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 -

Resistance From Inside Trump Admin


Farmer77
 Share

Recommended Posts

6 minutes ago, RoofGardener said:

Ummm.... no ? Not even remotely similar ? 

Sure there are some definite similarities. As @odas pointed out above both rose to power after a long slow economic recovery , both rose to power at a time when nationalism and totalitarian attitudes are on the rise, neither are exactly on speaking terms with the truth, both have fanatical followers etc. However the scapegoating and marginalization of minority groups and democrats for not being hard enough on minority groups being probably the most obvious IMO

Quote

......"Voice or no voice, the people can always be brought to the bidding of the leaders. That is easy. All you have to do is tell them they are being attacked, and denounce the pacifists for lack of patriotism, and exposing the country to greater danger.”

— Herman Goering at the Nuremberg trials

 Now with all of that being said I do think its more productive to speak of dictatorial tactics and tendencies in general rather than jumping straight to the Hitler analogies.

 

 

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Farmer77 said:

Sure there are some definite similarities. As @odas pointed out above both rose to power after a long slow economic recovery , both rose to power at a time when nationalism and totalitarian attitudes are on the rise, neither are exactly on speaking terms with the truth, both have fanatical followers etc. However the scapegoating and marginalization of minority groups and democrats for not being hard enough on minority groups being probably the most obvious IMO

 Now with all of that being said I do think its more productive to speak of dictatorial tactics and tendencies in general rather than jumping straight to the Hitler analogies.

And in what way has President Trump targeted minority groups ? 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Farmer77 said:

I dont think anyone's comparing Trump the man to Hitler the man just yet,

Oh yes they are.  And this just shows how ignorant of history you are.

 

simply recognizing that his tactics and the overall environment are eerily similar.

Yes, of course, what Trump has exhibited to date is eerily similar.  Hitler did well for his nation, as every leader hopes to do.  He turned a defeated nation around within a decade into a major world power.  That’s why Hitler was Time’s Man of the Year.  Obama made the cover twice.  But this is where the eerily similarity ends.  Hitler had an agenda and wrote about it.  All you had to do was read it like “Dreams of My Father” or “Audacity of Hope” to see what a dictator had in mind.  Trump is taking on the swamp and building up the American people.  That is his agenda.  Progressives have no answer to the positiveness Trump brings and all they have is a farce of a comparison.

 

The whole not forgetting history so we're not doomed to repeat it thing.

That is why you are in line for two helpings of forgetfulness.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

27 minutes ago, RoofGardener said:

And in what way has President Trump targeted minority groups ? 

Materially one of the first things he did was roll back DOJ mandated police reforms from jurisdictions with historic constitutional violations against its citizenry, specifically minorities. We also still have hundreds of Mexican kids separated from their parents down near the border.

Spiritually if you will his entire campaign and his entire presidency has been based on framing minorities as an out of control threat that only he has the solutions for. Muslims, Mexicans, blacks, MS-13, gays even.

Where this becomes disturbing is that all the data points to his election being largely due to his success at creating/capitalizing on that fear of "others" meaning he has every reason to not only continue the tactic but to ramp it up.

 

 

Edited by Farmer77
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, RavenHawk said:

Oh yes they are.  And this just shows how ignorant of history you are.

Not thinking folks in this thread are comparing Trump the man to Hitler the man just yet means im ignorant of history? OK

7 minutes ago, RavenHawk said:

.  That is his agenda.  Progressives have no answer to the positiveness Trump brings and all they have is a farce of a comparison.

There is a very small minority of people who see "positiveness" from Trump. Their motives are less than patriotic.

7 minutes ago, RavenHawk said:

That is why you are in line for two helpings of forgetfulness.

Please do expound on this

Edited by Farmer77
Link to comment
Share on other sites

25 minutes ago, Farmer77 said:

Materially one of the first things he did was roll back DOJ mandated police reforms from jurisdictions with historic constitutional violations against its citizenry, specifically minorities. We also still have hundreds of Mexican kids separated from their parents down near the border.

