Jump to content
Join the Unexplained Mysteries community today! It's free and setting up an account only takes a moment.
- Sign In or Create Account -
IBelieveWhatIWant

Trump wants to become president for life?

306 posts in this topic

Recommended Posts

GlitterRose
1 hour ago, Lilly said:

Dictators don't want the population to be armed at all. Dictators don't reduce regulations, they increase them. Dictators don't joke about their dictatorial pursuits. 

That's correct.

What's that he said? 

Oh...I remember. 

Ought to just do away with due process and take the guns. 

I don't think he is joking. 

Edited by ChaosRose
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
LV-426

I can't believe any credible news agency would actually try to make a story out of this. It's just Trump being Trump.

Whether it's a joke, a bad attempt at diplomacy, or a clever aside to draw media attention away from other news, it's a non-story.

They might as well post a story about me wanting to be king in a land full of Margo Robbie clones... there's about as much possibility of Trump becoming president for life in the land of the free...

  • Like 5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
IBelieveWhatIWant
18 minutes ago, LV-426 said:

They might as well post a story about me wanting to be king in a land full of Margo Robbie clones... there's about as much possibility of Trump becoming president for life in the land of the free...

Do you really think America is truly the "Land of the Free"? Privatised prisons, schools looking very similar to jails, monopolised ISP's, extreme poverty, even greater tax cuts for the rich, a "watchdog" headed by a former ISP lawyer with obvious bias. But sure I guess men and women can speak out against things they disagree with freely...for now http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/us-politics/trump-free-speech-libel-law-michael-wolff-fire-fury-mental-state-latest-a8145741.html

 

Yep, "Land of the free" alright.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
LV-426
14 minutes ago, IBelieveWhatIWant said:

Do you really think America is truly the "Land of the Free"? Privatised prisons, schools looking very similar to jails, monopolised ISP's, extreme poverty, even greater tax cuts for the rich, a "watchdog" headed by a former ISP lawyer with obvious bias. But sure I guess men and women can speak out against things they disagree with freely...for now http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/us-politics/trump-free-speech-libel-law-michael-wolff-fire-fury-mental-state-latest-a8145741.html

 

Yep, "Land of the free" alright.

America has its problems, the same as the rest of us do.

I could post stories about corruption and injustice in your country, my country... any country. None of us are perfect when we're governed by self-serving political elites and big business.

There has to be a sense of reality though. There are plenty of issues out there to discuss regarding economics, environment, law, etc. without resorting to headlines like this one. It just backs up what people say about looking for any excuse whatsoever to discredit Trump, and undermines any any actual debate on his policies.

Edited by LV-426
  • Like 7

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
GlitterRose
2 hours ago, Lilly said:

Dictators don't want the population to be armed at all. Dictators don't reduce regulations, they increase them. Dictators don't joke about their dictatorial pursuits. 

The bit about regulations is a little more complicated.

Dictators are all for lots of regulations on the average Joe.

They're not for regulations on their buddies. 

Dictators and oligarchs alike prefer few regulations on them and theirs, because it allows kleptocracy.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Hammerclaw
9 hours ago, Likely Guy said:

Providing your tax returns used to be a tradition as well until someone chose to ignore it.

Mine was rather handsome this year, and my health insurance is free--but that may be particular to my State and my income and senior citizen status.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
F3SS

The difference between this rumor when it applies to Obama and Trump is that Obama had extreme sycophant support in Congress and throughout the media and an opposition party who were afraid to criticize him. One could’ve justified a tiny cause for concern there.

Trump otoh has mostly reluctant support in Congress, a few media pundits on his side, the rest of the media is actively out to fry him and an opposition party that would openly be happy to literally see him die right now. The guy can’t even eat KFC without the media doing an expose on how he eats it the wrong way. Yet he’ll become dictator on a whim at his own will? Ok.

Edited by F3SS
  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Helen of Annoy
6 minutes ago, ChaosRose said:

The bit about regulations is a little more complicated.

Dictators are all for lots of regulations on the average Joe.

They're not for regulations on their buddies. 

Dictators and oligarchs alike prefer few regulations on them and theirs, because it allows kleptocracy.

May I also add that dictators love to regulate press. They absolutely need their own news agency, reporters that know exactly what has to be said and exactly how, but they consider free press their mortal enemy. For a reason, of course. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Hammerclaw
3 minutes ago, Helen of Annoy said:

May I also add that dictators love to regulate press. They absolutely need their own news agency, reporters that know exactly what has to be said and exactly how, but they consider free press their mortal enemy. For a reason, of course. 

