuart Kelly said:

From Rush Limbaugh today:

Don’t Doubt Me: The Democrats’ Impeachment Ploy Is Failing

In the backrooms, the Dems are in "Oh shit!" mode.

It's even worse than that for the Dems.

It's a hell of an article. here's the link if something ever happens to the tweet.

Intel Community Secretly Gutted Requirement Of First-Hand Whistleblower Knowledge
Federal records show that the intelligence community secretly revised the formal whistleblower complaint form in August 2019 to eliminate the requirement of direct, first-hand knowledge of wrongdoing.

Here is a simplified version from my understanding.

1. Let's start with me. When this whistleblower thing came out, I was almost sure it was another scam like the fake witnesses in the Kavanaugh hearing. But I kept seeing a report that the Acting Director of the Intelligence Community (DNI), Joseph Maguire, said to Congress that the whistleblower acted "by the book" in registering his whistleblower complaint. By then, I already knew the whistleblower was packaging hearsay and presenting it, so I wondered, How can overheard gossip be registered "by the book"? Well, it's easy if you change the book, as the article explains.

2. Notice that it's widely reported that the whistleblower complaint has been on Adam Schiff's desk since last August 12. But only now, at the end of September, he used it to raise hell. Why? Why did he wait?

3. Look at the rules. Before August, the Disclosure of Urgent Concern form of the ICIG (Intelligence Community Inspector General) stated that, to be categorized as credible, the information from a whistleblower cannot be "an employee’s second-hand knowledge of wrongdoing." There was even a big honking notice on the form: “FIRST-HAND INFORMATION REQUIRED."

4. Sometime in August 2019, precise date unknown to the press as of yet, this requirement changed and secondhand information became admissible as credible. A whistleblower is now given a checkbox on the form saying "I heard about it from others."

5. In other words, the Deep State tried to run this crap through Schiff, but slammed up against complaint rules that did not permit it to be used as credible. So presenting it in Congress would have been suicide for Schiff. But then, someone (backstage in some deep dark corner) changed the rules so second-hand information can be credible and got the new rules approved. This part is murky, but the new rules are there for all to see. I believe Schiff held onto the complaint for a month and a half to make sure nobody got pissed and changed the rules back to the requirement of first-hand knowledge. Once he felt that the new rules had "taken," he raised hell in Congress.

6. This is how Maguire was able to say, in a breathtakingly weaselly way and with a straight face, that the whistleblower complaint was filed "by the book." They had just changed the goddam book around the time (probably after) the complaint was filed so Schiff could use it within legal requirements to bash President Trump in Congress and prompt an impeachment inquiry.

They used the principle: If your crap is illegal and you still want to do it, change the law--preferably in a way no one will notice--and make it legal.

What scumbags.

Michael

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

SNL had their usual guy, Alec Baldwin, pretending to be Trump and he overdid the smirk face and pursed lip crap again. He is terrible. Its like a Vegas showgirl trying to do Kabuki. But they also lampooned the Dems and got a few laughs from me.   

Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 hours ago, Michael Stuart Kelly said:

They used the principle: If your crap is illegal and you still want to do it, change the law--preferably in a way no one will notice--and make it legal.

What scumbags.

And they are also using questions framed with keywords on the news to habituate the public to their narrative.

One frame in particular I have seen in many videos these last two or three days goes something like this: Are you comfortable with the president asking the head of a foreign nation to dig up dirt on his political opponent in an election?

They are talking about the transcript of the conversation between President Trump and President Zelensky (Ukraine). All anyone has to do is read the transcript to see that this question is about something that never happened.

And here's the sneaky part. The establishment is having reporters do this on Fox right when facts are being talked about, especially Biden's video bragging about the quid quo pro he demanded from the Ukraine government and a prosecutor who was investigating his son.

Well... it didn't work out so well this morning. Ed Henry tried this crap on Mark Levin and got his ass handed to him in a manner I rarely see on Fox anymore. It was a beautiful thing to behold and President Trump tweeted the entire interview. 

