Donald Trump


Recommended Posts

10 hours ago, william.scherk said:

Each post/comment has a "report post" link attached. One can click that link and file a complaint that the admin will deal with. 

In any case, posting information, links and tweets is what almost all of us active OLers does. The other thing to consider is that OL has a "silent" readership. 

Ah. So Shakespearean. I wonder how many unobserved readers listen to any of us?  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, Jon Letendre said:

OL entertains with a smile daily crap not worth debating or else OL is a cult?

Really?

Jon,

That's a false dichotomy.

Here's the part you don't get. I will put it in the mouth of a woman you read, Tiffany FitzHenry.

I was curious about her, so I went to her Twitter feed. (btw - I like her. :) ) 

Right at the top, there's this:

She gets it.

So far you don't, or better, I've seen you get glimpses, but then you then fall back into your outrage as if outrage all by itself changes the world.

Think about it.

Michael

Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 hours ago, Jon Letendre said:

Quote your sentence and tell me how to interpret it.

Then we can compare to how I interpreted it to see if I got it wrong like you said I did.

Jon,

What's riding you on this?

Here's my full initial post re the Tiffany FitzHenry Tweet:

On October 9, 2019 at 2:39 PM, Ellen Stuttle said:

Their describing Trump as a threat to "our" way of life is macabrely ironic.  He's a threat to their way of killing.

However, what's new about the Tweet announcement you posted?  Hasn't it been known for a long time that the Bush administration didn't have evidence of Iraq's possessing weapons of mass destruction?

Ellen

I didn't say there isn't anything new in it.  I asked what is new.  I still have no idea what, if anything, you think is new, let alone why a document which was declassified four years ago (according to information William provided) would be a bombshell revelation now.

Ellen

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Ellen Stuttle said:

Jon,

What's riding you on this?

Here's my full initial post re the Tiffany FitzHenry Tweet:

I didn't say there isn't anything new in it.  I asked what is new.  I still have no idea what, if anything, you think is new, let alone why a document which was declassified four years ago (according to information William provided) would be a bombshell revelation now.

Ellen

Prickly, prickly.

No, Ellen, your sentence,

Hasn't it been known for a long time that the Bush administration didn't have evidence of Iraq's possessing weapons of mass destruction?”

 ... does not mean just: What is new? The previous sentence (“what's new about the Tweet announcement?”) handled that quite thoroughly.

Rather, it brings an additional thought, namely,

*Why bother with what we already know?*

It’s worthless, counterproductive, Negative Nancy crap.

But you are not going to own spewing some Negative Nancy crap in this instance, and that’s ok.

Good talk, thanks, bye.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 hours ago, Peter said:
On 10/10/2019 at 11:00 AM, william.scherk said:

The other thing to consider is that OL has a "silent" readership. 

I wonder how many unobserved readers listen to any of us?  

I believe that the OL software does not count bots and spiders when it returns a page of results under 'Browse/Online Users.' If one checks that page, I think it gives a more-or-less-correct snapshot of visitors at any given time:

2019-10-11-OnlineUsersObjectivistLiving.

 

Edited by william.scherk
Tightened up quote from Peter Taylor
Link to comment
Share on other sites

In Loosiana tonight: “The radical Democrats’ policies are crazy. Their politicians are corrupt. Their candidates are terrible,” Mr. Trump said to huge applause. “And they know they can’t win on Election Day so they’re pursuing an illegal, invalid and unconstitutional bullshit impeachment.”

Deputy Sheriff Barney Fife: Oh my. Such language. Aunt Bee, what do you think?

I think Sheriff Andy needs to stop drinking three beers before dinner.

But . . . Aunt Bee? Andy doesn’t drink.

Well. It must have been his sense of humor taking over.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I watched a little of the Louisiana “Keep America Great,” rally. Trump’s fans are so worked up, it is awesome. After two years of his Precedency, Trump supporter are hyped because he has done such a stupendous job. I remember his  local pre-election rally at Stephen Decatur High School in Berlin, Maryland and the response was great but now I see a real “love” for our President being expressed for all he has done, and for all he will do. Peter  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Donald J. Trump. JFK?  DJT? The initials JFK Compared to DJT? I am not sure the initials will resonate like Jack’s but I think President Donald J. Trump is resonating with America just as JFK did before . .  . and after JFK’s assassination. I am sure the Secret Service is better qualified and alert but I still worry about the crazies. I have seen two Trump 2020 flags in my neighborhood now. And so, to bed.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Key words Firtash, Manafort, Shokin ...