Well, that's a pretty good description of the Obama years, with the vast majority of the Press marching lock-step with the Administration. Hardly the case, now, quite the opposite, actually.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Helen of Annoy
33 minutes ago, Hammerclaw said:

Well, that's a pretty good description of the Obama years, with the vast majority of the Press marching lock-step with the Administration. Hardly the case, now, quite the opposite, actually.

Was it Obama that reintroduced Fake News (Lügenpresse) phrase? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Aquila King
5 hours ago, preacherman76 said:

Mmm Clinton actually RAPED women.

Not to defend Clinton here, but that's a bit of an exaggeration. He used his power to coerce a single woman (Monica Lewinski) to give him sexual favors. She has for years claimed that she did so consentingly, though recently came out saying that she was assaulted against her will once the Me Too movement began.

My point is, it's been a bit more ambiguous as to whether or not it was consent or sexual assault, but regardless, I think we can all agree that it was deeply unethical. One could easily argue that with the power of the office of presidency, consent is impossible. No one in Clinton's position of power should have any kind of sexual relationship with an intern, consenting or otherwise.

So yes, I agree that it was disgusting and wrong. Though calling it outright 'rape' is just hyperbolic language to the greatest degree.

5 hours ago, preacherman76 said:

Trumps comment had nothing to do with assault.

I'll quote him again: "I don't even wait"

Wait for what? What's clearly implied is that he doesn't wait for consent.

You're only defending this because of some dumb primitive tribalistic mentality.

You support Trump, therefore in your mind he must be defended no matter how indefensible his words and actions may be.

5 hours ago, preacherman76 said:

He was talking about how women throw themselves at rich people like himself.

LOL. That's a rather loose interpretation of his words.

Might as well say he tripped and his penis fell right into that porn star's vagina.

5 hours ago, preacherman76 said:

Not one women has ever accused him of anything before he ran for office, and every one of them dropped their law suits soon as it was over.

First of all, the only reason women came forward is because they finally had video evidence of him bragging about assaulting women in the first place, which empowered them to step forward, thinking that their voices would finally be heard. But unfortunately due to people like you, they get smeared while the accused (and self-admitted) sex abuser is defended and made president of all things.

Second, Not a one of them has recanted their story, and some have continued to tell their story front and center to this day.

But of course, again, the victims of sexual assault are the ones who are attacked while the self-admitted sex abuser is defended incessantly...

This is why you people disgust me.

5 hours ago, preacherman76 said:

Not only that but the dems were PAYING women to say he assaulted them.

This is some Alex Jones level conspiracy BS.

I'd ask you to prove it, but given that there's literally no evidence of this I'll just ignore it and move on...

5 hours ago, preacherman76 said:

To compare him to the true monster that is Bill Clinton is a injustice.

No, to defend sexual assault when it's committed by someone on your 'team' while opposing it when someone on the other team does it is the greatest injustice, literally.

Stop pretending like you care so deeply about sexual assault victims. If you did, you'd be going after Trump just as much as Bill Clinton as I have. But you won't, because you're a partisan political hack who will defend Trump no matter what he does because he's on your side. Go team!

You people disgust me to no end...

5 hours ago, preacherman76 said:

In turn, you don't have to believe every lie told about him either.

And I'm sure in your mind, anything that ever in any way paints him in a negative light, EVER, is conveniently considered a 'lie.' Even when we have him on tape.

You should win a gold medal for mental gymnastics here.

5 hours ago, preacherman76 said:

Especially when they have been directly caught lying about him several times.

Prove it.

5 hours ago, preacherman76 said:

I mean do you believe he tried to kill fish when he was in Japan?

I honestly have no earthly idea what you're talking about.

5 hours ago, preacherman76 said:

What he said regarding China was a clear sarcastic joke. I cant understand for the life of me how you could believe otherwise.

Again, what?

And btw, relevance please?

5 hours ago, preacherman76 said:

None of you were billionaires with women throwing themselves at you. He never said anything about assault.  

Keep telling yourself this convenient false narrative all you want. Fact of the matter is, he did brag about sexual assault. We have him on tape doing so. And now we have multiple credible accounts of women accusing him of the very thing he bragged about. The only reason you overlook this and defend him is because it suits your political agenda.

Don't pretend that you give a s**t about sexual assault victims. If you did, you'd actually be disgusted by this. But no, of course not. I'd venture a guess that you'd also quickly defend that pedophile Roy Moore as well since he's on your team.

This should go beyond politics, but unfortunately you have to turn it into another partisan political issue.