And the end of the interview...

Ah... now that's rational passion.

What's more, a slew of people are slamming the crap out of Ed Henry. President Trump retweeted a bunch of them.

For example (for just a few):

and...

and...

and this one which has been deleted by the account holder (probably due to a surge of threats from anti-Trumpers)...

image.png

and President Trump even retweeted this one:

Not a good day for Ed Henry.

And not a good day for the Soros media manipulation machine to inject a frame by sleaze into the mainstream.

:)

Michael

Link to comment
Share on other sites

In spite of SNL derision and the disgust of a majority of Americans, the haters who want to overturn the election and destroy America’s Constitution are still going full throttle. Below are headlines and info snipped from the Net.

Mitch McConnell says the Senate would have 'no choice' but to hold a trial if Trump is impeached.

From  Fox  News . Eric Trump on impeachment fight:  “'We're  going  to  win  again. This is going to backfire on them'He also called Elizabeth Warren, “Pocahontas’ on Fox and friends. Will this crap cause a civil war? Evangelicals are in a rage against the impeachment plot.

“Schiff and the chairs warned that “the failure of these department employees to appear for their scheduled depositions shall constitute evidence of obstruction of the House’s impeachment inquiry.” Schiff hinted last week that any stonewalling from the White House would simply “strengthen” their case on obstruction—which was a focus of informal House impeachment investigations prior to the Ukraine controversy. Despite the rapidly surfacing developments, Republicans are casting the impeachment inquiry as Russia investigation 2.0.”

Who is going to be forced to be there? Mike Pompeo, Inspector General Michael Atkinson, records from Rudy Giuliani, and former State Department officials. And “Any stonewalling from the White House would simply “strengthen” their case on obstruction.”

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sit. Sit! Give me your paw. Your paw! Good boy. Sometimes you have to raise your voice to be understood. Rush today. 60 Minutes deliberately lied about the whistleblower being under police protection because he feared for his life. The dude’s lawyer said 60 Minutes knew that wasn’t true, but Scott Pelley broadcast it anyway, as fake news propaganda. Sandy from New Port Rhode Island called to ask, if it is a crime to lie to Congress then why isn’t it a crime for congress to lie to us? Constant chaos is a tool to win the 2020 election. But Trump kind of thrives in chaos per Rush and even creates chaos at times to further his agenda. Trump will have a gold mine of facts to aid his campaign.

From the net. Claiming that Rep. Adam Schiff, D-Calif., chairman of the House Intelligence Committee, falsely described his phone call with the president of Ukraine, Trump tweeted Monday:  "Arrest for Treason?" Schiff did not immediately respond, but others called it an outrageous comment. "Out. Of. Control," tweeted Republican strategist Mike Murphy. "Treason? A POTUS saying this? #UnfitAndUnstable."

Edited by Peter
Is this a silent coup. Civil war coming?
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, william.scherk said:

Cuteness ...

William,

Not cuteness. Policy.

President Trump got consent from President Zelensky before releasing the transcript.

If it was cuteness only and these transcripts could be seen by anyone, I would like to see the transcripts of the calls between Obama and Putin, or Obama and Muslim authorities, or Obama and Soros, or Obama and Clinton for that matter. 

Michael

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This is kinda cute too ...

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Scott Adams has some good points about how this could lead to a landslide so thanks to Wilhelm for the clip on his blog and for this one on the Trump thread. Some democrats are not happy with the impeachment enquiry, though 90 percent are reported to be in favor of impeachment.  It would be tough getting along with your colleagues if you are a dissenter. And if I read it right there are 53 republican senators and 45 democrats and 2 independents who would be voting nay or yea.

Two thirds of the Senate would need to vote for impeachment for the process to succeed. One more time with a drum roll. TWO THIRDS of the 100 Senators would need to vote YES to convict The President. Now is that 66 and two thirds or is it rounded up to 67 or down to 66? So has our valiant President  committed Treason, Bribery, or High crimes and Misdemeanors? Horse crap. Peter  

edit If I read it right, two thirds of 100 senators would be 67 mathematically.