Spiritually if you will his entire campaign and his entire presidency has been based on framing minorities as an out of control threat that only he has the solutions for. Muslims, Mexicans, blacks, MS-13, gays even.

Where this becomes disturbing is that all the data points to his election being largely due to his success at creating/capitalizing on that fear of "others" meaning he has every reason to not only continue the tactic but to ramp it up.

 

 

I think that you'll find that all of those - with the exception of gays (?!?) are an illegal immigrant issue, or a national security issue regarding non-US citizens, and NOT a "minority" issue. At no point - that I am aware of - has he targeted US citizens that are part of a minority group ? (with the possible exception of MS-13 gang members, which seems a reasonable issue to target ? )

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Farmer77 said:

Since I am willing and able to read and understand context I will side with Obama's vision on this one.

Finally!  I was waiting for someone to bring up the full quote.  It has a very simple counter.  It shows how those that agree with this speech do not understand the dynamic of a free market or the subtlety of the Invisible Hand.  The bottom line is, is if you are not there to build it, it doesn’t get built.  Others don’t build it for you.  Yes of course, people help you out along your path.  Not because they are interested in your wellbeing but for theirs.  Without your passion and vision, something doesn’t get built.  It is your success and achievement, not someone else’s!  The only purpose for hitting people over the head with “You didn’t build that” is to control the plantation.

 

As opposed to Trump following the classic dictator playbook of ensuring his faithful we are under attack from the evil "others" and basing policy off of that manipulation.

A nation usually falls from the evil within than from without.  The swamp is the evil plaguing this nation.  Trump will use the swamp against itself and that is what he has been doing.  He’s given the swamp chances within his own cabinet to change their ways and when they haven’t he fires them.  Very Lincoln like.  The swamp will fight back and use comparisons to dictators to do so.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, RoofGardener said:

I think that you'll find that all of those - with the exception of gays (?!?) are an illegal immigrant issue, or a national security issue regarding non-US citizens, and NOT a "minority" issue. At no point - that I am aware of - has he targeted US citizens that are part of a minority group ? (with the possible exception of MS-13 gang members, which seems a reasonable issue to target ? )

Sure its largely framed as an illegal immigrant issue, what a magnificent cover, but things like questioning whether a federal judge could properly do his job because of his Mexican heritage kinda showed Trump's hand. Really though illegal immigration can be tackled without creating the impression that evil folks are flooding the border. 

What you cant feel from over there is how the leader of the free world acting in such an overtly aggressive manner towards minorities has changed the public discourse. Surely if youre honest you can recognize it happening online but at least where I am anyways overt public displays of racism are becoming more and more common. The creation of a constant enemy is destroying civility and common sense and it provides that link to famous dictators of the past I was referring to and i see it working in my every day life.

Now there are areas where he loses the cover of illegal immigration. The POTUS suggesting NFL players protesting should leave the country while actively encouraging people to boycott the product being a good example of that, along with the aforementioned removal of DOJ police reforms, the encouraging of police to be more violent with suspects, not wanting people from "shithole" countries, and of course calling racists, KKK members and Nazis very fine people.

 

  • Thanks 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, RavenHawk said:

The only purpose for hitting people over the head with “You didn’t build that” is to control the plantation.

Another perspective is that he was simply trying to get people to appreciate the importance of community, history and humility.

8 minutes ago, RavenHawk said:

A nation usually falls from the evil within than from without.

Agreed and Trump and his group of robber baron grifters just may be that evil which makes it fall.

9 minutes ago, RavenHawk said:

The swamp is the evil plaguing this nation.  Trump will use the swamp against itself and that is what he has been doing. 

Trump is the swamp, albeit a slightly less articulate version. Seriously, the only difference between Trump and the "elites" is his social awkwardness. He was born rich, given an empire to run and has been in the media spotlight for decades, he surrounded himself with people who are compromised by corporate and foreign interests and lies constantly.  Might as well call him a Clinton.

15 minutes ago, RavenHawk said:

The swamp will fight back and use comparisons to dictators to do so.

Man I want there to be somebody out there like your vision of Donald Trump, I really do, the facts just dont back up the hyperbole however. They havent for a while but as time goes by it just becomes more and more glaringly obvious.