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
GlitterRose
56 minutes ago, Helen of Annoy said:

May I also add that dictators love to regulate press. They absolutely need their own news agency, reporters that know exactly what has to be said and exactly how, but they consider free press their mortal enemy. For a reason, of course. 

Propaganda outlets...praised.

Actual news...disdained. 

Check.

It's interesting how the tabloids have fallen in line. 

No one was surprised about Fox News.

Edited by ChaosRose
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Hammerclaw
14 minutes ago, Helen of Annoy said:

Was it Obama that reintroduced Fake News (Lügenpresse) phrase? 

Are you saying there isn't any? Propaganda, a term I'm sure you are familiar with, would be more appropriate.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
IBelieveWhatIWant
58 minutes ago, Hammerclaw said:

Well, that's a pretty good description of the Obama years, with the vast majority of the Press marching lock-step with the Administration. Hardly the case, now, quite the opposite, actually.

Oh yeah, it WAS Obama who started his own news program wasn't it? Oh wait that was Trump. Also there was a study done by Oxford University that showed Trump supporters shared more actual fake news than anyone else (this was leading up to the State of The Union address). If you wanna throw fake news/propaganda to anyone, might wanna think about your own party there.

  • Like 5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
GlitterRose
23 minutes ago, Hammerclaw said:

Are you saying there isn't any? Propaganda, a term I'm sure you are familiar with, would be more appropriate.

Lol...there's lots of it.

It's just that it's largely in support of Trump. 

Haven't you noticed The Enquirer at every check stand in America? 

Isn't it interesting that they suddenly stopped talking about the Loch Ness Monster and celebrity gossip...and now they're full on pro-Trump propaganda?

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
GlitterRose

Actual news outlets might get something wrong once in a while, and they'll admit to it.

Fox News is now all propaganda, all the time. And unapologetic about it. 

And it's like the POTUS has adopted Hitler's ideas on the Big Lie.

Say it enough times and people will believe it's true. 

And he has lots of help with that from a hostile foreign power that is tech savvy.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Hammerclaw
18 minutes ago, IBelieveWhatIWant said:

Oh yeah, it WAS Obama who started his own news program wasn't it? Oh wait that was Trump. Also there was a study done by Oxford University that showed Trump supporters shared more actual fake news than anyone else (this was leading up to the State of The Union address). If you wanna throw fake news/propaganda to anyone, might wanna think about your own party there.

Why, when the opposition party owns the vast majority of the press, who's members in an equally vast majority are Democrats? You strain at a gnat and swallow a camel.

Edited by Hammerclaw

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Hammerclaw
3 minutes ago, ChaosRose said:

Lol...there's lots of it.

It's just that it's largely in support of Trump. 

Haven't you noticed The Enquirer at every check stand in America? 

Isn't it interesting that they suddenly stopped talking about the Loch Ness Monster and celebrity gossip...and now they're full on pro-Trump propaganda?

What's that against the hundreds against him?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
GlitterRose
Just now, Hammerclaw said:

What's that against the hundreds against him?

Well...when you're the POTUS and you're only lying when your lips are moving

when you are obviously (at least) looking the other way while a hostile foreign power has its way with the US

when you're so corrupt that the stench of it is raising up to the heavens and choking the whole lot Devil's Advocate-style...

there's stuff to report. 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
GlitterRose

And then you've got the evangelicals sidling on up to him during this whole ugly episode.

Why?

Well...it sure seems like immanentize the eschaton are the marching orders of the day.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
IBelieveWhatIWant
13 minutes ago, Hammerclaw said:

Why, when the opposition party owns the vast majority of the press, who's members in an equally vast majority are Democrats? You strain at a gnat and swallow a camel.

You would have a case for msm being unfairly against Trump if he wasn't a compulsive liar.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
ExpandMyMind
1 hour ago, Aquila King said:

I'd venture a guess that you'd also quickly defend that pedophile Roy Moore as well since he's on your team.

I don't think he did support him but and then actually voted for the guy. 

Edited by ExpandMyMind
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Aquila King
39 minutes ago, ExpandMyMind said:

I don't think he did support him but and then actually voted for the guy. 

I already had little to no respect for and then to start with.

Though now I'll be sure to remind him of his support for a pedophile the next time he wants to preach about 'morals.'

I don't ever want to hear him say he cares about morality ever again.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Tatetopa

You know that president for life is not as long in some countries as it is in others.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Setton

Given his propensity for diet cokes, lack of sleep and opinion on exercise, I'd say there's a good chance he'll be president for life anyway. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
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

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.