Notes. From the web. Vermont Gov. Phil Scott and Massachusetts Gov. Charlie Baker, both outspoken critics of Trump from the Northeast, said Thursday they favored the investigation, but Scott added that he would wait for more information before calling for further action against the president . . . . Sen. Mitt Romney (R-Utah) also said Wednesday that, "It remains troubling in the extreme. It’s deeply troubling.” That same day, The Post reported that further cracks were emerging privately among GOP senators.

The House of Representatives ... shall have the sole Power of Impeachment. — Article I, Section 2, Clause 5

The Senate shall have the sole Power to try all Impeachments. When sitting for that Purpose, they shall be on Oath or Affirmation. When the President of the United States is tried, the Chief Justice shall preside: And no Person shall be convicted without the Concurrence of two-thirds of the Members present. Judgment in Cases of Impeachment shall not extend further than to removal from Office, and disqualification to hold and enjoy any Office of honor, Trust or Profit under the United States; but the Party convicted shall nevertheless be liable and subject to Indictment, Trial, Judgment and Punishment, according to Law. —Article I, Section 3, Clauses 6 and 7

[The President] ... shall have power to grant reprieves and pardons for offenses against the United States, except in cases of impeachment. —Article II, Section 2

The President, Vice President and all civil Officers of the United States, shall be removed from Office on Impeachment for, and Conviction of, Treason, Bribery, or other high Crimes and Misdemeanors. —Article II, Section 4

Link to comment
Share on other sites

My fellow Americans. I am fed up with the scoundrels who call themselves Democrats. I am going to have an investigation led by a special prosecutor who will be appointed by a bipartisan group of Republicans and Democrats. They will investigate every politician of whatever party, who has profited, or who’s family members have profited, from dealings with foreign governments. To shorten the process we will go back to the beginning of the Obama administration and yes, we will also investigate my administration.

I can’t have this impeachment crap stopping my agenda. So I am asking every Republican Congressman to sign off on impeachment. You heard me right. I can’t order, but I am asking every Republican congressman to sign off on impeachment by Monday, October 7, 2019. And then I am asking the Senate to convene on October 14th to vote on my conviction or exoneration. And I suggest everyone reread the Constitution. At least two thirds is required for conviction by the Senate and 66 is not “at least two thirds.” 67 Senators is “at least” two thirds. Do your duty to your country. Signed . . . .      

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Man, some progressives are super-pissed off about the fake news legacy media targeting President Trump about the Ukraine and impeachment, not because they are targeting Trump, not because they are promoting impeachment, but because they are targeting Trump with easily debunked falsehoods rather than real stuff.

These kinds of progressives are bitterly complaining it's the Russian hoax all over again and will only serve to reelect President Trump.

In this video, Jimmy Dore used a phrase for respectable (to him) left-wing journalists who succumbed to Trump Derangement Syndrome so much, they started making shit up. I think it will become a catch phrase:

Quote

Trump broke his brain.

:)

Michael

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 9/30/2019 at 2:21 PM, william.scherk said:

Cute2

Moscow 'asked US to release details of conversation'

Quote

[...] "Look, I haven't been president all my life, but my previous life taught me that any of my conversation can become public," said Putin when asked to about the Trump-Ukraine scandal and ensuing impeachment inquiry. "I always proceed from this."

Putin added: "So when there were attempts to launch a scandal regarding my meeting with Trump in Helsinki — we directly told the administration to just publish it. If somebody wants to know something — just publish it, we don't mind."

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

In reality, the Electoral College split was 232/306. Trump's odd arithmetic 223 + 306 = 529.  

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just to be clear on one thing, I am not in denial about this impeachment thing. It is going nowhere and, no matter what happens, even if by some miracle, the House passes Articles of Impeachment, it will die in the Senate and serve to reinforce President Trump for the 2020 campaign. But I don't think it will pass the House.

