ChrisWeigant.com

Friday Talking Points [499] -- The Constitutional Crisis Is Already Here

[ Posted Friday, September 7th, 2018 – 17:55 PDT ]

As we are occasionally wont to do, today's column will be nothing short of a rant. It just seemed like it was time for one, to us. There were two enormous stories in the world of politics this week: the Supreme Court confirmation hearings in the Senate, and the two bombshells about Trump revealed by Bob Woodward and an anonymous senior member of the Trump administration. All other political stories paled in significance.

So, for once, we are not even going to bother running down the political news of the week here in the introduction. We've addressed the Senate hearings in the awards section, and we will focus on the Trump revelations in the talking points, which (as we said) will consist of one long rant rather than discrete talking points for Democrats.

It's been that kind of a week, so without further ado, let's get on with it.

 

Most Impressive Democrat Of The Week

For once, we have a plethora to choose from for the Most Impressive Democrat Of The Week award. We're going to hand out Honorable Mentions to all of these candidates, and we have to admit it was a tough choice to decide who rose to the level of the MIDOTW this week.

First up, we have Senator Elizabeth Warren, but we're not going to say why until mid-rant, below in the talking points segment of our program. So you've got that to look forward to. Warren stated what a lot of people have been thinking this week, and she did not mince words in doing so.

Next, some election news. Progressives won one upset this week, and lost another. Ayanna Pressley won the nomination for a House seat in Massachusetts, although the political or ideological differences between her and Michael Capuano, whom she beat, were pretty miniscule. Capuano has been a solid vote for progressive values, so it was impossible to paint him as some sort of establishment or corporate Democrat. Nevertheless, he is a white man representing a district where minorities are the majority, so the voters decided it was time to let an African-American woman represent them. The outcome, we should mention, is not in question -- this is such a deep-blue district that there is no Republican candidate running, all but assuring Pressley of winning in November. Pressley becomes the second Progressive challenger to successfully "primary" a Democratic House member this election cycle (Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez being the other).

Down in Delaware, however, Senator Tom Carper won his nomination, handily defeating Progressive challenger Kerri Evelyn Harris. Delaware is a very corporate-friendly state, having the most generous laws for banking and for corporate formation in the country. So it's really not a big surprise that Carper won the nomination again, even though he is indeed a rather moderate Democrat.

In campaign news, former president Barack Obama finally hit the hustings and gave a speech which -- a first for Obama -- criticized Donald Trump by name. Obama has been critical before, but never directly named Trump (even though it was obvious who he was talking about). Getting Obama out in front of Democratic crowds is an excellent idea, right about now, because he can help fire up an already-enthusiastic Democratic voter base before the midterm elections. Democratic candidates for office should be begging Obama to appear in their state or district, in fact, if they're smart. Obama re-entering the world of politics is good news for Democrats everywhere, to put it another way.

Senator Bernie Sanders and Representative Ro Khanna launched a bill this week called the "Stop Bad Employers by Zeroing Out Subsidies Act" (or the "Stop BEZOS Act"). He is directly attacking Amazon and its founder Jeff Bezos, for the fact that many Amazon employees are on food stamps (SNAP) or Medicaid. Bernie's bill would impose a tax of 100 percent on any public assistance payments the government made to any Amazon employees, meaning the government would get paid back for the money it had to spend to support workers of what became a trillion-dollar business this week.

Now, even liberal economists pointed out that the bill could have all kinds of unforeseen and unintended consequences, but that's not really the point. Bernie knows his bill is never going to pass in its current form, but he is making an incredibly effective political point -- working for one of the two richest companies on the face of the Earth means that you should make enough money to survive without government benefits. Workers should not qualify for public assistance, because they really should be paid enough money that their income is above the limit. That's a pretty easy concept for people to understand, and it points out the problems of inequality that still exist for millions of workers. Why should the government have to subsidize workers of the wealthiest companies? They should be paid a living wage, instead. Of course, the real way to solve this problem would be to raise the minimum wage for all workers, but as the bill points out, in the meantime the system is being abused by some of the richest men on the planet.

But the Most Impressive Democrat Of The Week award goes to two Democratic senators who stood out among the Democrats on the committee questioning Judge Brett Kavanaugh during the Supreme Court confirmation hearings. Senators Cory Booker and Mazie Hirono were both impressive, for different reasons.

Booker was the first (but not the last) Democratic senator to risk expulsion by publicly releasing non-confidential documents that Republicans on the committee had ruled should be kept secret. This was a brave stance to take, and the outcome of his action is still unknown. He likely won't be expelled from the Senate, but he is now technically in danger of this fate. The secrecy surrounding Kavanaugh's document trail was a blatant political move to hide embarrassing documents from public scrutiny, and Booker showed how fed up he was with this state of affairs. By doing so, he put his own job at risk, which is a rather impressive thing to do.

Senator Mazie Hirono, on the other hand, deserves the MIDOTW award for her relentless questioning of Kavanaugh. While other Democrats attempted to knock Kavanaugh down a peg, none were really very effective in doing so. But Hirono was, even though the issue at hand was a pretty obscure one for people living outside of Hawai'i (it involved the status of Native Hawai'ians). Hirono attacked Kavanaugh for using the reasoning in an infamous Supreme Court case (Korematsu, which upheld the Japanese internment program in World War II) in his decision on the Hawai'ian case. Even though the issue was obscure, Hirono more than any other Democrat managed to lay bare the real thinking behind one of Kavanaugh's opinions, which was the goal for Democrats in the whole Kabuki-theater atmosphere of the hearings.

Of course, this is a subjective assessment, and we have to admit we didn't watch every hour of the two days of hearings (we watched as much as we could). So perhaps we missed another Democratic senator who did a better job, but from what we saw, Senator Hirono did a better job holding Kavanaugh's feet to the fire than presidential hopefuls Cory Booker and Kamala Harris. Hirono also backed up Booker by releasing a supposedly-secret letter herself, which technically puts her in the same boat as Booker, risking expulsion from the Senate for doing so. Hirono has also recently been calling the president an "unindicted co-conspirator," which is entirely accurate and should be used by all Democrats from now on.

We did write, earlier in the week, that the confirmation of Brett Kavanaugh is most probably already a done deal. The hearings were nothing short of political theater, in other words. But measuring by that yardstick, we have to say that Senators Cory Booker and Mazie Hirono stood out among the pack. Which is why we're awarding both of them the Most Impressive Democrat Of The Week this week.

[Congratulate Senator Cory Booker on his Senate contact page and Senator Mazie Hirono on her Senate contact page, to let them know you appreciate their efforts.]

 

Most Disappointing Democrat Of The Week

We could have awarded (on strictly literal interpretation grounds) Kerri Evelyn Harris the Most Disappointing Democrat Of The Week, for disappointing so many Progressives across the country by failing to unseat Senator Tom Carper in the Delaware primary race this week. Two upsets in House races are one thing, but successfully "primarying" a sitting senator would have taken things to a new level for Progressive candidates. But we just couldn't bring ourselves to do so, first because it would be rubbing salt in the wound, and second because she actually did have some "coattails" and boosted some down-ballot Delaware Progressives to victory in their primary races.

Instead, we're going to award the MDDOTW this week to Senator Dianne Feinstein, who took it upon herself to actually apologize to Brett Kavanaugh for the presence of protesters at his hearing. Feinstein, incredibly, said during one of these protests: "I'm sorry for the circumstances, but we'll get through it."

This remark was instantly condemned by Kevin De León, the Democrat in California who is challenging Feinstein's Senate seat. Due to the wacky "top-two jungle primary" system in California, two Democrats (and no Republican) will appear on the ballot for Senator in November. A recent poll showed that De León has now moved within single digits of Feinstein in this race, but there were a large amount of "undecideds" in the poll as well, to be fair.

This is why Feinstein richly deserves a challenge from the left, though. She is about as far from a "lefty" Democrat on just about every issue other than assault weapons and women's right to choose an abortion. Feinstein is also 85 years old, meaning she will be 91 at the end of her next term, should she win.

In the midst of the resistance against Trump, Feinstein is the ultimate bad example of a Democrat who refuses to fight back. Feinstein has already shown her true colors earlier, by stating (to gasps, in the audience) that she thought Trump could be a good president, if we'd all just give him the benefit of the doubt. This is not who should be representing California in the Senate in such dire times, plain and simple.

By apologizing for people who felt so strongly about keeping Kavanaugh off the Supreme Court that they risked arrest and prosecution to protest, Feinstein showed other Democrats precisely how not to behave. For doing so (once again), Dianne Feinstein is our Most Disappointing Democrat Of The Week this week.

[Contact Senator Dianne Feinstein on her Senate contact page, to let her know what you think of her actions.]

 

Friday Talking Points

Volume 499 (9/7/18)

As previously promised, today we are pre-empting the talking points section for a rant. We feel this is necessary, this week, and hope you'll agree. Without further ado, let's get started, shall we?

 

The Constitutional Crisis Is Already Here

Ninety-nine years ago this month, the president of the United States suffered a stroke. In September of 1919, President Woodrow Wilson became incapacitated. He was neither physically nor mentally able to perform his constitutional duties.

Others at first hid the president's condition from the public. His wife and his cabinet maintained the pretense that Wilson was still in charge and still doing his job. He wasn't. In fact, his wife was more in charge of the United States government than anyone else, as she dealt with routine matters and handed off more serious matters to the cabinet members to deal with. She even brought in a complicit journalist who wrote a "fake news" story (in the original meaning of the term) to convince the public that all was well, when in reality all was decidedly not well with the president.

Wilson had over a year left in his second term when this happened. At the time, there simply was no existing mechanism to remove a sitting president who had become incapable of performing his duties. The Twenty-Fifth Amendment was still decades in the future (at the time, the Eighteenth Amendment had just been ratified, which started Prohibition). It was a serious constitutional crisis, but there simply was no remedy that spelled out how to handle such a situation.

After World War II and the dawning of the Atomic Age, it became even more critical to always have a functioning president at the helm, because at any time the Cold War could have turned hot. When President Kennedy was assassinated in 1963, this became a pressing problem. Not because Kennedy had been killed and L.B.J. sworn in to replace him almost immediately, but because of what could have happened instead. If the assassin's bullet hadn't outright killed Kennedy, but instead left him in a vegetative state, what would have happened? The only real constitutional answer, at the time, was to impeach him. This was a square-peg-in-a-round-hole solution to the problem, however, because merely being in a coma (or worse) wasn't exactly a "high crime or misdemeanor" in any sense of the term. Even ignoring that misapplication of the constitution's intent, impeachment would have taken some time to actually accomplish. While the process played out, there would still be a gap in the chain of command -- at the very top.

Most people have an inaccurate image of the vice presidency. Most people assume that the veep is number two in the chain of command in the White House. This is not even remotely true. The vice president has absolutely no constitutional power whatsoever, outside of officially being in charge of the Senate. None. He cannot order the military to do anything. He cannot order anyone in the White House to do anything. These would be constitutionally invalid orders. Like a second-born prince, the vice president is in essence no more than a human "spare part" -- but a spare part that cannot be used while the president is still alive. And the First Lady has even less of a constitutional leg to stand on -- even though Edith Wilson singlehandedly assumed this power almost 100 years ago, with over a year left in her husband's term in office.

Because Kennedy's death caused people to start thinking about such things in depth, a remedy was proposed and adopted as the Twenty-Fifth Amendment to the United States Constitution. This amendment solved several problems not originally anticipated by the framers of the Constitution. The first and foremost was the fact that when a vice president assumed office (after the death of a president), there was no mechanism for replacing the vice president. This led, several times (after the death of a sitting president), to the country having a president but no vice president. The second problem was the succession of the presidency, which became a more acute problem with the fear of nuclear weapons. If Washington erupted in nuclear fire, who would become president? The original document only listed one replacement: the vice president. Various acts of Congress had established a more extensive list, including the speaker of the House, the president pro-tempore of the Senate, and the members of the cabinet. But what if they all died together suddenly? The Constitution had no answer to that one. So a much longer list was drawn up, and even to this day when the cabinet and president (and Congress and most of the Supreme Court) gather under one roof for the State Of The Union speech, one cabinet member becomes the "designated survivor" and is sequestered far away from Washington, likely in an underground bunker somewhere in the mountains. This assures continuity of government, even in the worst-case scenario.

But the Twenty-Fifth Amendment also had a fourth section, which dealt with a president who had become incapacitated, but was not actually dead. For the first time, during Donald Trump's presidency, politicians and the media are starting to seriously discuss invoking this clause. We've written before about exactly how this would happen, which is worth reading for anyone interested in the details of the process. The short version: it is nowhere near as cut-and-dried as it first sounds. A majority of the cabinet would have to sign a letter stating they felt the president was incapable of holding office, but that wouldn't mean Mike Pence was immediately sworn in as president (or even as "acting president"). Trump could write his own letter objecting to their conclusion. Then Congress would have three weeks to make up its mind. When the vote came, it would require a higher bar than even impeachment, because both houses of Congress would have to vote to remove the president by a two-thirds margin. In other words, no matter which party was in charge of the two chambers, a whole lot of Republicans would have to vote to remove Trump.

Thus endeth the history lesson for today. Instead, let's take a look at why such a history lesson was needed after the past week's bombshell revelations.

The first of these was the release of excerpts from Bob Woodward's upcoming book Fear (which will be released to the public next Tuesday), which painted a pretty damning picture of the Trump presidency. His aides have been either completely ignoring his direct orders or actively subverting them, for (as they believed) the good of the country. Woodward calls this an "administrative coup d'état," which is as good a label as any. Trump is seen as erratic, incapable of learning, and highly unstable both emotionally and mentally. Woodward's book, in fact, echoes exactly what has been said about Trump in two previous books (Omarosa's Unhinged and Michael Wolff's Fire And Fury). When they came out, both of these books were disparaged over the believability of the authors. This was not possible for the inside-the-Beltway crowd to do for Bob Woodward's book, though, because Woodward is truly in a class by himself when it comes to writing about sitting presidents. He's no Omarosa, in other words. And yet his book paints an identical picture as that revealed in the other two books.