Bonus Mike Huckabee and the (allegedly) Dirty Duo ...

 

Edited by william.scherk
Added links for keywords
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On another thread, William (in gaslighting mode :) ) asked Peter the following:

2 hours ago, william.scherk said:

How would we know if your opinion is right or wrong (or a mixture), Peter? 

And in William's post above, he gave a good example to work on to answer that. So here goes.

 

The best starting place is, you have to relate your previous knowledge of dishonest actors to the new messages they bring out.

Here's a simple way of saying it. Presume that habitual liars will lie.

For example, let's enlarge the highlighted phrase from the tweet of the progressive leftie, Laura Rozen, who William quoted. We should enlarge it to make sure we can read it easily instead of skimming it to get a general impression since the lady writes deceptively.

image.png

For those who don't know the weeds of the Ukraine mess all that well, Shokin is the prosecutor in the Ukraine who Biden got fired, the one who was investigating the Burisma corruption (and by extension, Joe Biden's son, Hunter Biden). By now you have to have seen the video of Joe Biden bragging that he got a prosecutor in the Ukraine fired on pain of the Ukraine not getting a cool billion dollars in loan guarantees. Shokin is that prosecutor.

(Firtash is not important for my point about identifying liars and sources. But, to place him in the big picture, he's a Ukrainian oligarch not in favor with the Biden and Deep State side. Also, not important to my point, but worth mentioning is that Shokin has provided a sworn affidavit. Rozen has nothing.)

Now notice with whom the credibility of Shokin has eroded: "observers in the U.S. and Ukraine, who already viewed his campaign against Biden as the vendetta of a corrupt bureaucrat."

So who are these people, these observers in the U.S. and the Ukraine? Note. You ALWAYS have to ask that kind of question to judge the information you get from the fake news these days. Who are the people being used as sources?

In this case, those people are obviously Biden's people at the very minimum. Duh...

:) 

Man, old Shokin lost so much credibility with them, Quid Quo Pro Joe shook down the entire Ukraine government over him for a cool billion. But the Rozen lady thinks it's just awful that Shokin is losing even more credibility with Biden's people.

Actually she doesn't. She merely used this as a pretext to make the language sound like it was everybody who is anybody in the U.S and Ukraine. I think even she believes clarifying who these people are would have sounded retarded.

And at another "duh" level of identification for who else she is talking about, she obviously means Shokin's enemies. You know, the ones who (to quote her words once again) "already viewed his campaign against Biden as the vendetta of a corrupt bureaucrat."

In other words, the people who were already calling Shokin a corrupt bureaucrat were losing faith in him.

:) 

Hard-hitting news, huh? :) 

Once again, she slanted it to imply both the US and the Ukraine don't think much of him. 

See? Just pay attention to the sources and who is reporting such sources and you will not get confused.

Now that everybody in the reporting is all identified and stuff, we can evaluate things. (The principle is to identify correctly in order to judge correctly.)

For example, William thinks this kind of sourcing and reporting are proper habits in top notch journalism. That's probably why he keeps trying to gaslight people with it.

As to myself, I think it's all horseshit.

I would think it horseshit as journalism even if it expressed views I agreed with.

It's easy once you know who the people are that people are talking about.

 

To make sure the question has been answered, here is a paraphrase. How do you know if the opinions you adopt about current affairs are right or wrong when you have to glean the facts informing them from the press?

Well, it's easy-peasy. Don't believe habitual liars at face value. And, if the sources are horseshit, don't believe them at face value either. In fact, with both, liars and horseshit, assume as default they are presenting propaganda, not information.

Most other reporters and sources are probably reliable. And even then, don't trust them until you have verified them as best you can.

Michael

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I went out to give my outside cat a snack just after dark and heard two shots fired from my right, about a mile away. Then I heard two more shots from my left about a mile away. Weird. It got me to think about possible coups against President Trump. That would start another Civil War, but I think Americans would rise up and shoot the bastards. The modern day progressive /  communists are sick, enraged, and violent. Peter  

edit. I also think the shots were fired by patriots . . .  possibly . . .  but I don't know why it was coordinated like that. 

Edited by Peter
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On October 11, 2019 at 2:26 PM, Jon Letendre said:

Prickly, prickly.