If you are a Trump supporter, don't listen to the media until this dies down a little. The media is in on the scam. All the noise is a propaganda bluff.

Better yet, get your news from some social media personality or personalities you resonate with. Even if the person has a wacky side, it won't be more wacky than what we have seen in the legacy media the last three years. At least going the alt path, you will not have an expectation of being at the right place and expectation of seriousness that a traditional institution instills by default in your subconscious.

President Trump ain't going anywhere.

But the Deep State is...

And so is the legacy media...

Michael

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Good advise, Michael. I ignored the top, left three stories about Trump on MSN"s home page before entering this room. I was just checking my email and Jimmy, (Jimbo) Wales' assistant asked for 25 bucks like last year so I clicked on the link and donated 25 to Wikipedia. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 9/28/2019 at 7:17 PM, Michael Stuart Kelly said:

It's even worse than that for the Dems.

It's a hell of an article. here's the link if something ever happens to the tweet.

Intel Community Secretly Gutted Requirement Of First-Hand Whistleblower Knowledge
Federal records show that the intelligence community secretly revised the formal whistleblower complaint form in August 2019 to eliminate the requirement of direct, first-hand knowledge of wrongdoing.

Here is a simplified version from my understanding.

1. Let's start with me. When this whistleblower thing came out, I was almost sure it was another scam like the fake witnesses in the Kavanaugh hearing. But I kept seeing a report that the Acting Director of the Intelligence Community (DNI), Joseph Maguire, said to Congress that the whistleblower acted "by the book" in registering his whistleblower complaint. By then, I already knew the whistleblower was packaging hearsay and presenting it, so I wondered, How can overheard gossip be registered "by the book"? Well, it's easy if you change the book, as the article explains.

2. Notice that it's widely reported that the whistleblower complaint has been on Adam Schiff's desk since last August 12. But only now, at the end of September, he used it to raise hell. Why? Why did he wait?

3. Look at the rules. Before August, the Disclosure of Urgent Concern form of the ICIG (Intelligence Community Inspector General) stated that, to be categorized as credible, the information from a whistleblower cannot be "an employee’s second-hand knowledge of wrongdoing." There was even a big honking notice on the form: “FIRST-HAND INFORMATION REQUIRED."

4. Sometime in August 2019, precise date unknown to the press as of yet, this requirement changed and secondhand information became admissible as credible. A whistleblower is now given a checkbox on the form saying "I heard about it from others."

5. In other words, the Deep State tried to run this crap through Schiff, but slammed up against complaint rules that did not permit it to be used as credible. So presenting it in Congress would have been suicide for Schiff. But then, someone (backstage in some deep dark corner) changed the rules so second-hand information can be credible and got the new rules approved. This part is murky, but the new rules are there for all to see. I believe Schiff held onto the complaint for a month and a half to make sure nobody got pissed and changed the rules back to the requirement of first-hand knowledge. Once he felt that the new rules had "taken," he raised hell in Congress.

6. This is how Maguire was able to say, in a breathtakingly weaselly way and with a straight face, that the whistleblower complaint was filed "by the book." They had just changed the goddam book around the time (probably after) the complaint was filed so Schiff could use it within legal requirements to bash President Trump in Congress and prompt an impeachment inquiry.

They used the principle: If your crap is illegal and you still want to do it, change the law--preferably in a way no one will notice--and make it legal.

What scumbags.

Can you believe it?

It's even worse than that.

Look at this:

Intel Community IG Stonewalling Congress On Backdated Whistleblower Rule Changes
Michael Atkinson, the inspector general for U.S. intelligence agencies, acknowledged that his office secretly changed key whistleblower forms and rules in September, but refused to explain to lawmakers why those changes were backdated to August.

