President Donald Trump

President Donald Trump

I assume it's still acceptable to have a Trump thread in a Politics forum?

So this is an obvious lie - basically aimed at

104 Views
28 April 2019 at 04:18 AM
Reply...

39342 Replies


Earlier posts are available on our legacy forum HERE

by Victor

soooo many people are perfectly fine with mass murder for profit so long as its dressed up properly.

You have a false theory of economics if you think war is good for business overall.


my god victor is dumb


ok "anti-Imperialist"


by TheBigEasy

You’re an idiot. Stop posting.

To be fair, we're also idiots for reading his posts and, even worse, responding to his posts.


by chezlaw

They've stumbled over the accidentally dominant strategy of deleting it so they can lie about it while it still being wildly seen because others incessantly show it to mock.

Why wouldn't they delete it?

Have to admit, I have almost no idea what you just said.


by StoppedRainingMen

Even his stupid ass signature legislation is ‘the one big beautiful bill’

Never mind, one day soon we can all read the big beautiful obituary.


by checkraisdraw

You have a false theory of economics if you think war is good for business overall.

It can be good for some profits, which is certainly something to be wary of.

But to paraphrase an economist I once heard: If it was good for the economy overall, we'd be producing tanks and dumping them in the ocean.


by weeeez

Do you ever wonder what the right will say about the next (or next next) president being not presidential after Trump?
I can't see anyone ever again point at a US president not being presidential ever again.

And yet, it will happen.

Even looking back at the normal world of a decade ago, tan suit was already hard to grasp


The hand of Job:


I will never unsee this.


by tame_deuces

It can be good for some profits, which is certainly something to be wary of.

But to paraphrase an economist I once heard: If it was good for the economy overall, we'd be producing tanks and dumping them in the ocean.

The US uniquely came out of the Second World War much richer than it went in, despite the huge cost. This is a little mysterious and there isn't a commonly mentioned explanation for the paradox.

One part is that the US took most of Britain's foreign exchange and gold, during the first half of the war when the US wasn't fighting, in payment for mainly pretty moderate military kit at gouging prices. Another part is that US-owned subsidiaries built, for profit, most of the German army's trucks and other kit like the Focke-Wulf 200 maritime patrol bomber and the famous 190 fighter plane, throughout the war and regardless of 'trading with the enemy' after December 1941. Of course Standard Oil, Du Pont and IBM also benefited from contracts with the Third Reich.

So it helps to be profiting from both sides (just as Ian Fleming's grandfather made his fortune selling jute sandbags to both sides in the American Civil War.) But I don't know if that's the complete explanation.


You tell him, Donny!

(tbf rbg & obama made a disastrous historical mistake, and there’s no way fdr or lbj wouldn’t have coaxed her into assuming senior status in the summer of 2013)


What a petty mfer

The Trump administration has abruptly canceled a multimillion-dollar contract with a Catholic charity that houses and cares for migrant children amid the president’s feud with Pope Leo XIV.


by biggerboat

What a petty mfer

The Trump administration has abruptly canceled a multimillion-dollar contract with a Catholic charity that houses and cares for migrant children amid the president’s feud with Pope Leo XIV.

Well, at least the Separation-of-Church-and-State crowd finally have something to be happy about.


Isn't the separation of church and state crowd just the entire United States since it's dictated by the Constitution?


by Gorgonian

Isn't the separation of church and state crowd just the entire United States since it's dictated by the Constitution?

No.

Neither the phrase 'separation of church and state' nor the concept itself exists in the Constitution.


by geezerchess

No.

Neither the phrase 'separation of church and state' nor the concept itself exists in the Constitution.

But the phrase has been used in the interpretation of the first amendment by the US Supreme Court since the early 1800s.


by jjjou812

But the phrase has been used in the interpretation of the first amendment by the US Supreme Court since the early 1800s.

So, is it your opinion that the U.S. government helping to fund a Catholic charity violates the First Amendment?


Sounds like the stupid constitution isn’t worth very much if people can’t even agree what it says apart from the right for people to shoot each other to death in “self defence”.


by jjjou812

But the phrase has been used in the interpretation of the first amendment by the US Supreme Court since the early 1800s.

The same court that ruled that slaves were property of their owners? And even if a slave flees to a free state, he has to be retuned to his owner?


Pope Leo bringing the heat

Pope Leo XIV: A ‘handful of tyrants’ are ravaging earth with war and exploitation


by jalfrezi

Sounds like the stupid constitution isn’t worth very much if people can’t even agree what it says apart from the right for people to shoot each other to death in “self defence”.

That doesn't logically follow. DUCY?


He is correct, of course.


by jalfrezi

Sounds like the stupid constitution isn’t worth very much if people can’t even agree what it says apart from the right for people to shoot each other to death in “self defence”.

Ya, wonder what those silly founders were so upset about and fled to the Americas to form a new country. Probably they just didn't like tea.

Just way too many paid propagandists in America now who warp everything to fit whatever today's bs narrative is. They are all on a rope being pulled in the same direction. Want to earn some extra cash guys? Become a podcaster / influencer and grow a base. Eventually some dark money will come your way asking you to speak out about certain topics... just don't ask what the source is.


by FreakDaddy

Ya, wonder what those silly founders were so upset about and fled to the Americas to form a new country. Probably they just didn't like tea.Just way too many paid propagandists in America now who warp everything to fit whatever today's bs narrative is. They are all on a rope being pulled in the same direction. Want to earn some extra cash guys? Become a podcaster / influencer a

While I like a lot of what Tucker is saying, he probably gets dark money by the same organizations that Victor donates to.


by geezerchess

No.

Neither the phrase 'separation of church and state' nor the concept itself exists in the Constitution.

It sure seems to me that Thomas Jefferson, and largely the Supreme Court, would disagree with that assertion.

https://firstamendment.mtsu.edu/article/...

Reply...