No, Ellen, your sentence,

Hasn't it been known for a long time that the Bush administration didn't have evidence of Iraq's possessing weapons of mass destruction?”

 ... does not mean just: What is new? The previous sentence (“what's new about the Tweet announcement?”) handled that quite thoroughly.

Rather, it brings an additional thought, namely,

*Why bother with what we already know?*

It’s worthless, counterproductive, Negative Nancy crap.

But you are not going to own spewing some Negative Nancy crap in this instance, and that’s ok.

Good talk, thanks, bye.

Jon,

The additional thought you attribute to me  - "Why bother with what we already know?" - was nowhere near my mind.  I was curious because of the "BOMBSHELL" with which Tiffany FitzHenry began her Tweet .  Although what she reported in the Tweet itself wasn't new, the dramatic beginning made me wonder if something startlingly new which she didn't specify was in the document.   Apparently, no - and the document wasn't "newly declassified," as she mistakenly thought.

She looks like she might be pretty young from her photo.  Possibly she wasn't noticing politics 15-16 years ago when people were becoming aware that Bush and co. had been selling a bill of goods about Hussein's non-existent WMDs.

Ellen

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 1/19/2019 at 4:16 PM, Jon Letendre said:

Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi was trying to leave the country on Thursday and she is second in line of Presidential succession, after Vice President Pence.

Interesting about her plans to leave the country Thursday is this arrest of a man who "planned to attack the White House on Thursday" with anti-tank rockets, rifles and other explosives https://www.wsbtv.com/news/local/atlanta/forsyth-county-man-charged-with-plot-to-attack-white-house-fbi-says/905525963

 

Nancy donning royal purple, of course. Donna Brazille tweet yesterday:

 

HV-rCq8I_bigger.jpgDonna BrazileVerified account @donnabrazile
FollowFollow @donnabrazile
More

Donna Brazile Retweeted TIME

#MadamSpeaker today #PresidentPelosi shortly thereafter #MLKWeekend is underway Keep Hope Alive!

Donna Brazile added,

OdBoPJnWaPhyiD9f.jpg
2:12
Verified account
 
1:35 PM - 18 Jan 2019

 

Nancy is busily signaling the assassination of President Trump again.

This time wearing orange(Man) beads and a bullet on her wrist, and wearing a greenlight dress. Signals sent to multiple sleeper MK Ultra assets.

Pedo Joe almost let their Hail Mary scheme slip, but he caught it in time ... 

 

EG9Hh5CWoAEuuwh?format=jpg&name=large

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, Peter said:

I have a hunch. Something is going on with the TDS crowd. And it's not good. 

Peter,

It's called losing and knowing it this time around.

They didn't know it during the 2016 election, but this time they do.

Not only are they going down, they are getting a glimpse of what their own souls are made of. That's why they keep slamming the door shut on reason in public discourse and cheating all the time in politics.

So look at the cornered animals.

Observe what panic looks like to power-mongers losing their power.

See how they snarl.

:) 

This is the stuff wars are made out of.

Except, these idiots are constrained by the Constitution with those big beautiful checks and balances in it.

Oh, and there's this. If they ever do manage to prompt an armed uprising (which, I believe they are too half-assed to pull off), which side do you want to be on? The one that wants to disarm citizens and "control the narrative" to control the population, or the other that has oodles of well oiled guns and goes to the shooting range to train all the time? These last already have their narrative in place and have had it that way since the founding of the country.

I can't think of these last without the words: "You want to take my freedom away from me? Come and get it."

:)

Michael

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It really is extraordinary what Trump’s team is doing to the criminals. He has the goods on them, they know he does. But they haven’t been arrested. Imagine that tension for a moment, imagine being them. When will you get arrested? Why won’t they arrest you? Maybe you’ve noticed that your security team isn’t yours anymore — you’ve tried whatever and whatever and they prevent you every time, they’re your keepers, you kind of are under arrest. You make overt, failed attempts at his life, but you are still left “free.” You try a make-believe impeachment inquiry but your targets publically laugh at you, publishing their attorney letters telling you to go to hell. Then Elijah swallows something from a Thai lab and is gone. Now fucking what?! Your bosses assure you you will not wake up in the morning if you quit the job. It hits you just how hopeless the situation is. You think about your grandchildren learning what you’ve done for power, money and prestige. You start to envy Elijah

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