 

 

  • Thanks 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, Farmer77 said:

Sure its largely framed as an illegal immigrant issue, what a magnificent cover,

Ah, so we're back to the theory of the dog whistle ? Any policy is just a "cover" for something else ? You know, between "dog whistle" and "cover", you can interpret ANY of Trumps actions in any way you want. Tax cuts ? Clearly a white-supremacist initiative. Negotiations with North Korea ? Aaaargh... RACIST. Withdrawal of UNRWA funding ? ISLAMOPHOBE !!

11 minutes ago, Farmer77 said:

... but things like questioning whether a federal judge could properly do his job because of his Mexican heritage kinda showed Trump's hand. Really though illegal immigration can be tackled without creating the impression that evil folks are flooding the border. 

Yes, that was an ugly thing to say, and it should have rebounded against him. However, here's the thing. He said that during the campaigning. And yet - people voted for him to be president despite knowing all of that. Including large numbers of Hispanic Americans. So what does that tell us ? 

15 minutes ago, Farmer77 said:

What you cant feel from over there is how the leader of the free world acting in such an overtly aggressive manner towards minorities has changed the public discourse. Surely if youre honest you can recognize it happening online but at least where I am anyways overt public displays of racism are becoming more and more common. The creation of a constant enemy is destroying civility and common sense and it provides that link to famous dictators of the past I was referring to and i see it working in my every day life.

Well, it's a fair point that I'm not in America, so I can't comment on the public discourse within America . However, in terms of online.... umm.. no.. I don't see it online. What I DO see is a backlash against liberal/left policies and "one world/anti-National" philosophies. Whenever you resist a bully, you can get increased violence - or at least truculence. And - in my opinion - it is THAT which we are seeing. People are fighting back against the Left, and the Left is SCREAMING about it as a consequence. It's just a re-balance of concensus. 

In regards the Obama DOJ reforms... perhaps it is appropriate to roll them back; did they make it better for law and order ? 

The NFL issue.. well.. the footballer made a big public display, using his celebrity status to push a quasi-political issue. Once you thrust yourself into the public limelight, you can't complain if people criticise you for it. 

And "shithole countries" ? Harsh words perhaps, but you've got to admit... he was entirely correct ! :) 

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, RoofGardener said:

Ah, so we're back to the theory of the dog whistle ? Any policy is just a "cover" for something else ? You know, between "dog whistle" and "cover", you can interpret ANY of Trumps actions in any way you want. Tax cuts ? Clearly a white-supremacist initiative. Negotiations with North Korea ? Aaaargh... RACIST. Withdrawal of UNRWA funding ? ISLAMOPHOBE !!

You're absolutely right about that. Honestly I believe that is part of why "the right" has become so complacent about true racism , because the boy has cried wolf too many times.

2 minutes ago, RoofGardener said:

Yes, that was an ugly thing to say, and it should have rebounded against him. However, here's the thing. He said that during the campaigning. And yet - people voted for him to be president despite knowing all of that. Including large numbers of Hispanic Americans. So what does that tell us ? 

I kinda hit on this earlier, to simplify things the data shows us that Trump was elected basically because of "white fear",  and what it tells us is that the tactic works. What the tactic working tells us is that we can expect Trump to continue and expand on it.

4 minutes ago, RoofGardener said:

Well, it's a fair point that I'm not in America, so I can't comment on the public discourse within America . However, in terms of online.... umm.. no.. I don't see it online. What I DO see is a backlash against liberal/left policies and "one world/anti-National" philosophies. Whenever you resist a bully, you can get increased violence - or at least truculence. And - in my opinion - it is THAT which we are seeing. People are fighting back against the Left, and the Left is SCREAMING about it as a consequence. It's just a re-balance of concensus. 

Really? You dont see it online? I can see it in this very forum.

If it werent for the reality that is Trump I would wholly agree with this sentiment. We're however at a place where I think both are true, there is screaming from the left after losing power AND Trump is a really really messed up individual who has incited and encouraged racists and racism.