Then, just to add icing on the cake, an anonymous "senior Trump administration official" penned an astonishing opinion piece for the New York Times. In it, he told exactly the same story as Woodward and the other tell-all authors. Trump was dangerously unstable. His aides actively worked to thwart his worst impulses. And Trump was so out of touch that he didn't even notice.

The Washington Post has a continuing series about our "Toddler-in-Chief" (Twitter: #ToddlerInChief) where they document every instance -- mostly from White House personnel -- of people around Trump speaking of him as if he is an unruly toddler. This column series has been going on for over a year now. That right there says something profound. Here's a recent example, from the middle of last month (quoted from a New York Magazine article), addressing how the White House staff feels when Trump is physically absent from the building (at one of his golf courses, for instance):

One former White House official told me that the difference is both physical and mental. "You totally feel a sense of relief, because it means he's gonna be out of contact at least part of the time," one former White House official told me. "When he's actually in the building and sees something or wants something done, it has to be done immediately because he just throws a fit. You have to go off and do whatever dumb task he wants done. But when he's on Air Force One or at his golf course, he can't really do that because of logistical issues. There's enough time between him and the people doing the work to slow that stuff down."

Which, coincidentally enough, is exactly the same story Woodward and the anonymous author in the Times told this week. When everybody -- including people who directly work for him -- is saying that the president is mentally unfit for office, the time of predicting a constitutional crisis is over, because the constitutional crisis is already here. Swearing to uphold the Constitution means swearing to uphold all of it -- including the Twenty-Fifth Amendment.

Senator Elizabeth Warren just pointed this out, saying this week:

If senior administration officials think the President of the United States is not able to do his job, then they should invoke the Twenty-Fifth Amendment. The Constitution provides for a procedure whenever the Vice President and senior officials think the President can't do his job. It does not provide that senior officials go around the President -- take documents off his desk, write anonymous op-eds.... Every one of these officials have sworn to uphold the Constitution of the United States. It's time for them to do their job.

We would have used the word "duty" there, at the end, rather than "job," but (semantic quibbles aside) Warren is entirely correct. And she's not the only one bringing up the Twenty-Fifth Amendment this week. Because, as we've already pointed out, invoking the Twenty-Fifth doesn't precipitate the constitutional crisis, the constitutional crisis is already here and ongoing -- we have a sitting president who is mentally unfit for office. Whether the Twenty-Fifth is actually invoked or not, the constitutional crisis still exists. After all, he does have the nuclear launch codes.

Republicans, both cabinet members and those in Congress, have so far been content to sit back and respond by echoing the name of an old Supertramp album: "Crisis? What crisis?" But this week it became almost impossible to continue pretending that the emperor isn't actually naked. Trump's reaction only confirmed the picture of him as flying off the handle, as he demanded the Justice Department begin an investigation into who wrote the anonymous Times article, because (somehow, according to him) it threatened "national security." That is patently insane. No national security secrets were revealed within the article. No classified information was disclosed. It is impossible for any sane lawyer to see such an article as some sort of federal crime, in fact. And yet, Trump's reaction was to sic the Justice Department on the New York Times, because that's the way he thinks things should work. Insulting the president, according to him, means committing treason (spoiler alert: it doesn't).

Trump also threatened to sue the paper, but nobody believes he will actually follow through on this (Trump threatens to sue media organizations all the time, but he rarely actually does; and when he has previously, he has lost in court). Trump also apparently instructed Sarah Huckabee Sanders to use her official Twitter feed to incite Trump's followers to phone up the paper and rant and rave. Is this presidential behavior? As we said, it's getting harder and harder for Republicans to continue making the case that it is. "But he's got no clothes on!" seems to be echoing through the halls of the White House and the Capitol.

There was another historical milestone a little over a week ago, one outside the world of politics. Forty-five years ago (at the end of August), a hostage situation developed during a bank robbery in Stockholm, Sweden. The hostages eventually began sympathizing with their captors, and the term "Stockholm Syndrome" entered the lexicon as a direct result. So far, congressional Republicans (and the Republican Party writ large) have followed a very similar path. They know their party is being held hostage by Donald Trump, but they see themselves as powerless to do anything about it. Actually, that's not quite true. They see themselves as powerless to do anything about it and still have a viable political career within the Republican Party. So far, the only Republicans who have been willing to say anything negative about Trump have been those who also announced they wouldn't be running for re-election. They know full well that being an anti-Trump Republican means they will not be able to win their party's nomination in the primaries. Just take a good look at Jeff Flake, as he's the prime example of this.

Any Republican who values his own continuance in office -- almost all of them, in other words -- has been pretending (along with the rest of the GOP crowd) that Donald Trump is wearing gorgeous clothes and is doing just fine as the leader of the country. They know if they say any differently, they'll soon be out of a job. So it's not exactly Stockholm Syndrome, but it sure is close. In their abject terror, they have decided to become complicit, plain and simple. That is getting harder and harder to do, obviously.

Hopefully, after the midterm elections, it will become impossible to ignore for very much longer. If Democrats take back the House, then they will also take back all the committee chairmanships. Congress will begin to exercise its constitutional oversight authority once again, as a direct result. Rather than having all the "Don't the Emperor's clothes look wonderful?" people in charge, Democrats will begin scrutinizing Trump's actions, as Congress should have been doing all along. White House officials (current and former) will be called upon to testify as to exactly what they've seen while doing their job.

People hoping for Trump's quick removal from office are going to be disappointed, we should point out in all fairness. Both the Twenty-Fifth Amendment and impeachment are very high bars to achieve. As they should be -- it should not be easy to remove a sitting president from office. If it were, it would happen all the time. If Trump is impeached, it will require a majority vote in the House and a two-thirds vote in the Senate to remove him from office. If the Twenty-Fifth Amendment is invoked, it would require over half of Trump's own cabinet as well as two-thirds majorities in both houses of Congress to depose him. Either way would require a whole lot of Republicans to publicly turn on the president.

We are, obviously, not there yet. And it must also be said, we may never get there. Turning on a president from your own party is an incredibly tough thing for politicians to do. There has to be clear and convincing evidence that the president either broke serious laws or is so mentally off the rails that he has become a danger to the American government. Those, again, are very high bars to clear for Republicans in Congress.

But the only way any Republicans' minds are going to be changed is to examine the available evidence. That's where a midterm takeover of the House would come in. If Democrats can prove the case to the public that Donald Trump is mentally incapable of being president, then the tide could turn even among Republicans. So far, Trump has been the ultimate Teflon president -- nothing has really stuck to him at all. But if witness after witness told the same story under oath that Bob Woodward and the anonymous Times author just told, it could actually begin to change some minds.

Of course, Republicans aren't going to turn on Trump until his job approval rating among Republican voters sinks to below 50 percent. Politically, that's the only way it will happen, because at that point supporting Trump becomes a political liability for Republican officeholders, and not a political asset. We're a long way from being there -- Trump posts job approval ratings of 70, 80, even 90 percent of Republican voters in the polls. That would have to go through a serious decline before any Republicans became brave enough to buck their party's leader. It has happened (see: Nixon, Richard), but it is pretty rare, because if his approval ratings stay high enough, then his party will continue to rally around the president (see: Clinton, Bill).

Nevertheless, we are not "on the brink" or "heading towards" a constitutional crisis, folks. We are already there. It really doesn't matter whether the cabinet invokes the Twenty-Fifth Amendment or not, because if history proves that they should have, then they'll bear the blame for whatever Trump winds up doing. Elizabeth Warren is right. If there is a conspiracy to hide the fact that Donald Trump cannot control himself and requires "adults in the room" who will ignore or actively subvert his wild orders, then the president of the United States might just be unfit to hold office. If this is true, then the cabinet members have a sworn duty to act. Failure to do so doesn't mean a constitutional crisis will be averted, but instead that it will merely be prolonged. Because the crisis is already here.

-- Chris Weigant

 

All-time award winners leaderboard, by rank
Follow Chris on Twitter: @ChrisWeigant

Cross-posted at: Democratic Underground

 

156 Comments on “Friday Talking Points [499] -- The Constitutional Crisis Is Already Here”

  1. [1] 
    nypoet22 wrote:

    "(at the time, the Nineteenth Amendment had just been ratified, which started Prohibition)."

    @CW,

    i think you'll find a few women voters who disagree with you on that one. perhaps you meant to write "eighteenth?"

    JL

  2. [2] 
    TheStig wrote:

    CW-

    You had my attention at rant....but I'm mixing a gin and tonic to better enjoy it.

  3. [3] 
    TheStig wrote:

    Acting as if you sympathize with someone because you fear them might be termed Bedminster Syndrone. I think it has a nice ring to it.

    I fully agree that impeachment of Trump is not in the cards during his first term. That said, Trump is under legal assault from Fed prosecutor Mueller as well as NY State and NYC prosecutors. Not to mention what amounts to a a significant White House mutiny. Trrump has to think about significant risks to liberty and his family fortunes 2 years out and 6 years out. He might win, but he might lose big. Is the job of President as much fun as he thought....or as lucrative?

    A lot of muck is being raked on multiple fronts. Nixon's fate may auger Trump's. Hand's up in a double V for victory and a helicopter ride to ignominity. Trump's potential liabilities ( don't forget fed and state taxes) suggest he might want relocate overseas for a couple of years in a country without an extradition treaty with the USA. Maybe his buddy Vlad could take him under his wing.

  4. [4] 
    John M from Ct. wrote:

    Well ranted. The constitutional crisis is already here - has been here, in fact, since Jan 21, 2017.

    I'm not convinced the 25th amendment is all that meaningful. As one commentator has pointed out, as the amendment lays out the process there are gaps in time between the cabinet saying to Congress the president is out of it, and the president saying he's not, and during those gaps a non-comatose president would probably fire his cabinet, invalidating their report to Congress. In other words, the 25th amendment anticipated a physical incapacity, not a mental or moral one. The writers were thinking of Eisenhower (a la Wilson) after a stroke, or Kennedy with his brain half gone, not a man-child tycoon who duped half the country into voting for him via his reality-show persona's tough-guy act and fascist dog-whistling.

    I am still wondering if the 'anonymous' collective who wrote the NYT Op-Ed weren't fishing for a Democratic win in the House, to reinforce their struggle to control the president's warlike impulses while continuing his appointees' successful administrative assaults on immigrants, environmentalism, and voting rights.

  5. [5] 
    C. R. Stucki wrote:

    I've seen this coming for months. When all you Dems/Libs who were barely able to keep your noses above water clinging to the straw of "collusion" finally began to realize that you were sinking beneath the waves, I knew your next 'straw' would be the 25th Amend.

    Sorry, it just ain't gonna happen. We elected a world-class asshole for pres, and we're about to (re-)discover that elections have consequences!

  6. [6] 
    Michale wrote:

    . Hirono also backed up Booker by releasing a supposedly-secret letter herself, which technically puts her in the same boat as Booker, risking expulsion from the Senate for doing so.

    Except for the fact that the documents they were using had already been OK'ed for release that morning.

    So it was nothing but theactrical grand standing and Booker and Hirono have nothing but egg all over their faces and Kavanaugh will be confirmed to the SCOTUS and there ain't NOTHING Democrats can do about it, except the Hodgkison Solution..

    Which wouldn't surprise me a bit...

    Instead, we're going to award the MDDOTW this week to Senator Dianne Feinstein, who took it upon herself to actually apologize to Brett Kavanaugh for the presence of protesters at his hearing. Feinstein, incredibly, said during one of these protests: "I'm sorry for the circumstances, but we'll get through it."

    Really?? Ya'all are disappointed in a Senator who expressed compassion and camaraderie to a fellow American???

    In this time of hatred and acrimony and actual VIOLENCE, ya'all are *DISAPPOINTED* with a Democrat that shows some HUMANITY!!!????

    What has the Democrat Party become!!?????

  7. [7] 
    Michale wrote:

    I've seen this coming for months. When all you Dems/Libs who were barely able to keep your noses above water clinging to the straw of "collusion" finally began to realize that you were sinking beneath the waves, I knew your next 'straw' would be the 25th Amend.

    It's a cycle... They start with collusion, then go thru Stormy Daniels, then it's emoluments and finally the 25th..

    When they are all tuckered out, the rest for a couple hours and then rinse and repeat the exact same cycle..

    They got really nothing tangible, so they just flit from shiny to shiny to shiny...

    Sorry, it just ain't gonna happen. We elected a world-class asshole for pres, and we're about to (re-)discover that elections have consequences!

    Exactly... We got the POTUS we need at this given moment in our history and, if the NeverTrumpers are successful in nullifying a free, fair and legal election???

    Then the hatred and intolerance and violence that the Left has, they will get returned back to them a thousand fold...

  8. [8] 
    Michale wrote:

    President Trump is proposing to use the Army Corps Of Engineers to build the Southern Border Wall..

    I like it.. :D I like that idea a LOT...

    Hysterical Screaming NeverTrumpers' heads exploding in 3... 2... 1...

  9. [9] 
    Michale wrote:

    Trump says he could use the MILITARY to build his wall if Congress won't fund it through Homeland Security's budget - and he won't rule out another government shutdown to get his way
    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-6144837/Trump-says-use-MILITARY-build-wall-Congress-wont-fund-DHS.html

  10. [10] 
    Chris Weigant wrote:

    nypoet22 -

    Whoops! You are so right... I was researching it and left the Wiki page on 19th, so I mis-cited it. Mea culpa, especially to the suffragettes....

    It has now been fixed, thanks for the eagle eye.

    TheStig [2,3] -

    A frosty cold beer for me, but we're each entitled to pick our poison, right?