In a nutshell, back in August, some so-far-unnamed idiot filed a whistleblower complaint against President Trump with the Intel Community IG. He or she (meaning the idiot) started being coached by Adam Schiff's staff. Suddenly the alarm bells went off. Clang clang clang! Warning! Warning! The rules did not allow the idiot to do that because the complaint was based on secondhand information.

Then the fun started. Here's one way I see it probably unfolded (the dialogue is my invention, but based on what I think happened).

Sometime last month, in September, someone on the Schiff side looked at the complaint and went, "Uh, oh. This shit is fucked up. We weren't allowed to do that according to IG rules."

"No problem," said Inspector General Atkinson. "I'll just change the rules." So he did.

Then a little later, someone on the Schiff side went, "Uh, oh. This shit is still fucked up. The complaint was in August and the rule change was in September."

"No problem," said IG Atkinson. "I'll backdate the change in rules to August, before the complaint was filed. Voila. Problem solved. No one ever looks at changes in dates and stuff. Just don't tell anyone." So he illegally backdated the change.

Then they tried to hide this with doublespeak, but too many people are now on it.

And it looks like some people are going to go to jail.

Furthermore, it ain't going to be President Trump or anyone on his side.

Michael

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Today The President set a great example as a leader.

He refuses to be a participant in the abuse of his rights and today he outright vowed non-compliance with the abusers.

We have never had a President who expresses and stands for principles like this. Millions of Americans see this and will be affected by it. He will continue talking about the Federal Reserve and more and more he will apply this sort of language to the discussion. It is getting people talking about rights and constitutionality and next will be income tax, then thousands of laws that infringe on the 2nd, and much more.

 

I write on behalf of President Donald J. Trump in response to your numerous, legally unsupported demands made as part of what you have labeled-contrary to the Constitution of the United States and all past bipartisan precedent-as an "impeachment inquiry." As you know, you have designed and implemented your inquiry in a maimer that violates fundamental fairness and constitutionally mandated due process.

For example, you have denied the President the right to cross-examine witnesses, to call witnesses, to receive transcripts of testimony, to have access to evidence, to have counsel present, and many other basic rights guaranteed to all Americans. You have conducted your proceedingsinsecret. Youhaveviolatedcivillibertiesandtheseparationofpowersby tlu·eatening Executive Branch officials, claiming that you will seek to punish those who exercise fundamental constitutional rights and prerogatives. All of this violates the Constitution, the rule oflaw, and eve1ypastprecedent. Never before in our history has the House of Representatives-under the control of either political party-taken the American people down the dangerous path you seem determined to pursue.

 

I. Your "Inquiry" Is Constitutionally Invalid and Violates Basic Due Process Rights and the Separation of Powers.

Your inquiry is constitutionally invalid and a violation of due process. In the history of our Nation, the House of Representatives has never attempted to launch an impeachment inquiry against the President without a majority of the House taking political accountability for that decisionbyvotingtoauthorizesuchadramaticconstitutionalstep. Here,Houseleadership claims to have initiated the gravest inter-branch conflict contemplated under our Constitution by means of nothing more than a press conference at which the Speaker of the House simply announced an "official impeachment inquiry."

 

II. The Invalid "Impeachment Inquiry" Plainly Seeks To Reverse the Election of 2016 and To Influence the Election of 2020.

The effort to impeach President Tnnnp-----without regard to any evidence of his actions in office�is a naked political strategy that began the day he was inaugurated, and perhaps even before. 17 In fact, your transparent rush to judgment, lack of democratically accountable authorization, and violation of basic rights in the current proceedings make clear the illegitimate, partisan purpose of this purported "impeachment inquiry." The Founders, however, did not create the extraordinary mechanism of impeachment so it could be used by a political party that feared for its prospects against the sitting President in the next election. The decision as to who will be elected President in 2020 should rest with the people of the United States, exactly where the Constitution places it.

https://www.whitehouse.gov/wp-content/uploads/2019/10/PAC-Letter-10.08.2019.pdf

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now