6 minutes ago, RoofGardener said:

And "shithole countries" ? Harsh words perhaps, but you've got to admit... he was entirely correct ! :) 

But he wasnt trashing the countries he was trashing the individuals from those countries who may immigrate here while lamenting that more white people dont immigrate. Surely you see the difference right?

 

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

25 minutes ago, Farmer77 said:

You're absolutely right about that. Honestly I believe that is part of why "the right" has become so complacent about true racism , because the boy has cried wolf too many times.

Hmm.... interesting point. 

25 minutes ago, Farmer77 said:

I kinda hit on this earlier, to simplify things the data shows us that Trump was elected basically because of "white fear",  and what it tells us is that the tactic works. What the tactic working tells us is that we can expect Trump to continue and expand on it.

Hmm.. am I not right in thinking that more black and hispanic etc voters voted for Trump than Mick Romney in 2012 ? And only slightly less than George W Bush in 2004 ? How does that tie in with "white fear" ? 

25 minutes ago, Farmer77 said:

If it werent for the reality that is Trump I would wholly agree with this sentiment. We're however at a place where I think both are true, there is screaming from the left after losing power AND Trump is a really really messed up individual who has incited and encouraged racists and racism.

I really don't think he has incited or encouraged racists and racism. 

25 minutes ago, Farmer77 said:

But he wasnt trashing the countries he was trashing the individuals from those countries who may immigrate here while lamenting that more white people dont immigrate. Surely you see the difference right?

Indeed... and I re-iterate: he was absolutely correct. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 minutes ago, RoofGardener said:

Hmm.. am I not right in thinking that more black and hispanic etc voters voted for Trump than Mick Romney in 2012 ? And only slightly less than George W Bush in 2004 ? How does that tie in with "white fear" ? 

You are right, heck Trump made some great points during his campaign (mostly "im not Hillary"), but thats discussing a small minority of minority groups not the majority of American voters

19 minutes ago, RoofGardener said:

I really don't think he has incited or encouraged racists and racism. 

All you need is to go to the source to find that answer:

Why we voted for Donald Trump": David Duke explains the white supremacist Charlottesville protests

Quote

David Duke, the former KKK grand wizard, is unambiguous about what Saturday’s alt-right and neo-Nazi rally in Charlottesville, Virginia, means to him: It’s the fulfillment of President Donald Trump’s vision for America.

“We are determined to take our country back,” Duke said from the rally, calling it a “turning point.” “We are going to fulfill the promises of Donald Trump. That’s what we believed in. That’s why we voted for Donald Trump, because he said he’s going to take our country back.

Neo-Nazis and White Supremacists applaud Donald Trump's response to deadly violence in Virginia

Quote

The founder of Daily Stormer, an American neo-Nazi and white supremacist site which considers itself to be part of the alt-right movement, hailed the fact President Trump “outright refused to disavow” the gathering of white supremacists.

“People saying he cucked are shills and kikes,” said its editor Andrew Anglin. “He did the opposite of cuck. He refused to even mention anything to do with us. When reporters were screaming at him about White Nationalism he just walked out of the room.”

Another Daily Stormer commenter said: ”Trump comments were good. He didn't attack us. He just said the nation should come together. Nothing specific against us. He said that we need to study why people are so angry, and implied that there was hate... on both sides! So he implied the Antifa are haters.”

 

Edited by Farmer77
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, Farmer77 said:

You are right, heck Trump made some great points during his campaign (mostly "im not Hillary"), but thats discussing a small minority of minority groups not the majority of American voters

All you need is to go to the source to find that answer:

Why we voted for Donald Trump": David Duke explains the white supremacist Charlottesville protests

Neo-Nazis and White Supremacists applaud Donald Trump's response to deadly violence in Virginia

 

Hmm.. what a bunch of loonies. 

I would suggest, however, that they are willfully misrepresenting Trump's position to their own ends. This tells you a lot about THEM, but absolutely NOTHING about President Trump. I STILL don't see Donald Trump overtly (or even implicitly) calling for violence, or proposing racist policies.  And by racist policies, I mean REAL racism, not the "you're racist if you're white or you wear a hat or you don't have a Che Guevara T-shirt or if you disagree with me in any way" leftist definition of Racist. 