    :-)

    What I'm most interested in tracking is Trump's growing sense of paranoia. It's hard not to believe everyone's out to get you when your own aides (It's coming from INSIDE THE HOUSE!!!) are obviously out to get you. Add to that a big midterm loss, and Trump may start going off the deep end. You know, even more than normal...

    Heh.

    John M from Ct. [4] -

    Thanks for the kind words.

    Oooo! -- hadn't even considered Trump firing the cabinet in the time gap, although I think that once the letter's written, it can't really be countermanded. But then, as I noted in my original article, we'd all be making this up as we went along, because it's never happened before. I am much more interested in what would happen if Trump refused to leave office. We'd have a President and an Acting President at the same time -- that'd be kind of mindblowing...

    Good point, also, about the inside-the-White-House resistance hoping for a blue wave to constrain Trump...

    C. R. Stucki [5] -

    While I don't think I resemble your remarks too much, I have to say your turn of phrase gave me a laugh. But please remember, I wrote that article exploring the limits of the XXVth during Trump's first week in office. So it was more an exploratory piece of the process than anything else....

    Michale [6] -

    In reverse order... please spare me the fake pearl-clutching over civility. Supporting Trump for 1.5 years has made you doing so nothing short of comic. Sorry, dude...

    As for the first part.. hey, I did prominently use the term "Kabuki theater", did I not? That's what these hearings (no matter how fascinating) almost always turn out to be....

    OK, that's it for now.

    -CW

  11. [11] 
    Michale wrote:

    Kavanaugh hearing day four: Democrats still land no punches
    http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2018/09/07/kavanaugh-hearing-day-four-democrats-still-land-no-punches.html

    Democrats embarrassed themselves and Kavanaugh came out smelling like a rose...

    Supreme Court Justice Kavanaugh is a reality, people. Better get used to it..

  12. [12] 
    Michale wrote:

    So a much longer list was drawn up, and even to this day when the cabinet and president (and Congress and most of the Supreme Court) gather under one roof for the State Of The Union speech, one cabinet member becomes the "designated survivor" and is sequestered far away from Washington, likely in an underground bunker somewhere in the mountains. This assures continuity of government, even in the worst-case scenario.

    Yea, I think they made a TV show about that.. :D

    In reverse order... please spare me the fake pearl-clutching over civility. Supporting Trump for 1.5 years has made you doing so nothing short of comic. Sorry, dude...

    See, here I thought ya'all were claiming ya'all are BETTER than Trump.. If ya'all want to concede that ya'all are as bad as Trump, fine.. I'll accept that concession..

    You Democrats are always going on and on about civility and "when they go low, we go high" and other stuff like that..

    And when a Democrat actually DOES be civil and DOES go high?? She is demonized for it..

    So, basically, ya'all's words like "civility" and "humanity" are either only lip service or are demanded from the Right with absolutely NO reciprocation from the Left..

    Fine.... Somewhat surprising and disappointing, but fine....

    Just one more little fact that proves Democrats are no better than Republicans...

    As for the first part.. hey, I did prominently use the term "Kabuki theater", did I not? That's what these hearings (no matter how fascinating) almost always turn out to be....

    Yes you did.. It's just different to see Democrats so willing to play the court jester.. :D

  13. [13] 
    Michale wrote:

    But the Twenty-Fifth Amendment also had a fourth section, which dealt with a president who had become incapacitated, but was not actually dead. For the first time, during Donald Trump's presidency, politicians and the media are starting to seriously discuss invoking this clause.

    Oh com'on... NeverTrumpers and the media started to seriously discuss the 25th solution to President Trump the second he was elected....

    This is nothing new.. This is it's, like 12th iteration...

    One former White House official told me that the difference is both physical and mental. "You totally feel a sense of relief, because it means he's gonna be out of contact at least part of the time," one former White House official told me. "When he's actually in the building and sees something or wants something done, it has to be done immediately because he just throws a fit. You have to go off and do whatever dumb task he wants done. But when he's on Air Force One or at his golf course, he can't really do that because of logistical issues. There's enough time between him and the people doing the work to slow that stuff down."

    Who said this??

    W/o that name ALL you have is anonymous hearsay...

    Do you have ANY facts that prove this was said???

    No you do not..

    Ergo, this is nothing but hearsay... PERIOD...

    Trump also apparently instructed Sarah Huckabee Sanders to use her official Twitter feed to incite Trump's followers to phone up the paper and rant and rave. Is this presidential behavior?

    By whose definition??

    By ya'all's definition, an awesome economy and a roaring job market is not "Presidential Behavior"... Unless the President happens to have a -D after his name..

    Hopefully, after the midterm elections, it will become impossible to ignore for very much longer. If Democrats take back the House, then they will also take back all the committee chairmanships. Congress will begin to exercise its constitutional oversight authority once again, as a direct result. Rather than having all the "Don't the Emperor's clothes look wonderful?" people in charge, Democrats will begin scrutinizing Trump's actions, as Congress should have been doing all along. White House officials (current and former) will be called upon to testify as to exactly what they've seen while doing their job.

    ANd what if the Blue Wave is actually a RED Wave and Democrats are SHELLACKED for a whopping FIFTH time in as many elections???

    Will ya'all FINALLY admit ya'all were wrong??

    Of course you won't.. You CAN'T....

    HHPTDS strikes again..

    Nevertheless, we are not "on the brink" or "heading towards" a constitutional crisis, folks. We are already there. It really doesn't matter whether the cabinet invokes the Twenty-Fifth Amendment or not, because if history proves that they should have, then they'll bear the blame for whatever Trump winds up doing. Elizabeth Warren is right. If there is a conspiracy to hide the fact that Donald Trump cannot control himself and requires "adults in the room" who will ignore or actively subvert his wild orders, then the president of the United States might just be unfit to hold office. If this is true, then the cabinet members have a sworn duty to act. Failure to do so doesn't mean a constitutional crisis will be averted, but instead that it will merely be prolonged. Because the crisis is already here.

    Crisis??

    Awesome economy...

    Job Market eploding...

    Unemployment is way down..

    Black American Unemployment is the lowest it's EVER been..

    American Confidence and Pride is way WAY up...

    Middle Class Americans see more $$ in their checks, lower prices on their utilities and lower prices when they shop...

    Economic Growth shattering Odumbo's moronic claim that 2% is the "New Norm"...

    Manufacturing jobs and pay is thru the roof...

    Crisis???

    Well, OK... If this is what a crisis looks like, I hope we have a long and growing crisis.. :D

    Let's face reality, people..

    The **ONLY** crisis here is that ya'all made predictions that Donald Trump would destroy the country and decimate the economy and start WWIII...

    The CRISIS is that ya'all were WRONG over and over and over again...

    THAT's the only "crisis" here..

  14. [14] 
    Michale wrote:

    But the Twenty-Fifth Amendment also had a fourth section, which dealt with a president who had become incapacitated, but was not actually dead. For the first time, during Donald Trump's presidency, politicians and the media are starting to seriously discuss invoking this clause.

    Oh com'on... NeverTrumpers and the media started to seriously discuss the 25th solution to President Trump the second he was elected....

    Don't believe me??

    Could Donald Trump Be Removed With The 25th Amendment? 15 Nov 2016

    Can the 25th Amendment Prevent a Trump Presidency?
    2 Nov 2016

    Hell, this reporter was pushing that idea even BEFORE Trump won the election :^/

    How to remove Trump from office - The Washington Post 9 Jan 2017

    There's a way to get rid of President Trump without impeaching him ... 15 Jan 2017

    Petition · 25th Amendment: Remove Donald Trump · Change.org 18 Nov 2016

    How To Keep Trump From Becoming President? 25th Amendment ... 28 Nov 2016

    Washington Post's Richard Cohen: Use 25th Amendment to Oust Trump 10 Jan 2017

    So, it's clear that the 25th Amendment has been a pet of the NeverTrumpers EVEN BEFORE he was elected!!

    It's all part and parcel to a cycle...

  15. [15] 
    James T Canuck wrote:

    I asked around, most people I talked to who caught Obama's speech said the same thing I was thinking at the time...it was strangely relaxing, almost comforting, to have a president talk and not have a bunch of bull come out of his mouth. Trump has been the same set finger nails down the same blackboard for a thousand years, or so. Say what you want about Obama, but he knows how to works a audience, in the same Trump orchestrates crowd. Obama has great timing between posture and delivery, he delivers his incredulity of Trumps antics with comedic jilt, as if it's verbal double take or eyeroll. It's a highly polished style, and so was the message today, he did what all former president's are good for after being put out to pasture, be a guided missile, without fear of political retribution, by their party. Today he did with aplomb, he landed every shot on Trump with ease, how could he not. Trump could rent himself out as a piñata, for all his gaffs and blunders. Then Obama made easy work of the entire republican party, who dropped their elbows the day they decided to check their balls, with matching hat and scruples, at the congressional cloakroom. If the democrats sprinkle Obama around in the right places, it can't hurt, and it might get the younger voters participating.

    Gauging from Trump's reaction to the Obama speech, any comparison to himself and a recalcitrant child, forever throwing petulant tantrums, is QED. Of it he said...

    " I watched it, but I fell asleep. I found he is very good, very good for sleeping."

    That's the kind of thing children say when they're still figuring out what constitutes humour, it's the phase they arrive at once poop loses its comedic lustre.

    "I think he was trying to take some credit. He was trying to take credit for this incredible thing happening to our country..."

    Not sure about the whole "our country" thing, it implies that Obama has gone from president to impertinent outsider, offering up unsolicited opinions, ( an outrageous suggestion, because that's my job:) in less than two years.

    And rightfully so, Trump was handed the two things any incoming government can tout as their own success from day one...a good economy and low unemployment. In many ways, Trump owes all his support from his party to Obama, as it's universally agreed Trump lives and dies on the economy. Trump tethered himself to someone else's achievement and assumed its success, don't be surprised when he abandons it in a similar way when it no longer suits him.

    This 25th amendment makes me chuckle. I think after dust settles, and the mess is cleared away, someone should get that amendment a better table, one not so close to the kitchen. It could swap places with the 2nd amendment, it is after-all self defense's bigger brother. Besides, the 1st amendment is a noisy bugger, the 2nd amendment keeps throwing bread rolls at it.

    Why not adopt something many parliaments have, " vote of no confidence" 51% of the legislature demands a resignation of the Leader and forces an immediate election, all gov't stops until it's decided.

    Three weeks is a long time to give a bull in a china shop. In era defining historical length, it's almost two Cuban Missile crisis'....

    LL&P

  16. [16] 
    Michale wrote:

    'Nuck,

    I asked around, most people I talked to who caught Obama's speech said the same thing I was thinking at the time...it was strangely relaxing, almost comforting, to have a president talk and not have a bunch of bull come out of his mouth.

    "If you like your doctor, you can keep your doctor. If you like your Healthcare plan you can keep your Healthcare plan."

    "I welcome the public debate of Domestic Surviellance.."
    -Barack Odumbo

    That's the kind of thing children say when they're still figuring out what constitutes humour, it's the phase they arrive at once poop loses its comedic lustre.

    You mean, like ya'all do with all the childish and immature comments about President Trump's appearance??

    Ya'all had a CONTEST to see who could be the most childish fer christ's sake!!!

    So, please.. You have NO MORAL STANDING whatsoever to discuss the "childish" antics of others...

    Three weeks is a long time to give a bull in a china shop. I

    Our bull in the China shop has had 2 years..

    And this country is doing awesome..

    Do you have ANYTHING substantial besides hypocrisy and sore luserism???

    Anything at all???

  17. [17] 
    James T Canuck wrote:

    [16] Yes, since you always manoeuvre yourself into a worse position than the one you started in.

    "You mean, like ya'all do with all the childish and immature comments about President Trump's appearance??"
    I maintain that he's bungling idiot and a gibbering sociopath, his appearance is of no concern to me, and certainly doesn't change my assertion he needs medication, not adoration.

    "Ya'all had a CONTEST to see who could be the most childish fer christ's sake!!!"

    I suspect you and I are separated on a social level, I don't run with the type of people who throw those kinds of contests, in fact, it would be social suicide in my circle, to suggest any contest that involved devolution in order to win. That sounds like an environment you would blend into more easily than I.

    I like to think that my moral authority is endowed by the majority where Trump is concerned, " The needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few "

    "Our bull in the China shop has had 2 years..
    And this country is doing awesome.."

    Your Bull is never ending.

    'The Bull' is in Obama's China shop, that was the gist.

    Your tortured generalising of anyone who dislikes Trump has been your undoing. Your whataboutism's are getting a bit dog-eared of late, a bit shaggy around the edge. The seem generated, slapped together and hurriedly issued, without care. Defending the indefensible is a heavy lift, pace yourself.

    I have to remember to wear my plaid shirt next time I log on, plaid does go well with jaw drop.

    LL&P

  18. [18] 
    Michale wrote:

    I maintain that he's bungling idiot and a gibbering sociopath, his appearance is of no concern to me,

    And yet, his appearence is a HUGE concern to most everyone else here.. And you don't correct them. So, as ya'all established at Charlottesville, SILENCE GIVES ASSENT.. In other words, you agree with all the childish and immature attacks on President Trump..

    and certainly doesn't change my assertion he needs medication, not adoration.

    And where did you get yer medical license, Dr 'Nuck??

    Your assessment would be a bit more believable if it came from a logical, rational and objective person..

    But it didn't, so it's not.. :D

    I suspect you and I are separated on a social level, I don't run with the type of people who throw those kinds of contests, in fact, it would be social suicide in my circle, to suggest any contest that involved devolution in order to win. That sounds like an environment you would blend into more easily than I.

    Uh... It was here in Weigantia....

    DUH.....

    I like to think that my moral authority is endowed by the majority where Trump is concerned,

    I know you like to THINK that.. It's called 'self-delusion'...,

    " The needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few "

    And the needs of the MANY (hundreds of millions of Americans who are seeing more money in their pockets and lowered prices and PRIDE in their country) are being served, over the few violent hateful and intolerant Democrats and NeverTrumpers..

    Defending the indefensible is a heavy lift

    Actually, not so much.. I simply have to point to FACTS and REALITY and viola' My airtight case is made and NO ONE here has been able to refute my case.. :D

    I have to remember to wear my plaid shirt next time I log on, plaid does go well with jaw drop.

    You dropped yer jaw?? Apologies.. Had I known you were physically defective, I would have taken it easy on ya...

    Irregardless, the FACT remains is you and the rest have been absolutely **WRONG** about President Trump at EVERY turn..

    Talk about heavy lifting.. Yer gettin' crushed.. No wonder you lost yer jaw...

  19. [19] 
    Michale wrote:

    Do you have ANYTHING substantial besides hypocrisy and sore luserism???

    Anything at all???

    So, yer answer to this question is "No... Nothing at all"

    Gotcha.. wink wink

  20. [20] 
    Michale wrote:

    In short, ya'all hysterical Never Trumpers are exactly like the hysterical Global Warming fanatics.

    Ya'all have ALWAYS been wrong about EVERYTHING to do with yer respective obsessions, yet ya'all STILL believe ya'all have ANY semblance of credibility..

    It would be really cute if it wasn't so sad and pathetic..

  21. [21] 
    Kick wrote:

    Michale
    16

    You mean, like ya'all do with all the childish and immature comments about President Trump's appearance??

    You're doing that thing again where you're preaching what you practice.

    Discussing other posters is not a substitute for political debate, and the guy who deflects ad nauseam to whataboutism regarding "Odumbo" because of the itty bitty words about his Orange Idol whining about immature comments is the height of sheer hypocrisy.

    So, please.. You have NO MORAL STANDING whatsoever to discuss the "childish" antics of others...

    Nor do you, but here you are, the most immature poster on the board who worships at the alter of the most immature POTUS in the history of America seeking to hold posters on a political blog comments section to standards you defend in the President of the United States and outright ignore in yourself.

    In short: Check your mirror. :)

  22. [22] 
    Kick wrote:

    Michale
    20

    Ya'all have ALWAYS been wrong about EVERYTHING to do with yer respective obsessions, yet ya'all STILL believe ya'all have ANY semblance of credibility..

    Speaking of "respective obsessions," yours seems to trolling everyone here for doing the same stuff you do. How pathetic is that? :)

    It would be really cute if it wasn't so sad and pathetic..

    Yep. :)

  23. [23] 
    Kick wrote:

    Yet another Russian hacker extradited to the United States.

    https://tinyurl.com/yc5uwsdj

  24. [24] 
    Michale wrote:

    You're doing that thing again where you're preaching what you practice.

    Discussing other posters is not a substitute for political debate, and the guy who deflects ad nauseam to whataboutism regarding "Odumbo" because of the itty bitty words about his Orange Idol whining about immature comments is the height of sheer hypocrisy.

    Says the person who is doing EXACTLY what she is trying to lecture me on..

    Ya'all have made MANY personal attacks on President Trump and his appearance..

    This is fact..

    Discussing other posters is not a substitute for political debate, and the guy who deflects ad nauseam to whataboutism regarding "Odumbo"

    My use of Odumbo is simply in response to all the childish and immature names ya'all ascribe to President Trump..

    So, ya'all stop the childish name-calling and then there won't BE any childish name-calling..

    It's really that simple.. :D

  25. [25] 
    Michale wrote:

    In short, ya'all set the standards around here..

    I simply kick ya'all arses by them :D

  26. [26] 
    Michale wrote:

    Yet another Russian hacker extradited to the United States.

    https://tinyurl.com/yc5uwsdj

    Which has nothing to do with President Trump or the election..

    In short... So???

  27. [27] 
    TheStig wrote:

    The emerging image of Trump is Urban Hayseed.

  28. [28] 
    TheStig wrote:

    Or City Bumbkin.

  29. [29] 
    Michale wrote:

    And another passing..

    Major Roger Healey... RIP...

  30. [30] 
    Michale wrote:

    The emerging image of Trump is Urban Hayseed.

    Yea, another ad hominem attack on President Trump...

    Hoo hum, same ol same ol...

    But there is some good news on the horizon..

    Odumbo is joining the mid-term race on behalf of the Democrats..

    Republicans are breathing a huge sigh of relief.. Whatever or whoever Odumbo backs, ALWAYS loses.... :D

    So the GOP is ecstatic..

  31. [31] 
    Michale wrote:

    TheStig wrote:
    The emerging image of Trump is Urban Hayseed.

    THAT is what passes for "political debate" in Weigantia these days... :^/

  32. [32] 
    Don Harris wrote:

    The first step in solving a problem is recognizing the problem.

    Instead you give us a symptom of the problem as if it were the actual problem.

    The constitutional crisis is not the symptom of President Trump. It is the two party system and Big Money interests that control our political system and the media that perpetuate the myth that the current major parties and Big Money candidates are the only viable choices and uses that as an excuse to not do their duty as journalists to inform citizens aboot other options that could change that dynamic.

    That is what produced president Trump.

    Instead we get articles aboot the symptom being the disease and how the cure for that symptom isn't going to happen.

    When 50% of citizens are most likely not going to vote in 2018- that is the crisis. President Trump did not cause over 50% of eligible voters to not vote in 2014 or 2010 or 2006, etc.

    History will determine whether Trump and the Big Money legislators of both CMPs are not fit to hold office. If this is true (is there really any question that requires the "if"?), then the media has a duty to act and if history shows the media should/could have acted by informing citizens aboot other options and didn't then they will bear the blame for whatever is done by Trump, the Big Money legislators and the inevitable president and Congress that comes next which will be even worse.

  33. [33] 
    Kick wrote:

    Michale
    24

    Says the person who is doing EXACTLY what she is trying to lecture me on..

    This is exactly what you were doing to JTC; and your rewording of my correct observation is actually making my point.

    Ya'all have made MANY personal attacks on President Trump and his appearance..

    So what? If you're looking for other members of the Cult45 Forum or to censor this board to suit your tender sensibilities regarding Your Orange Worship, I can assure you that you've come to the wrong place. Besides, the itty bitty words aren't about you so there's no need to whine and try to censor people who criticize the Orange Blowhole since you're not him.

    My use of Odumbo is simply in response to all the childish and immature names ya'all ascribe to President Trump..

    I don't give a hang, and I couldn't care less what you call Odumbo or anyone else, and I would wager no one else here does either. We're not afraid of the itty bitty words on the screen. Knock yourself out and fire away.

    So, ya'all stop the childish name-calling and then there won't BE any childish name-calling..

    You're not a very good liar. :)

  34. [34] 
    Don Harris wrote:

    And just for some historical perspective, while I wasn't commenting here at the time I said the same thing when GWB was president.

    While Obama was next and could be considered not as bad as GWB, he was only not as bad which led to Trump and the current symptom(s) in the ongoing constitutional crisis.

  35. [35] 
    Kick wrote:

    Michale
    26

    Which has nothing to do with President Trump or the election..

    Prove that it has nothing to do with Fat Orange Bastard. The DOJ wouldn't exactly advertise if it did. He's not the first Russian hacker extradited; there are quite a few over here now sitting in jail cells scattered across America.

  36. [36] 
    Michale wrote:

    You're not a very good liar. :)

    I have proven beyond any doubt that I can stop the name-calling and personal attacks...

    No one else can make the same claim...

    But thank you for proving my exact point..

    Let me know when you actually want "political debate"... I'll be around.. I'll **ALWAYS** be here.. :D

  37. [37] 
    Kick wrote:

    I have proven beyond any doubt that I can stop the name-calling and personal attacks...

    I really don't care. I have no intentions of censoring the names I use to refer to Hair Dick-Tater so if you don't like it or can't handle it, I suggest you avert your eyes.

    No one else can make the same claim...

    I don't think anyone else cares either.

  38. [38] 
    Michale wrote:

    Let me know when you actually want "political debate"...

    I say that because you ALWAYS seem to make EVERY commentary about me.. :D Makes me feel speeshal all over. :D

  39. [39] 
    Kick wrote:

    Michale
    38

    I say that because you ALWAYS seem to make EVERY commentary about me.. :D

    It only seems that way to you because you obviously believe that posts about the Fat Orange Bastard are about you.

    Makes me feel speeshal all over. :D

    Special kind of stupid... all over the board. :)

  40. [40] 
    James T Canuck wrote:

    [18]

    Lol, and so the hamster wheel keeps turning, churning out whataboutisms and obfuscation in lieu actual reasoned out rebuttal. How embarrassing, to be called out for using whataboutisms, and denying it with more whataboutisms. It's mind boggling that any one would see that as a sound debating technique. It's 'Python-esk', a half-day course at the "Argument Clinic", whataboutisms, contradiction and gainsaying are all insufficient technique in maintaining a contrary position.

    " "An argument is a connected series of statements intended to establish a definite proposition"

    I see no mention in the Oxford Dictionary that says whataboutism's can be used to establish a definite proposition. Therefore, their use is just another way of saying 'there's no defending the indefensible'.

    The core(and flaw) of your 'pro-Trump' rhetoric is built on dogmatic sloganeering that you bought into when Trump was building his myth. You tout the fantastic economy as 'awesome' now, but you conveniently overlook that Trump was telling you it wasn't until he showed up, and within days is was great again. The truth is, without Obama, Trump would have no successes of his own conception to look to and crow. all Trump has done has rubbed out Obama's name and added his own.

    When the self proclaimed 'best deal maker in the world' stabilizes his genius long enough to actually make and sign a deal, instead of tearing up other people's deals with childlike contempt, you'll have something of Trump's to laud over his nay-sayers...until then, stick to the whataboutisms, they are as useful and genuine as Trump's 'awesome' economy.

    LL&P

  41. [41] 
    TheStig wrote:

    Kick-33

    "You're not a very good liar."

    In spite of all the practice he gets around here.

  42. [42] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    Michale,

    President Trump is proposing to use the Army Corps Of Engineers to build the Southern Border Wall..

    I hope they are better at building walls than they are at building levees.

  43. [43] 
    ListenWhenYouHear wrote:

    Trump is now trying to say that Woodward’s book is complete BS because he does not talk the way that Woodward quotes him in the book.

    I’m sure that Trump is correct in his accusation, at least partially. I doubt that those telling Woodward about Trump’s rants actually included all of the incoherent babbling that comes out of Trump’s piehole and just shared the meat of what they found so disturbing!

    If Woodward had attempted to quote Trump’s word salad word-for-word so it matches how Trump really talks, Fear would have made James Michener’s Hawaii look like a pamphlet you’d find stuck under your windshield!

  44. [44] 
    James T Canuck wrote:

    [43] "Trump and top officials are confident they have narrowed down the author of the now infamous Op-ed"

    It's interesting that renowned conspiratorialist and paranoid has mustered the focus to conduct such a thorough investigation, in such a short time.

    Seen through the legal lens of "Cui bono" the whole Op-ed ruse actually starts to make more sense. Combing perceived threats out of your orbit is something people of power and paranoia do frequently...Take ambassador Hailey for instance, she claims to have disagreed with Trump from time to time and taken her issues to him. Sometimes he agrees and changes his mind, other times he doesn't and plunges forward into some mess she sees as folly. What naked toadyism, it's the one thing all Trump's appointees have in common, to a man, they assume the public believes their every utterance as unassailable gospel, and above reproach.

    I've reached the point that I consider anything emanating from the White House is a deliberate lie or an obvious red herring to distract away from some con-job or illegal act happening elsewhere.
    It's a natural reaction to being lied to more than being told the truth.

    LL&P

  45. [45] 
    Kick wrote:

    James T Canuck
    40

    Now see there... JTC said it so much better than I did.

    Very well done, sir. :)

  46. [46] 
    Kick wrote:

    TS
    41

    In spite of all the practice he gets around here.

    *^*^*^*^* Pathetic Fact of the Day Award *^*^*^*^*

    Because that statement is both factual and the pathetic truth all at the same time! :)

  47. [47] 
    James T Canuck wrote:

    [46] It's the futility of explaining the obvious to the oblivious. It's exhausting to go round and round with anyone who likes being dizzy. It's reality attrition, 'let's see who can cling to their reality the longest'. Odds are, the Michale's of the world will prevail, their facts are invented and therefore inexhaustible. Our facts are based on observation and reasoning, they're finite and can't be invented.

    I can live with the loss. It's the only path to bliss that doesn't involve ignorance.

    LL&P

  48. [48] 
    Michale wrote:

    Once again, ya'all have your hysterical Party slavery...

    Why Trump's Record Trumps the Media's Spin
    The media is determined to prove that Donald Trump is unfit to be president.

    https://nationalinterest.org/feature/why-trumps-record-trumps-medias-spin-30757

    And then there are the facts...

  49. [49] 
    Michale wrote:

    'Nuck

    Odds are, the Michale's of the world will prevail,

    I just wanted to thank you for this large spacious place you give me in your head.

    And rent free too!! :D

    Yer a peach... :D

  50. [50] 
    Michale wrote:

    As we approach the first 600 days into the Donald J. Trump Presidency it’s again time to assess his accomplishments. What better way to perform this analysis than to compare his results to the prior Administration’s – President Barack H. Obama’s?

    After President Obama was elected President the already low stock market crashed. When Trump was elected the stock market skyrocketed. The markets are a gauge of the economy and include expectations of the future.

    The day President Obama was elected President, November 4th, 2008, the DOW stood at 9,625. Immediately however, the DOW began to tank and by March 9, 2009, the DOW could go down no further as it landed at 6,547 for a decrease of more than 30%.