I think it was yourself who used to have the signature that went something like "Fascist has come to mean anything that you disagree with". 

Well, among the Left, the same can be said of the word Racist. 

Edited by RoofGardener
  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, RoofGardener said:

I would suggest, however, that they are willfully misrepresenting Trump's position to their own ends. This tells you a lot about THEM, but absolutely NOTHING about President Trump.

In a vacuum i would agree with you. Knowing what we know however, from being busted for racist renting and hiring practices, to the central park 5 to calling nazis, KKK and white supremacists very fine people I just cant agree with you on that point.

In fact Id bet dollars to donuts that Cambridge Analytica probably locked in for Trump that the racist idiot demographic could help him win and he has been courting them since he refused to denounce David Duke in that CNN interview.

4 minutes ago, RoofGardener said:

I STILL don't see Donald Trump overtly (or even implicitly) calling for violence, or proposing racist policies.

Aside from the removal of DOJ reforms in racist police departments youre correct about overtly or implicitly calling for violence or racist policies. You dont have to call for violence in order to create it. Spend enough time and energy convincing people that a certain subset of society is out to get you, is unpatriotic or inhuman and the violence and policies will take care of themselves.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Farmer77 said:

In a vacuum i would agree with you. Knowing what we know however, from being busted for racist renting and hiring practices, to the central park 5 to calling nazis, KKK and white supremacists very fine people I just cant agree with you on that point.

In fact Id bet dollars to donuts that Cambridge Analytica probably locked in for Trump that the racist idiot demographic could help him win and he has been courting them since he refused to denounce David Duke in that CNN interview.

Aside from the removal of DOJ reforms in racist police departments youre correct about overtly or implicitly calling for violence or racist policies. You dont have to call for violence in order to create it. Spend enough time and energy convincing people that a certain subset of society is out to get you, is unpatriotic or inhuman and the violence and policies will take care of themselves.

 

You see, I disagree with your viewpoint on the "evidence" you have presented. The President did NOT say that "nazi's, KKK etc where very fine people". He was speaking about the overall protests having 'very fine people' on both sides. He was trying to DEFUSE the situation, for pete's sake. And it was said at a time when the full situation wasn't known to him. 

As for the Central Park Five.. all that DT did (back in.. what.. in 1989.. almost 30 years ago  ? ) was take out a full-page advert in the NYT demanding for the restoration of the death penalty in New York, and a tougher approach to violent crime. It never mentioned the "five". 

And the "racist hiring practices" ? Yup.. Back in the 1970's. 40+ years ago. And he was never found guilty in court of it. I'm not sure about the DOJ thing.. do you have any links to it ? 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, RoofGardener said:

You see, I disagree with your viewpoint on the "evidence" you have presented. The President did NOT say that "nazi's, KKK etc where very fine people". He was speaking about the overall protests having 'very fine people' on both sides. He was trying to DEFUSE the situation, for pete's sake. 

Man it was a protest organized by racists for the sole purpose of uniting their viewpoints with mainstream right wing viewpoints, hence the name "unite the right".

You dont defuse evil by capitulating to it. Thats like USA conservatism 101

1 minute ago, RoofGardener said:

And it was said at a time when the full situation wasn't known to him. 

Couple things. First he himself said he waited days to "get all the facts" before commenting. Second as I mentioned just today in another thread ive posted multiple links to sites that were posted days and even weeks before the rally that explained exactly who was organizing the rally, what organizations were involved and who the speakers would be. 

Do you honestly believe that the most powerful man in the world didnt have access to that information?

5 minutes ago, RoofGardener said:

As for the Central Park Five.. all that DT did (back in.. what.. in 1989.. almost 30 years ago  ? ) was take out a full-page advert in the NYT demanding for the restoration of the death penalty in New York, and a tougher approach to violent crime. It never mentioned the "five". 

Seriously? Thats a pretty Trumpian/Clintonian response :lol: No it never mentioned the five but it did mention roving gangs of muggers and murderers which of course he was actually referring to the five.