    After President Trump was elected the DOW exploded. On November 8th, 2016, the DOW stood at 18,332. Since that date the DOW has soared and it never looked back.

    Russell 2000

    The Russell 2000 is a major index of US small cap stocks recognized throughout the financial industry. The 2000 companies in the Russell 2000 are the bottom 2000 companies in the Russell 3000. These companies have seen incredible results as well since President Trump was elected President. The Russell 2000 reached 31 new highs in 2017 and this year already has reached 30 new all-time highs.

    The Russell 2000 never reached a new high in Obama’s first 600 days and only reached 3 new all-time highs in his entire first term! The other major indices are all the same, recording massive gains since President Trump was elected into office with dismal results in Obama’s first 600 days in office.

    In President Obama’s first 600 days in office, the US lost over (4.4) million jobs. In President Trump’s first 600 days in office, the US has gained over 3.4 million jobs.

    In summary, in every major economic category, President Trump’s economy is moving in the right direction and is mostly record breaking. In comparison, President Obama’s economy his first 600 days were some of the worst months in US economic history. President Trump has reversed the Obama economic nightmare. 8/23
    https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2018/09/a-comparison-of-two-presidents-president-trump-versus-president-obama-their-first-600-days/

    History will be very VERY kind to President Trump..

    Not so much to Odumbo...

  51. [51] 
    Michale wrote:

    "The Obama recovery of the last seven years remains the worst in postwar American history. Average gross domestic product (GDP) growth since the bottom of the recession in 2009 was barely above 2.1% per year. The average since 1949 is well above 4% per year during the previous 10 expansions.

    This result is not just bad, it is catastrophic. The average American should not be wondering if his or her income is a bit above or below 2007 levels. Just by historical averages, the average American should be 20% better off than in 2007. And this slow growth is settling in as a permanent new-abnormal.

    I believe the root cause of abysmal growth is the huge tax increases imposed by Obama and the Democrats in Congress since 2008. The most harmful were the increase in the capital gains tax from 15 to 20 percent, the increase in top bracket income from 35 to 39.6 percent, and the new tax of 3.8 percent on investment income in the Affordable Care Act (ACA). The massive increase in regulatory burden through the ACA and Dodd-Frank bills are also crushing, but unfortunately are harder to measure."
    -Rex Sinquefield, FORBES

    "Unfortunately, 2% GDP is the new normal.."
    -Barack Odumbo

    For the record, President Trump reached a GDP of 4.2% last quarter...

    Once again... FACTS... vs... The NeverTrumpers and their HHPTDS...

    The FACTS win every time.. :D

    The screams and whinings and foot stompings of the hysterical NeverTrumpers just doesn't matter anymore. It's all nothing but white noise.. An annoying buzzing that is simply incapable of affecting anything.. :D

  52. [52] 
    ListenWhenYouHear wrote:

    Trump made this complaint on Fox&Comrades...

    “What’s unfair, I don’t mind when they write a book and they make lies because it gets discredited,” he told Pete Hegseth, adding that it’s challenging “when somebody writes and you can’t discredit because you have no idea who they are.”

    So Trump doesn’t bother discrediting WHAT was said; because he cannot! That’s why he needs to identify whoever authored the piece... so he can attack them personally to shift the focus off of what was said. Geez, that sounds awfully familiar, doesn’t it?

  53. [53] 
    Michale wrote:

    So Trump doesn’t bother discrediting WHAT was said; because he cannot!

    No. President Trump doesn't bother discrediting what was said because the cowardly traitor discredited it himself by posting it anonymously...

    There is also no need to discredit it because it's the same old tired bullshit that has already been discredited...

  54. [54] 
    Michale wrote:

    As to the upcoming election, let me lay it out for you people simply and succintly..

    The Democrats have been SHELLACKED in every election since 2010...

    EVERY ELECTION...

    And, there has NOT been any kind of fundemental change in how the Democrats approach elections. Democrats are, for 2018, STILL operating from the same playbook that resulted in their SHELLACKING in 2010, 2012, 2014 and 2016...

    There is really no reason to expect that 2018 will be anything BUT another Democrat shellacking...

    "Simply logic"

  55. [55] 
    Balthasar wrote:

    The most harmful were the increase in the capital gains tax from 15 to 20 percent, the increase in top bracket income from 35 to 39.6 percent, and the new tax of 3.8 percent on investment income in the Affordable Care Act (ACA). The massive increase in regulatory burden through the ACA and Dodd-Frank bills are also crushing, but unfortunately are harder to measure."

    If cost increases of 5%, 4.6% and 3.8% bother Mr. Sinquefield so much, he ought to try shopping lately. Wall Street snowflake!

  56. [56] 
    Balthasar wrote:

    There is really no reason to expect that 2018 will be anything BUT another Democrat shellacking...

    You're absolutely right. Republicans can rest easy, knowing that historical trends are with them.

    Everything's fine. Trump's in charge. Republicans can just relax, even take Nov. 6 off, if they want.

    Don't worry, be happy...

  57. [57] 
    Michale wrote:

    You're absolutely right. Republicans can rest easy, knowing that historical trends are with them.

    Actually, historical trends are the ONLY thing against the GOP in this election.

    And, it's not as if those trends are absolute...

    The simple fact is (which I noticed you ignored.. :D) is that Dumbocrats have not made a SINGLE change to their election strategy.. It's the SAME strategy that they used in 2010, it's the SAME strategy that they used in 2012, it's the SAME strategy that they used in 2014 and it's the very same EXACT strategy they used in 2016..

    But THIS TIME, it's gonna be different, right?? :D

    Whatever ya have to tell yerself to make it thru yer day.. :D

    Just keep in mind, though.. Ya'all said the same thing in the run up to the 2016 elections.. :D

    Didna work out for ya'all then, eh? :D

    But, THIS time, it's different, right? :D

  58. [58] 
    Michale wrote:

    In OTHER words, the EXACT SAME strategy that lost the Dumbocrat Party over 1000 political seats in the last 8 years is the strategy that the Dumbocrats are using in 2018...

    "GOOD CALL!!!"
    -Jim Carrey, LIAR LIAR

    :D

  59. [59] 
    Balthasar wrote:

    Actually, historical trends are the ONLY thing against the GOP in this election.

    ? No, I was agreeing with you. Republicans can take this one easy, it's in the bag. Democrats are just going to spin their wheels doing nonsense like signing voters up, getting them to the polls, etc., etc. like they always do, y'know.

    Republicans shouldn't change a thing. In fact, it would probably be good to make sure that Trump gets out there and hold lots of rallies on candidates' behalf - just to pile on and rub it in a little.

    And, ignore Obama. Nobody listens to him anyway.

    :}

  60. [60] 
    Balthasar wrote:

    President Donald Trump’s unfiltered friend and informal adviser Roger Stone called on him Saturday to fire “insubordinate hillbilly” Attorney General Jeff Sessions.

    But the “hillbilly” hit on Sessions could be another possible sign of brewing trouble with Trump’s supporters in the South. Bob Woodward’s new book, “Fear: Trump In The White House,” claims the president has mocked Sessions’ southern accent, called him a “dumb southerner,” and derided him as “mentally retarded.” Digs against the intelligence of southerners particularly rankle people in the South, regardless of their position on the former Alabama senator.

    The White House has denied Woodward’s claims.

    But a Page Six editor told The New York Times last week that Trump referred to the Georgia family of his ex-wife Marla Maples as “dumb southerners.” He even spoke in a fake southern accent to mock Maples’ mother, editor Jeane MacIntosh told the Times. He compared Maples’ relatives to the family of rubes who move to Beverly Hills in the TV sitcom “The Beverly Hillbillies.”

    The "Southern Strategy" in action...

  61. [61] 
    Michale wrote:

    And, ignore Obama. Nobody listens to him anyway.

    Exactly..

    They ONLY people who listen to Odumbo are the dittoheads who just nod and go "uh huh... uh huh... uh huh"...

    Odumbo is not going to CHANGE anyone's mind.. The ONLY thing Odumbo will do is push the fence-sitters into the GOP camp.

    They remember what a lousy time they had under Odumbo..

    It's also a fact that the majority of candidates and issues that Odumbo backed...LOST.. :D

    SO, yea.. Odumbo needs to keep talking. Next to Pelosi, Odumbo is the best gift the GOP could hope for.. :D

    I am glad you see the light...

  62. [62] 
    Balthasar wrote:

    I am glad you see the light...

    Oh I do, Michale, I do. Obama was surrounded by loyal 'dittoheads'. That is obviously not true of Trump.

    And that loyalty went both ways: could you imagine Trump sticking up for his Attorney General the way that Obama did? Only collusion could account for it.

    And Obama treated the Europeans and Canadians as allies, rather than as adversaries. When they compare the strategic thinking of these two men, this will surely be one of the examples they cite.

    In truth, the two men couldn't be more opposite to one another, or disagree more about core principles. Voters should take that into account when they weigh the value of each man's words, and vote accordingly.

  63. [63] 
    James T Canuck wrote:

    [49]Confusing open-mindedness with gullibility, how revealing. Yer a Strawberry, the lowest hanging fruit on any given tree.

    [50,51...dross.)

    [53]Laughable bullshit, the 'tired old bullshit' is in fact alive and well and becoming fact. The image of the Trump White House is consistently painted as dysfunctional and rudderless. That narrative is prevailing, simply asserting it's bullshit and disproven isn't moving the needle. Grow up.

    [54]Shellacking? The GOP has never defeated Obama and Clinton won the popular vote...what colour is the sky in your world? Simple logic...at least you were half right. Simple describes the mind that churned out that logic.

    [56] Sarcasm at its best.

    [62] Yup.

    Two definitions of Witch hunt... Which Witch crone crusade sounds legitimate?

    1. An investigation into the activities of a group of people who seek or sought to undermine the greater good based on legitimate data.

    or

    2. An investigation into the activities of a group of people who seek or sought to undermine the greater good based on reaction to negative opinion.

    Which Witch will be decided by indictments and convictions under the law.

    LL&P

  64. [64] 
    Michale wrote:

    DH...

    Yer Giants aren't off to a good start. :D

    Usually, it's the JAGs who are killed by penalties.. :D

  65. [65] 
    Michale wrote:

    In truth, the two men couldn't be more opposite to one another, or disagree more about core principles. Voters should take that into account when they weigh the value of each man's words, and vote accordingly.

    AND what each accomplished...

    After President Obama was elected President the already low stock market crashed. When Trump was elected the stock market skyrocketed. The markets are a gauge of the economy and include expectations of the future.

    The day President Obama was elected President, November 4th, 2008, the DOW stood at 9,625. Immediately however, the DOW began to tank and by March 9, 2009, the DOW could go down no further as it landed at 6,547 for a decrease of more than 30%.

    After President Trump was elected the DOW exploded. On November 8th, 2016, the DOW stood at 18,332. Since that date the DOW has soared and it never looked back.

    Odumbo decimated this country and it's economy..

    President Trump is truly making America Great again..

    These are the facts and that just drives you batshit.. :D

  66. [66] 
    James T Canuck wrote:

    Did anyone happen to catch John Dean and his cunning injection into the Judicial appointment process.

    Then I'll catch you up...He was there for the sole purpose of pointing out the un-democratic process of appointing political hacks to the SCOTUS. Ok, a partisan talking point, sure, I'll have that.

    Only one Republican member was there to hear his testimony, under oath. He cleared his throat, welcomed Dean with..."I consider you a rat"

    So much for baying to the American people that "anonymous" should reveal themselves and take their concerns up in the light of day. John Dean was such a person, he did have the fucking balls to stick to his story and he does still has the courage of his convictions... Where in this GOP mentality is an "anonymous" supposed to go?

    Excoriation of John Dean for CYOA is one thing, but to label him a rat is cowardice in its purest form. Killing the messenger before the message can be delivered is proof of blinkered bloody-mindedness.

    No dross or whataboutisms allowed in rebuttal.

    LL&P

  67. [67] 
    Balthasar wrote:

    [65] Every once in a while, Michale, you post an article snippet with a thought that's been so abused that one is tempted to call the authorities.

    This is one of those. It's been so stripped of context and made to assume such a grotesque posture that it belongs in one of those old b&w porn magazines from the '70's.

    And one has to wonder: which is more abused, the poor, undeveloped idea, forced to perform an obscenity, or the gullible mind that looks approvingly on it, and assumes that it resembles reality? Very sad.

  68. [68] 
    James T Canuck wrote:

    [65] Again I'm forced to fact check Michale's deliberate lies to bolster his failing narrative. Here's what Forbes Magazine had to say about the Obama legacy...

    "When Barack Obama was sworn in as the 44th president of the United States on January 20, 2009, the U.S. stock market was in free fall. The financial crisis was in full swing following the collapse of Lehman Brothers and the Standard & Poor’s 500 index, a popular measure of the U.S. stock market, closed at 805 points on Inauguration Day.
    Eight years later, the S&P 500 index has risen to 2,274 points after one of the great bull runs in stock market history. With Obama as president, the U.S. stock market, as measured by the S&P 500, returned 235%, or 16.4% annualized.

    and...

    "The Obama stock market trounced the stock market of his presidential predecessor, George W. Bush, which fell 30.6% from January 20, 2001 to January 20, 2009. Bill Clinton’s stock market, however, beat the Obama stock market, returning 264%, or 17.5% annualized."

    and in conclusion....

    "Still, of the main stock index’s 469 stocks that were trading when Obama took office and remain listed today, only 12 of them ended the Obama terms in negative total return territory. Some of those stocks, like Goldman Sachs, got an extra boost after Donald Trump was elected and the stock market staged a Trump rally. But in the history books, those gains will be attributed to the Obama stock market."

    Stop with your lying, that's a start. Facts can be checked.

    LL&P

  69. [69] 
    Michale wrote:

    'Nuck

    The difference between you and I is that I post my links that show the FACTS..

    You just spew bullshit without ANY collaboration...

  70. [70] 
    Michale wrote:

    only 12 of them ended the Obama terms in negative total return territory.

    And if we were talking about the END of Odumbo's term, you would have an argument.

    But we're not, so you don't..

    As usual, you feebly attempt to move the parameters to make your messiah look good..

    But it's not possible because Odumbo was shit..

    THAT is why he lost the third term... :D

  71. [71] 
    James T Canuck wrote:

    [67] Balty. Well put, hope you didn't mind me steppingstone your post, between the two posts a deliberate lie was squashed, with ease, I might add.

    A shrewd investor never rents, they own..."Bricks and mortar" Owning a space in Michale's head is much more satisfying than renting.

    LL& proprietorship.

  72. [72] 
    Balthasar wrote:

    JTC: He cleared his throat, welcomed Dean with..."I consider you a rat"

    Oaf. Some republicants think that they defeated Common Decency in 2016.

    I'm with you on 'anonymous'. Someone has to gin up one of those old high contrast Obama 'hope' posters, replacing it with Trump's face and the word 'fear'.

  73. [73] 
    Balthasar wrote:

    [71] hope you didn't mind me steppingstone your post, between the two posts a deliberate lie was squashed, with ease, I might add.

    Think nothing of it. You're right, that was an easily disproved lie, I've just been trying today to avoid that sort of direct tit-for-tat.

  74. [74] 
    Michale wrote:

    Think nothing of it. You're right, that was an easily disproved lie,

    And yet, Nuck DIDN'T *disprove* it..

    He moved the goal posts because the FACTS didn't suit his "response" and then spewed a bunch of unsubstantiated bs.

    That is the Left Wing in a nutshell.. :D

  75. [75] 
    Michale wrote:

    JAGS PREVAIL!!!!!!!! :D

  76. [76] 
    Michale wrote:

    JAGS are like President Trump!!!

    THEY WIN EVERY TIME!!!! :D

  77. [77] 
    James T Canuck wrote:

    [69] So...the Fact Sheet that all of Wall Street measure wins and losses by is now fake news...Forbes needs investigating, threatened with the crime of publishing supportable stock market numbers, and closing down for not massaging its fact into a Trumpian delusion.

    OK, big wheel, let's see how well that narrative fares.

    LL&P

  78. [78] 
    James T Canuck wrote:

    [76] JAGS are like President Trump!!!
    THEY WIN EVERY TIME!!!! :D

    Unlike Trump, the Jags will get in the White House via undisputed wins.

    Strawberry.

    LL&P

  79. [79] 
    Michale wrote:

    Nuck,

    You moved the goal posts..

    The discussion was Trump's/Odumbo's FIRST 600 days in office..

    You compare Trump's 600 days to ODUMBO's entire 8 years..

    You cheat and lie because you CAN'T address the facts..

    Now, when President Trump finishes his 8 years, THEN you can compare it to Odumbo's..

    Until that happens, you are FULL OF SHIT...

    That clear enough for ya, Nuck??

    Rhymes with stoopid fuck... :D

  80. [80] 
    Michale wrote:

    Unlike Trump, the Jags will get in the White House via undisputed wins.

    President Trump's win IS "undisputed"...

    Obama himself said it was a "free, fair and legal election"...

    Only sore lusers whine and bitch and moan and complain..

  81. [81] 
    Patrick wrote:

    80
    No one is disputing that he won the election you f'n moron. Its the crazy shit that Mr Tangerine Man has done since that has everyone anxious.

    "Hey! Mr. Tangerine Man, tell a lie for me
    I'm not sleepy and I need a laugh or two
    Hey! Mr. Tangerine Man, tell a lie for me
    In the jingle jangle morning we will be impeaching you"

  82. [82] 
    Balthasar wrote:

    M [79]: You compare Trump's 600 days to ODUMBO's entire 8 years..

    Okay, try this: on the day that Obama left office, he had an approval rating, according to Gallup, of 59%, and a disapproval rating of 37%. Other polls at the time had similar numbers.

    So today, the same poll reports that Trump has a 41% approval rating, and a disapproval rating of 53%. On average, the reverse.

    But by your own measure the economy is roaring along, doing better than Obama's. So shouldn't Trump's approval numbers be higher?

    Or to steal a catchphrase: "It's not the economy, stupid."

    Shouldn't have given all of the profits from the boom to the top 1%, eh? Live and learn.

  83. [83] 
    James T Canuck wrote:

    [79-80- tenancy v ownership]

    And now for something completely different, and other 'Witch Hunts'...Trump v Zervos

    Q 1: Mr Trump, we require a full accounting of your personal and professional business activities, including tax returns and credit reports dating back to the day you met the plaintiff.

    A 1: Will you take a cheque.

    No way Trump needs this headache right now, and no way it can be reasonably or legally be stopped...unless someone has a few judges in their pocket?

    Clinton v Jones should suffice, in the same way Whitewater churned up Monika Lewinski...if one standard for both sides is to be applied, Michale. Hmmm...

    Be careful, I set a perjury trap for you...

    LL&P

  84. [84] 
    James T Canuck wrote:

    If nothing else, the Clinton's have provided a good precedent for investigations involving the president, both legal and civil. They have clearly provided that a sitting president can be subjected to civil litigation.

    It almost makes up for the unmitigated hubris of 2016 when Clinton (Mrs.) took her foot off the gas, and decided to coast.

    LL&P

  85. [85] 
    Balthasar wrote:

    It almost makes up for the unmitigated hubris of 2016 when Clinton (Mrs.) took her foot off the gas, and decided to coast.

    I have to disagree, JT, Clinton wasn't coasting, she was being drowned out. Don't forget that if she and Trump had competing speeches, they used to put Clinton's speech in a little box in the corner, while the main screen had an image of the empty podium that Trump was scheduled to appear in front of next. Often, a disembodied panel would provide the soundtrack, sometimes ironically talking about how Hillary was struggling to 'break through' the Trump talk. That's how absurd the campaign was, most of the time.

  86. [86] 
    Kick wrote:

    Balthasar
    59

    Republicans shouldn't change a thing. In fact, it would probably be good to make sure that Trump gets out there and hold lots of rallies on candidates' behalf - just to pile on and rub it in a little.

    Like I said before that election where Connor Lamb got SHELLACKED in that gerrymandered red district in Pennsylvania, I will even pack Trump's fat suits and orange goop and that pet ferret he wears on his head... even pay his way to Pennsylvania to make sure he goes.

    Keep that lying con artist ignorant hot bag of wind out there front and center and professing his love for his voters; he does so "love the uneducated"... loves them so much that he's already told the idiots that if he gets impeached, it's all their fault. :)

  87. [87] 
    Kick wrote:

    Balthasar
    60

    President Donald Trump’s unfiltered friend and informal adviser Roger Stone called on him Saturday to fire “insubordinate hillbilly” Attorney General Jeff Sessions.

    Hillbilly? You don't say? Why that sounds exactly like the type language those elitist New York scumbags like Manafort, Stone, and Trump would use to refer to a Southerner with a "mouth full of rocks" and an accent.

    And don't think for one minute they're not fully aware of their good fortune that the majority of their voters haven't got a clue about their entire ruse; they positively "love the uneducated."

    Digs against the intelligence of southerners particularly rankle people in the South, regardless of their position on the former Alabama senator.

    I thank the Lord daily that I can turn my accent on and off at will and received the best education my daddy's money could buy... wouldn't want any of those carpetbaggers like Benedict Donald assuming my accent was an indicator of my intelligence. :)

  88. [88] 
    Kick wrote:

    Balthasar
    62

    And Obama treated the Europeans and Canadians as allies, rather than as adversaries. When they compare the strategic thinking of these two men, this will surely be one of the examples they cite.

    And I can't see why it would be memorable that time Donald Trump groveled at the feet of our adversary Russia, taking a knee on behalf of America at the feet of Vladimir Vladimirovich Putin.

  89. [89] 
    Kick wrote:

    EDIT

    wouldn't

  90. [90] 
    Kick wrote:

    Balthasar
    67

    [65] Every once in a while, Michale, you post an article snippet with a thought that's been so abused that one is tempted to call the authorities.

    And he frequently doesn't credit the moron who wrote it... so it's plagiarism at worst and copyright infringement at best. Call the authorities indeed. ;)

  91. [91] 
    James T Canuck wrote:

    [84] Balty, I have to be consistent, Clinton chose not to pay attention to certain states that wound up biting her in the arse on election day, that's not debatable, she's admitted as much and Bannon crowed thusly. It's impossible to say, whether proven or not, any 'collusion' made a difference, but her decision was hers and hers alone. It's also a stretch to wonder if press coverage tipped the scales, given that she won the popular vote. Trump's moral imperative, 'The American people overwhelmingly support this administration' is nonsense built on the 60,000 people who decided the Electoral College, an aspect of the general election she seemed to have ignored.

    Mistakes are a part of any healthy learning curve.

    People need to get out and vote, for whom isn't important. 51% of eligible voters showing up isn't good enough. It certainly isn't a poster child for democracy in the world.

    LL&P

  92. [92] 
    Kick wrote:

    Michale
    69

    The difference between you and I is that I post my links that show the FACTS..

    No, you often don't. In point of fact, you quite frequently post with no link whatsoever... spamming the board with entire articles... and in the post you and JTC and Balthasar are discussing, you don't either, whereas JTC identified the source of his quote as Forbes.

    You just spew bullshit without ANY collaboration...

    Yes, you resemble your remark... frequently... because you are, in fact, usually the one who supplies bullshit without a link or a even a clue regarding the author or from which right-wing rag the utter nonsensical spew was lifted.

    Here let me help you stop your plagiarism and copyright infringement on another man's blog:

    https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2018/09/a-comparison-of-two-presidents-president-trump-versus-president-obama-their-first-600-days/

    Gateway Pundit, a "guest post" by either Joe Hoft or Jim Hoft… it's unclear who (unless they correct it later), the moron is identified by two different names from one line to the next because they're obviously idiots on the right-wing rags. :)

  93. [93] 
    James T Canuck wrote:

    [91] Lol...precedent set.

    Someone has been a naughty boy. Not that I'm surprised.

    LL&P

  94. [94] 
    James T Canuck wrote:

    Seems like as good a time as any to test drive 'commenting tips' al a CW

    In fairness I should site the Forbes reference.

    LL&P

  95. [95] 
    James T Canuck wrote:

    [91] Kick, pointing out the shameless plagiarism! kicked me to look at the rules here.

    My mother is a Neo-Nazi, she wouldn't mind if I accused her of being one :)

    LL&P

  96. [96] 
    Kick wrote:

    Now, back to the bullshit Michale posted at [65], you will recall that the Dow had taken some huge history making hits before Obama was even elected that the moron who wrote the article omits.

    Dow Jones Industrial Average
    Largest Daily Point Losses in History

    1. 02-05-2018 ?1,175.21
    2. 02-08-2018 ?1,032.89
    3. 09-29-2008 ?777.68
    4. 10-15-2008 ?733.08
    5. 03-22-2018 ?724.42

    The day President Obama was elected President, November 4th, 2008, the DOW stood at 9,625.

    So what? The Dow Jones Industrial Average had hit its pre-recession high on October 9, 2007, closing at 14,164.43. By March 5, 2009, it had dropped more than 50 percent to 6,594.44. Blaming Obama for the recession that began around a year before he was elected and carried into his presidency is exactly what a right-wing moron would do.

    Immediately however, the DOW began to tank and by March 9, 2009, the DOW could go down no further as it landed at 6,547 for a decrease of more than 30%.

    Immediately? Wrong, wrong, wrong. The Dow had been steadily tanking since October 2007. Two of the worst daily point loses in Dow history occurred on 09-29-2008 at -777.68 and 10-15-2008 at -733.08 before Obama was even elected, which had occupied places 1 and 2 for quite awhile until Donald Trump became president and eclipsed them both in 2018. Fun with numbers.

    Additionally, what kind of moron would write that the Dow could go down no further when it was at 6,547? That utter nonsensical bullshit right there should have alerted anyone with two brain cells to rub together that the person who fabricated this shit was an effing moron because if the Dow is sitting at 6,547, there is plenty further down that it can go. Idiots. :)

  97. [97] 
    Kick wrote:

    EDIT

    Dow Jones Industrial Average
    Largest Daily Point Losses in History

    1. 02-05-2018..... - 1,175.21
    2. 02-08-2018..... - 1,032.89
    3. 09-29-2008..... - 777.68
    4. 10-15-2008..... - 733.08
    5. 03-22-2018..... - 724.42

    I have no idea how the loss indicators turned into question marks.

    Fixed it.

  98. [98] 
    Kick wrote:

    This stock market bullshit Michale posted at [65] from The Gateway Pundit is exactly why Trump and his con artist ilk "love the uneducated." Because you can fabricate the stupidest shit about history and tell these morons anything... no matter how effing stupid it is… and they'll believe it without question and regurgitate it on cue like useful idiots.

    If Trump gets impeached, he's already prepared to blame them for it; we know this to be a fact because he admitted it. :)

  99. [99] 
    Kick wrote:

    JTC
    94

    [91] Kick, pointing out the shameless plagiarism! kicked me to look at the rules here.

    Well, after I posted that, I see that he had posted the link in another comment box. There's the proof that I don't read all his spamming posts. *laughs*

    Be that as it may and nevertheless, he did still post it in [65] without a link and without attribution so my statement is still factual. Why he feels he needs to post this bullshit twice in one commentary is beyond me, and it's par for the course and indicative of his regular spamming the board endlessly and repetitively with the same shit over and over.

  100. [100] 
    Michale wrote:

    Balthy,

    Okay, try this: on the day that Obama left office, he had an approval rating, according to Gallup, of 59%, and a disapproval rating of 37%. Other polls at the time had similar numbers.

    What part of THE FIRST 600 DAYS so you not understand??