Check out this article the Trumspter wrote, even AFTER they had been acquitted via DNA evidence AND a confession . It really speaks to his motives and his ego.

Donald Trump: Central Park Five settlement is a 'disgrace'

Quote

My opinion on the settlement of the Central Park Jogger case is that it's a disgrace. A detective close to the case, and who has followed it since 1989, calls it "the heist of the century."

Settling doesn't mean innocence, but it indicates incompetence on several levels. This case has not been dormant, and many people have asked why it took so long to settle? It is politics at its lowest and worst form.

Again he wrote this AFTER DNA evidence acquitted the 5.

 

12 minutes ago, RoofGardener said:

And the "racist hiring practices" ? Yup.. Back in the 1970's. 40+ years ago. And he was never found guilty in court of it. I'm not sure about the DOJ thing.. do you have any links to it ? 

Well as Trump said above "settling doesnt mean innocence" .

Quote

1973: The US Department of Justice — under the Nixon administration, out of all administrations — sued the Trump Management Corporation for violating the Fair Housing Act. Federal officials found evidence that Trump had refused to rent to black tenants and lied to black applicants about whether apartments were available, among other accusations. Trump said the federal government was trying to get him to rent to welfare recipients. In the aftermath, he signed an agreement in 1975 agreeing not to discriminate to renters of color without admitting to discriminating before.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

57 minutes ago, Farmer77 said:

Man it was a protest organized by racists for the sole purpose of uniting their viewpoints with mainstream right wing viewpoints, hence the name "unite the right".

....

Ah right. So anyone who is "right wing" is inherently evil ? OK... gottit :D 

57 minutes ago, Farmer77 said:

...Couple things. First he himself said he waited days to "get all the facts" before commenting. Second as I mentioned just today in another thread ive posted multiple links to sites that were posted days and even weeks before the rally that explained exactly who was organizing the rally, what organizations were involved and who the speakers would be. 

Do you honestly believe that the most powerful man in the world didnt have access to that information?

Yes..... I do honestly believe that. You have to ask.. where did he get his information from ? There was a LOT of confusion in the days following the event. 

57 minutes ago, Farmer77 said:

...Seriously? Thats a pretty Trumpian/Clintonian response :lol: No it never mentioned the five but it did mention roving gangs of muggers and murderers which of course he was actually referring to the five....

.. unless, of course, he was referring to the roving gangs of muggers and murders which where plaguing New York at the time ? 

57 minutes ago, Farmer77 said:

....Check out this article the Trumspter wrote, even AFTER they had been acquitted via DNA evidence AND a confession . It really speaks to his motives and his ego. Donald Trump: Central Park Five settlement is a 'disgrace' Again he wrote this AFTER DNA evidence acquitted the 5...

and AFTER the release of the Armstrong Report. Recall that the DNA evidence did NOT find them innocent; it merely found that Matias Reyes was involved. 

 

57 minutes ago, Farmer77 said:

...Well as Trump said above "settling doesnt mean innocence" ...

Hmmm.. fair point. I'll accept that 40 years ago - in the 1970's - Trump was guilty of prejudice against being forced to take on welfare tenants. (which happened to be mostly black).  And - of course - he's been found similarly guilty multiple times since. 

Oh wait.. no.. he hasn't :D 

Edited by RoofGardener
  • Thanks 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, RoofGardener said:

Ah right. So anyone who is "right wing" is inherently evil ? OK... gottit :D 

Huh? Hopefully that was in jest it definitely was not what i was getting at

4 minutes ago, RoofGardener said:

Yes..... I do honestly believe that. You have to ask.. where did he get his information from ? There was a LOT of confusion in the days following the event. 

The NSA, FBI, DOJ, homeland security. He should be the most informed human being on the planet. If Joe blow reporter knew weeks in advance who was organizing the rally, and he did,  then the most powerful man on the planet sure as hell had the capability to find out in the days it took for him to make the statement.

Its truly disingenuous to claim he was somehow underinfomed. If he was it was by his own choice

 

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Trump believes op-ed writer in 'national security,' Conway says

 

Quote

Washington (CNN)President Donald Trump believes the author of an anonymous op-ed criticizing his leadership and detailing a "resistance" within his administration is "somebody in national security," Kellyanne Conway said on Friday.