    Once again, you have to change the entire argument just so you can PRETEND to make an argument.. :^/

    After President Obama was elected President the already low stock market crashed. When Trump was elected the stock market skyrocketed. The markets are a gauge of the economy and include expectations of the future.

    The day President Obama was elected President, November 4th, 2008, the DOW stood at 9,625. Immediately however, the DOW began to tank and by March 9, 2009, the DOW could go down no further as it landed at 6,547 for a decrease of more than 30%.

    After President Trump was elected the DOW exploded. On November 8th, 2016, the DOW stood at 18,332. Since that date the DOW has soared and it never looked back.

    THESE are the facts that no amount of your spin and bullshit can change..

  101. [101] 
    Michale wrote:

    But by your own measure the economy is roaring along, doing better than Obama's. So shouldn't Trump's approval numbers be higher?

    Oh, gee wiz.. I dunno..

    Maybe it's because the Leftist Media has STATED that their ONLY GOAL is to remove President Trump from office.. To NULLIFY a "free, fair and legal" election..

    Let's engage those 2 brain cells of yours and see if you could POSSIBLY concede that THAT might have something to do with it.. :D

    Now, I have answered your question..

    Do you have the integrity to answer mine??

    If President Trump is so bad and incompetent as you claim, why are his approval numbers comparable to Odumbo's??

  102. [102] 
    Michale wrote:

    Jags kicked butt!!!!!! :D

    Super Bowl bound fer sure!!! :D

  103. [103] 
    Michale wrote:

    As Leslie Moonves Negotiates His Exit from CBS, Six Women Raise New Assault and Harassment Claims
    https://www.newyorker.com/news/news-desk/as-leslie-moonves-negotiates-his-exit-from-cbs-women-raise-new-assault-and-harassment-claims

    What *IS* it about Democrats that they always rape and sexually assault women??

  104. [104] 
    Michale wrote:

    Trump Administration to Close Palestine Liberation Organization Office in Washington
    National security adviser John Bolton also plans to threaten sanctions against International Criminal Court, in a Monday speech

    https://www.wsj.com/articles/trump-administration-to-close-palestine-liberation-organization-office-in-washington-1536546125

    President Trump...

    Making America GREAT Again...

  105. [105] 
    Michale wrote:

    Dolphins' Kenny Stills, Albert Wilson first NFL players in Week 1 to kneel during anthem
    https://www.usatoday.com/story/sports/nfl/2018/09/09/nfl-player-protests-kneel-anthem-kenny-stills-albert-wilson/1248376002/

    America hating scumbags..

    Fire them..

  106. [106] 
    Michale wrote:

    TWITTER SUSPENDS BENGHAZI HERO After Criticism of President Obama!
    https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2018/09/twitter-suspends-benghazi-hero-after-criticism-of-president-obama/

    Apparently, according to Leftist Twitter, you can't criticize Odumbo... :^/

    What *IS* it with Dumbocrats who censor speech they don't like??

  107. [107] 
    Michale wrote:

    Trump Set To Put Iran in Hot Seat At United Nations

    The United States has assumed the presidency of the United Nations Security Council — and that means the council is about to put Iran under the hot lights.
    https://www.nysun.com/foreign/trump-set-to-put-iran-in-hot-seat-at-united/90377/

    Nice.....

  108. [108] 
    Michale wrote:

    https://www.cbsnews.com/news/bob-woodward-fear-trump-in-the-white-house-people-better-wake-up-to-whats-going-on-in-the-oval-office/

    Like I said.. Woodward is a hysterical NeverTrumper.. You can't trust anything he says because he is biased and not objective..

  109. [109] 
    Michale wrote:

    Michael Moore takes mic away after David Hogg urges foreign meddling in American elections
    http://www.theamericanmirror.com/at-toronto-film-fest-david-hogg-urges-foreign-meddling-in-american-elections/

    Yea.. Morons really don't MIND foreign meddling in our elections..

    As long as it's supports the moron's agenda..

  110. [110] 
    James T Canuck wrote:

    [102] What *IS* it about Democrats that they always rape and sexually assault women?? More grotesque generalizations?

    What is it about Trump that makes him a serial philanderer and compulsive liar?

    [105]"What *IS* it with Dumbocrats who censor speech they don't like??"
    What is it about Trump wanting to change libel laws when things are said about him the doesn't like?

    LL&P

  111. [111] 
    Michale wrote:

    'nuck

    Funny how you bitch and moan about 'whataboutism' but yet you WALLOW in it.. :D

    What is it about Trump

    What is it about Trump??

    He's the President Of The United States and that just drives you apeshit crazy.. :D

    BBBWWWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

  112. [112] 
    Don Harris wrote:

    Michale (101)-

    Jags kicked butt?!? They won 20-15. The Jags defense was a pick six better and that was the difference in the game. And if Eli throws the 4th and six a few yards farther down the field so the receiver didn't have to wait for it and giving the defender the opportunity to make the play it could have been a touchdown and the Giants would have won.

    It was a good game (at least for the defenses) and a close game, not a butt kicking.

    P.S.- The Giants lost to the Patriots in the regular season when they beat them in the Superbowl.

    After all, all we have to do is beat the Cowboys, Texans, Saints, Panthers, Eagles, Falcons and Redskins and we will be 7-1. :D

  113. [113] 
    Michale wrote:

    Jags kicked butt?!? They won 20-15. The Jags defense was a pick six better and that was the difference in the game. And if Eli throws the 4th and six a few yards farther down the field so the receiver didn't have to wait for it and giving the defender the opportunity to make the play it could have been a touchdown and the Giants would have won.

    Yea, I concede that the Jags did not play as good as they should have..

    I mean, jeezus! The Giants were 3-13 last year..

    P.S.- The Giants lost to the Patriots in the regular season when they beat them in the Superbowl.

    True.. And who was the coach that got the Giants to the Superbowl??

    Tom Coughlin..

    And where is Tom Coughlin now?? :D

    It was a good game.. Nail biter... :D

  114. [114] 
    Don Harris wrote:

    It is okay to root for a sports team and have unrealistic expectations for the team you are rooting for.

    For example, every year at the beginning of the season I believe that the Giants and Patriots can meet in the Superbowl with both teams at 18-0 (with the Giants winning of course).

    But the Trump on the campaign trail is the best thing for the Democrats and the Obama on the campaign trail is the best thing for the Republicans is treating the political parties as if they were sports teams.

    This not okay as it is bad for the country because while either may marginally motivate the "other team's" base it causes over 50% of eligible voters to not vote in off year elections.

  115. [115] 
    Don Harris wrote:

    It is way past time, CW, to start covering REAL politics covering ALL the options and stop pretending that the FANTASY politics of the two party system is the only option is REAL politics.

  116. [116] 
    Michale wrote:

    It is okay to root for a sports team and have unrealistic expectations for the team you are rooting for.

    That's how Donald Trump became President :D

    But the Trump on the campaign trail is the best thing for the Democrats and the Obama on the campaign trail is the best thing for the Republicans is treating the political parties as if they were sports teams.

    Troo dat.. :D

  117. [117] 
    Don Harris wrote:

    Kenny Stills, Albert Wilson.

    Two people that understand what the flag and anthem represent.

    Michale.

    One person that doesn't.

  118. [118] 
    Balthasar wrote:

    Michale [99]:

    Apparently the clever reply didn't work. Let's try this: whoever wrote that gets an "F" in logic.

    As Kick and JTC point out, the stock market had already been falling for some time before Obama took office, and had been already rising for some time before Trump took office.

    If you don't understand why those two numbers aren't comparable, I can't help you.

    If President Trump is so bad and incompetent as you claim, why are his approval numbers comparable to Odumbo's?

    That was my point at [81] - if you compare the two men's numbers honestly - that is, when both were at a point when the stock markets were rising, and the economy was booming, Trump's approval/disapproval numbers are actually the opposite of Obama's.

    You're actually making my point for me: Obama's numbers improved as the economy improved. So why isn't Trump getting the same bump?

    Maybe it's because the Leftist Media has STATED that their ONLY GOAL is to remove President Trump from office..

    What!!? the ENTIRE leftist media STATED that? When? Did they issue a joint communique? Who signed it?

    You seem to be conveniently forgetting that there is also a Rightist media - you know, where you get all of YOUR links from. Judging by your posts 102-108, they're still kicking, and still in the tank for the Unindicted Co-Conspirator.

    Let me help you: the fact is that, apart from the 41% or so of Americans who would apparently vote for a Tomato provided it was sufficiently racist and ran as a republican, people aren't really warming up to Trump. I dunno, maybe being ignorant, crude and amoral has something to do with it.

    Just guessing...

  119. [119] 
    Michale wrote:

    Two people that understand what the flag and anthem represent.

    If they understand what the flag represents then they would never shit on it..

    No one is saying that these America hating scumbags don't have a right to protest..

    But they should do it on THEIR OWN time and not on MY nickel..

  120. [120] 
    Michale wrote:

    Michale.

    One person that doesn't.

    Oh, now yer just sucking up... :^/

  121. [121] 
    Michale wrote:

    As Kick and JTC point out, the stock market had already been falling for some time before Obama took office, and had been already rising for some time before Trump took office.

    Which doesn't CHANGE the FACT that, after Odumbo was elected, the Stock Market had a huge crash...

    I can't help you.

    Yer blinded by Party slavery.. Of course you can't help me.. Nor would you want to..

    You're actually making my point for me: Obama's numbers improved as the economy improved. So why isn't Trump getting the same bump?

    He has.. Now it's on a downslide and then it's going to go up again.. Just like Odumbo's numbers..

    What!!? the ENTIRE leftist media STATED that? When? Did they issue a joint communique? Who signed it?

    If you really don't believe this, then NO AMOUNT OF FACTS will convince you...

    A few of the Leftist has outright stated that their job is to nullify a free, fair and legal election..

    NO ONE in the Leftist Media contradicted that claim..

    Ergo, do to the hysterical NeverTrumper's Charlottesville rule...

    SILENCE GIVES ASSENT...

    Let me help you: the fact is that, apart from the 41% or so of Americans who would apparently vote for a Tomato provided it was sufficiently racist and ran as a republican, people aren't really warming up to Trump.

    Yea, that's always been your claim..

    Yet you CAN'T address the FACT that black American support for President Trump has TRIPLED and hispanic American support for President Trump has doubled..

    These FACTS prove your claim is full of shit...

  122. [122] 
    Michale wrote:

    Which doesn't CHANGE the FACT that, after Odumbo was elected, the Stock Market had a huge crash...

    Ya'all's attempt to explain WHY it happened is nothing but spin..

    The *FACT* remains that, after Odumbo was elected, there was a stock market crash..

    After President Trump was elected, the stock market surged..

    These are FACTS that you can't spin or bullshit away...

  123. [123] 
    Michale wrote:

    FLORENCE UPDATE

    NHC has moved the cone of uncertainty to encompass all of South Carolina nearly to the Georgia border.. The Bermuda ridge continues to strengthen which will force Florence further south.. This illustrates the danger of forecasting a storm so far out...

    Anyone on the coast from Central FL thru Delaware/Maryland should monitor Florence closely...

    https://www.nhc.noaa.gov/storm_graphics/AT06/refresh/AL062018_5day_cone_no_line_and_wind+png/145000_5day_cone_no_line_and_wind.png

  124. [124] 
    Balthasar wrote:

    These are FACTS that you can't spin or bullshit away...

    Yes I can, but I don't have to. It's already bullshit.

    It started as unadorned bullshit and it's now slightly adorned bullshit. In fact, it now has a slight resemblance to horseshit. A lot of horseshit.

  125. [125] 
    Balthasar wrote:

    Oh, Hey! Just in time to bolster my argument that the GOP's fatal mistake was to forget to share the wealth with their constituents, comes this tale about Trump's favorite guys, the Steelworkers. It appears that they just voted to authorize a strike, because none of the benefits of either the tax bill or the tariffs got to them:

    “Angry USW members conducted strike authorization meetings at each U.S. Steel local over the past week,” the USW said in a statement, noting that there were “overwhelming” or even unanimous yes votes in every local, the Times of Northwest Indiana reported.

    A three-year U.S. Steel contract for close to 16,000 USW members nationwide ran out September 2 and workers are operating on a rolling temporary contract.

    “Between the tariffs and the tax break for corporations, they stand to make $2 billion this year,” Don Furko, president of USW Local 1557 in Clairton, Pennsylvania, told the Post-Gazette.

    The workers, meanwhile, are struggling to make ends meet and pay for health care, he added.

    “Top company officials have given themselves more than $50 million in pay and bonuses since 2015 while the hourly workforce has not received a wage increase over the same period,” said a union statement.

    You'd think that Trump would have the hang of paying people off by now. He's actually terrible at it.

  126. [126] 
    Michale wrote:

    Yes I can, but I don't have to. It's already bullshit.

    Yet, you have NO FACTS that substantiate your claim of bullshit..

    And *I* have posted many MANY facts that PROVE President Trump's popularity rise amongst black and hispanic Americans..

    You can't win, Balthy.. I have god on my side.. :D

  127. [127] 
    Michale wrote:

    Oh, Hey! Just in time to bolster my argument that the GOP's fatal mistake was to forget to share the wealth with their constituents, comes this tale about Trump's favorite guys, the Steelworkers. It appears that they just voted to authorize a strike, because none of the benefits of either the tax bill or the tariffs got to them:

    It's HUFFPOOP...

    As a FACTUAL claim it's useless..

    Would YOU accept a brietbart or inforwars link??

  128. [128] 
    Balthasar wrote:

    As a FACTUAL claim it's useless..

    How much do you want to bet that it's truthful, that it actually happened?

  129. [129] 
    Michale wrote:

    How much do you want to bet that it's truthful, that it actually happened?

    I'll bet you the FACT that the stock market crashed after Odumbos election and shot up after President Trump was elected...