"The President just, just today said he believes it's somebody in national security," Conway told CNN's Christiane Amanpour in an interview for her new hour-long program, which premiers on CNN International and PBS on Monday.

Bet its a whole ton of fun in the WH these days :lol:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Farmer77 said:

Huh? Hopefully that was in jest it definitely was not what i was getting at

The NSA, FBI, DOJ, homeland security. He should be the most informed human being on the planet. If Joe blow reporter knew weeks in advance who was organizing the rally, and he did,  then the most powerful man on the planet sure as hell had the capability to find out in the days it took for him to make the statement.

Its truly disingenuous to claim he was somehow underinfomed. If he was it was by his own choice

Think about what you're saying, Farmer77

The NSA, FBI and the DoJ would have ZERO coherent information. Neither would homeland security. The riot is NOT in their bailwick. They would have no officers on the scene, and no source of information.  At least not in the early days. 

Only the city police would have ANY idea what happened, and it would take time for them to correlate reports from all of THEIR law enforcement officers before THEY could give any solid information to anybody else. It would be interesting to know what info they DID give to the White House. 

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 minutes ago, RoofGardener said:

The NSA, FBI and the DoJ would have ZERO coherent information. Neither would homeland security. The riot is NOT in their bailwick. They would have no officers on the scene, and no source of information.  At least not in the early days. 

All they would have had to do was reach out to local PD or government. You dont think that could have happened in the 3 days it took for Trump to fully comment? Not to mention its the FBI's job to track hate groups .

16 minutes ago, RoofGardener said:

nly the city police would have ANY idea what happened, and it would take time for them to correlate reports from all of THEIR law enforcement officers before THEY could give any solid information to anybody else. It would be interesting to know what info they DID give to the White House. 

What you're leaving out however is that the racists were the ones who applied for the permit for the rally. The entire city government of Charlottesville knew who the organizer was due to his past racist shenanigans. The solid information as to who Trump was calling very fine people was readily available. And again, it was available online a thorough google search is all it would have taken.

Edited by Farmer77
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Farmer77 said:

All they would have had to do was reach out to local PD or government. You dont think that could have happened in the 3 days it took for Trump to fully comment? Not to mention its the FBI's job to track hate groups .

What you're leaving out however is that the racists were the ones who applied for the permit for the rally. The entire city government of Charlottesville knew who the organizer was due to his past racist shenanigans. The solid information as to who Trump was calling very fine people was readily available. And again, it was available online a thorough google search is all it would have taken.

The local PD... YES. As I already said. But it would take them a while to sort out the mess. The local government ? Not really. 

A racist loony applied for the permit. Does that mean that everyone who attended upheld his views ? How about the various militia groups that attended ? (and stood apart from the violence except when they themselves where attacked). Are they all racist ? Where there NO "fine people" among their ranks ? Many of them carried assault rifles; where any bullets fired, despite the provocation ? No, there where not. Curious restraint for such debased vile thugs. 

If he is so bad, why has he been granted permission to hold "Unite the Right #2' in Lafayette Park, Washington ? 

Edited by RoofGardener
Link to comment
Share on other sites

So now we are on to "Trump is like Hitler" crap.   This is just dumb.    If you look for comparisons, you could find them with anyone.   Obama had dark hair so he exhibited traits like Hitler.   Obama pushed for stronger gun control just like Hitler!  

 

What a joke.  

 

Trump is a loud mouth who needs to hire a social media filter.   However the country is doing pretty good.   He's kept the economic trend going up.   Everything hasn't crashed like was predicted by many on the left.   I actually thin he has done a decent job.  

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

If we're going to make comparisons to historical figures, I think Trump is much more like Patton than Hitler.  Patton was profane and unconventional, had no filter between brain and mouth, and often caused controversy by not being aware of all the nuances of politics, but his men supported and respected him and he accomplished more than others thought he could.  

  • Like 2
  • Thanks 1
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
 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.