    :D

    THAT actually happened to.. yet you ignore it because it doesn't fit yer Party slavery... :D

  130. [130] 
    Michale wrote:

    But hay... Let's look at yer HUFFPOOP claim..

    “Angry USW members conducted strike authorization meetings at each U.S. Steel local over the past week,” the USW said in a statement, noting that there were “overwhelming” or even unanimous yes votes in every local, the Times of Northwest Indiana reported.

    Hearsay... Not factual...

    The workers, meanwhile, are struggling to make ends meet and pay for health care, he added.

    An opinion. Unsubstantiated...

    “Top company officials have given themselves more than $50 million in pay and bonuses since 2015 while the hourly workforce has not received a wage increase over the same period,” said a union statement.

    A claim of fact, unsubstantiated...

    Which brings us back to my original fact..

    It's HUFFPOOP so it's bullshit...

  131. [131] 
    Michale wrote:

    Obama re-emerges to remind voters why they elected Trump

    Just in time to remind America why voters elected Donald Trump president two years ago, ex-President Barack Obama emerged from political exile last week.

    Pompous, insufferable, self-enthralled, cliched and uninspiring, he picked up right where he left off.

    Reliving his eight-year campaign that cost over 1,000 Democrat politicians their seats, Mr. Obama put on his psychiatrist cap and declared our current politics mentally unwell.

    This November, he lectured, is “a chance to restore some sanity in our politics.”
    https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2018/sep/9/obama-reminds-voters-why-they-backed-trump/

    Once again, Odumbo proves why he is an incredibly effect asset for Republicans to win elections...

  132. [132] 
    Balthasar wrote:

    Hearsay... Not factual...

    Well lookee here..an article about it here, in the Northwest Indiana Times. That's about as close to the action as you can get without actually joining the union. This author not only puts his name to it, he includes his phone number, so that you can call him a liar to his face..er, ear!

    Hmmmmm...same fact set. I guess you owe me a blowjob.

    No, *ugh* I take that back. I'll settle for a handjob.

  133. [133] 
    Balthasar wrote:

    Once again, Odumbo proves why he is an incredibly effect asset for Republicans to win elections...

    How anyone can back Trump and still have the balls to call any other politician "pompous" demonstrates how far from the farm that opinion comes from. It reads like a Reddit rant. About par for The Washington Times.

    The Trump base doesn't need to be activated. They've been activated ever since the Donald of Orange floated down from his golden tower.

    What Obama can indisputably do is to get folks out to vote. So even if a few of your yahoos shit their pants at his appearance, it still ends up being a boost for the Democrats.

    He's still the man that made a chump out of Trump.

    :}

  134. [134] 
    Michale wrote:

    "Those meetings resulted in a massive show of solidarity, with huge turnouts across the country and an overwhelming 'yes' vote in every local. Many locals reported that their results were unanimous."

    That's the UNION's opinion..

    What else are they going to say?? DUH....

    Hmmmmm...same fact set. I guess you owe me a blowjob.

    No, *ugh* I take that back. I'll settle for a handjob.

    Sorry, no offense but I don't ride that back..

    Unless you got tits, I ain't interested.. :D

    He's still the man that made a chump out of Trump.

    He's still the man that *GAVE* us President Trump.. There.. Fixed it for you.. :D

    "2% Economic Growth is the new norm. What?? Is President Trump going to wave a magic wand???"
    -Barack Odumbo

    "AbraCaDabra, bitch!!"
    -President Trump

    :D

    Seems that Odumbo is REALLY the chump because he ain't shit anymore.. And President Trump has all but DEMOLISHED Odumbo's legacy..

    Why do you think America is so GREAT now?? :D

    I noticed you ignore the FACT that President Trump's approval rating amongst black Americans has TRIPLED and DOUBLED amongst hispanic Americans.. :D

    You ignore it because it TOTALLY decimates your hysterical Anti-Trump argument. :D

  135. [135] 
    Michale wrote:

    You can't win, Balthy..

    "You can't win! I have god on my side!!!"
    -Max Von Sydow, NEEDFUL THINGS

    :D

  136. [136] 
    James T Canuck wrote:

    [128] Wrong regardless of your selective memoryThe stock market began it's crash two weeks before the election...in fact this is how 'the balance' coined it...

    "The stock market crash of 2008 occurred on September 29, 2008. The Dow Jones Industrial Average fell 777.68 points in intra-day trading. Until 2018, it was the largest point drop in history. It plummeted because Congress rejected the bank bailout bill. But the stresses that led to the crash had been building for a long time."

    It does go on to say that it hit it's low some months later. That being said, Obama didn't cause it, he did however go on to dig America out of the hole the Bush administration.

    It is precise to say that...On the day of his inauguration, whose vast crowd dwarfed his successor's, Obama inherited an economy in freefall.

    LL&P

  137. [137] 
    Michale wrote:

    'Nuck

    NONE of which changes the fact that, when Odumbo was elected, the market crashed..

    When President Trump was elected, the market exploded upwards...

    You can spin it all you want..

    But the FACTS remain the same..

    Market crashed when Odumbo was elected..

    Market exploded upwards when President Trump was elected..

    These are the FACTS and it just burns you up that you can't change the FACTS.. :D

  138. [138] 
    Balthasar wrote:

    That's the UNION's opinion..

    Exactly. Can you believe it? First Trump gets called out for making fun of hillbillies, then I find out that he's in dutch with the Steelworkers Union.

    I doubt that Trump's imaginary black constituency can make up for losing the South and upper midwest.

  139. [139] 
    Michale wrote:

    I doubt that Trump's imaginary black constituency can make up for losing the South and upper midwest.

    Imaginary??

    Ya see, you prove my point for me..

    It's a FACT that black American support for President Trump has almost TRIPLED and you ignore it..

    I suppose Kanye West never professed support for Trump, eh??

    You live in your own little delusional world..

    But you'll be rudely awaken in Nov of 2018, just like you were in Nov of 2016... :D

    And I'll be here to remind you, AGAIN, who was factually accurate and who was delusional.. :D

  140. [140] 
    Balthasar wrote:

    I suppose Kanye West never professed support for Trump, eh??

    You're welcome to Kanye. Birdbrains flock together, or something.

    Good luck with that 'black support' thing. I hope that Trump triples his support again and has nine!

  141. [141] 
    Michale wrote:

    Good luck with that 'black support' thing. I hope that Trump triples his support again and has nine!

    Actually, President Trump's support was AT 9% (or thereabouts) and has almost tripled to 24%...

    If that reaches 30%, Dumbocrats are toast..

    Once again.. Your hysterical delusions..

    And I have the FACTS.. :D

  142. [142] 
    Michale wrote:

    There’s an old adage in the legal world: when the facts are against you, pound the law; when the law is against you, pound the facts; when the law and the facts are against you, pound the table. That about sums up the Democrats’ approach to Judge Brett Kavanaugh’s confirmation hearings. They can’t find anything to impugn his qualifications, which are equal to that of any recent Supreme Court nominee. Nor do they have a coherent theory of jurisprudence to challenge Kavanaugh’s textualism in statutory interpretation and originalism in constitutional law.
    https://www.city-journal.org/democratic-attack-on-brett-kavanaugh-16162.html

    That's the Democrat Party.. Firing blanks since 2010... :D

  143. [143] 
    Michale wrote:

    The Democrat establishment beckoned, and former President Obama appeared.

    After months of desperate entreaties, highlighted by a summer New York magazine cover story titled "Barack Obama, Where Are You?," Obama returned on Friday with a longwinded speech at the University of Illinois. It featured his greatest hits of identity politics, income redistribution, and tax-spend-and-regulate leftism.

    Obama tried to rewrite history, claiming that his administration "returned the economy to healthy growth and initiated the longest streak of job creation on record," "covered another 20 million Americans with health insurance," and "cut our deficits by more than half, partly by making sure that people like me, who have been given such amazing opportunities by this country, pay our fair share of taxes to help folks coming up behind me."

    Reality check: Obama presided over the slowest economic recovery in American history, with the unemployment rate not falling back below 8 percent for good until his second term. While in office, the economy never hit 3 percent annual growth -- the first president never to meet that threshold since Herbert Hoover.

    Somewhere between most and virtually all of the new insured population came through the Obamacare provision to dramatically expand Medicaid -- a deeply flawed program -- to able bodied adults well above the poverty line.
    https://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2018/09/10/obama_comes_out_of_retirement_with_same_tired_message_138026.html

  144. [144] 
    Kick wrote:

    Michale
    118

    If they understand what the flag represents then they would never shit on it..

    I know, right?! They should be emulating Your Orange Worship and hunching it like it's their grown daughter.

    No one is saying that these America hating scumbags don't have a right to protest..

    Yes, the Orange Flag Molester is absolutely saying that and referring to them as "sons of bitches" and saying they should be fired for doing it.

    But they should do it on THEIR OWN time and not on MY nickel..

    There are tens of millions of patriots who wish The Fat Bastard would stop groping the flag on our "nickel" too, but here we are. The hysterical whining and blatant hypocrisy of the Orange "Son of a Bitch" and his worshipers knows no bounds. Can you imagine their heads exploding if Barack Obama ever molested the flag in the same manner and that massive rush of hot air escaping into the ether? *laughs*

    So let Hair Dick-Tater and the Tater Tots whine incessantly about some players taking a knee on Sunday, but unless and until the athletes start groping the flag on the playing field, no one need take the fake outrage and hysterics of Cult45 seriously. :)

  145. [145] 
    LeaningBlue wrote:

    [143] - Cult45

    That's good. Haven't heard it before.

    Woodward Eve, and the start of Hurricane Week. What a f'n nightmare.

  146. [146] 
    Patrick wrote:

    144 Kick

    Now that's funny. Great post.

  147. [147] 
    Michale wrote:

    That's good. Haven't heard it before.

    You don't get around much, eh?? :D

    It's been a thing for quite a while.. It's even a hashtag..

    Not very original...

  148. [148] 
    Kick wrote:

    Michale
    145

    Not very original...

    The hysterically repetitive board troll takes issue with originality, and next he'll be lecturing again on hypocrisy. #Pathetic

  149. [149] 
    Michale wrote:

    And the crack whore welfare girl starts MORE shit in this forum because she gets her ass kicked six ways from Sunday...

    The facts PROVE that Weigantia was a better place without you in it..

    So, please.. Do EVERYONE a favor and end your pathetic and miserable stay here...

  150. [150] 
    Kick wrote:

    Michale
    147

    Thank you for proving exactly my point yet again.

    Next time you want to hijack a post and whine and moan hysterically about something not being "original," you can save yourself some time and a whole lot of repetitive board spew and go directly to your mirror and have it out with yourself. :) *laughs*

  151. [151] 
    Michale wrote:

    Cry, crackwhore, whine, bitch and moan..

    Don't blame me because you can't handle having your ass kicked six ways from Sunday...

    Like I said.. You would make EVERYONE on the entire planet VERY happy if you would just off yourself..

  152. [152] 
    Kick wrote:

    Cry, crackwhore, whine, bitch and moan..

    Crack a book. Get some new material. Learn to punctuate and write in paragraphs, and enough with your projection about your poor family and your admitted lives as whores. Take your hysterical projection and deal with it. Your pathetic existence as trailer trash is your own and no one else's. TMI

    Like I said.. You would make EVERYONE on the entire planet VERY happy if you would just off yourself..

    You want to talk about who can't handle it? Your handiwork above is the sentence of a troll who exhibits zero evidence of being able to take it. If you're going to regularly hijack posts and dish it out, then you could at least stop your whining about others leaving because you can't handle getting it back in your general direction. What an effing snowflake troll you are. Own it, troll; you are quite the whiny projectionist. If only you could stop your repetitive rhetoric and whiny drivel long enough to see what everyone else does except yourself.

    In short: Check your mirror, troll. If you're going to troll the board ad nauseam, you're going to get it right back. Don't like it? Don't dish it out and then whine like a little bitch because somebody called you on your repetitive routine. :) *laughs*

  153. [153] 
    Michale wrote:

    Blaa blaaa blaaa...

    Yer a scumbag piece of shit who can't handle being bested in a debate so you have to go after your opponents family..

    You simply can't handle LOSING all the time so you have to start shit EVERY TIME..

    EVERY TIME it's you who starts with the name-calling and the personal attacks and the attacks on people's families.

    EVERY TIME it's you who always starts the shit..

    And all because you can't handle losing all the time..

    Your a scumbag waste of skin and the sooner you off yourself the better it will be for the entire world..

    Thank the gods you can't procreate. It's comforting to know your piece of shit existence ends with you...

    So, do everyone here a favor.. Make it sooner rather than later..

  154. [154] 
    Kick wrote:

    Oh, isn't that cute, y'all? The board troll thinks that spamming the blog daily with right-wing rag conspiracy theory bullshit and the regular hijacking of everyone's posts and hurling insults toward the group as a whole is "debate."

    I can't stop laughing. :)

  155. [155] 
    James T Canuck wrote:

    [136] doorknob

    That's why your divorce from reality has been granted a 'decree absolute'...created and got stuck with are two different things.

    Enjoy your bliss, like this lying, confused chunk of funk...

    https://www.msn.com/en-ca/video/news/donald-trumps-strangest-remarks-about-9-11/vi-BBNbPm1?ocid=spartandhp

    LL&P

  156. [156] 
    Patrick wrote:

    Hey I think it is working.

Leave a Reply

[If you have questions as to how to register or log in, to be able to post comments here, or if you'd like advanced commenting and formatting tips, please visit our "Commenting Tips" page, for further details.]

You must be logged in to post a comment.
If you are a new user, please register so you can post comments here.

[The first time you post a comment (after creating your user name and logging in), it will be held for approval. Please be patient (as it may take awhile). After your first comment has been approved, you will be able to post further comments instantly and automatically.]