The Trump Presidency

Do you ...


  • Total voters
    149
Status
Not open for further replies.
His resume sparkles

So did Garland's.
Even most Republican senators granted as much.
Then they went on to treat him like a festering dog turd laying the gutter.
Here's hoping Gorsuch is treated with exactly the same degree of respect :hatsoff:

We're going to seat our justices.

Republicans treated every nominee Obama put forward with respect. They seated 2 liberal woman justices because they were "qualified".

It is at the discretion of the senate to hear nominees or decline to.

Rarely does any president get to seat a justice in their final year.

If anyone disrespected Garland, it was Obama. He nominated him. Knowing full well he would never get a hearing.

The Republicans warned well in advance.
Knowing this, Obama still nominated him knowing he would be in limbo. He played politics with Garland and hung him out to dry.

About as disrespectful as you can get.
 
If anyone disrespected Garland, it was Obama. He nominated him. Knowing full well he would never get a hearing.

The Republicans warned well in advance.
Knowing this, Obama still nominated him knowing he would be in limbo. He played politics with Garland and hung him out to dry.

About as disrespectful as you can get.

What a load of bullshit. Republicans refusing to do their fucking jobs. Plain and simple. No supreme court nominee ever went that long without a hearing. Before that, the longest period between nomination and confirmation of a supreme court justice was 125 days. Since 1900, only 3 president have had the opportunity to nominate someone in their final/lame duck year and they did every time. It's completely standard. What's not is the senate refusing to do its job because it's run by a bunch of obstinate children.

Obama nominated a true moderate. One that any reasonable person from either side would have supported, if there were any reasonable people left over there, and the anti-America party sat on their hands. That's what's disrespectful, you piece of shit.
 
All partisanship aside (if possible) and let's be honest for a second. Whether you like the great orange imbecile or not, is there anyone who doesn't just cringe when you hear him talking? People made fun of W's inarticulate speech, but drumpf makes him sound like the greatest orator in history.

If it wasn't for his daddy's millions, drumpf would be working in a used car lot on the side of an interstate with a dozen cars in the $5-1500 range, and living in the back of the sales office. And that's exactly what he sounds like too.
 
The only thing worth quoting from this moron....

Republicans refusing to do their fucking jobs.
Refusing to hear Garland is doing their job.

Per the United States constitution.

You know. Separation of powers..checks..balances and shit..

Now shut the fuck up.. because that statement alone proves you are an unhinged leftist whining ass snowflake crybaby with about as much grasp of how our government works as a coat rack.
 
The Garland thing - democrats readily admit they would have done the same thing had the situation been reversed. Put that in your pipe and smoke it m8. ya ignorant ausshole.
 
Can someone tell me why is Trump banning migrants from Syria, , Irak, Yemen, Sudan and Lybia, contries from which not a single terrorist who striked the US came from (althought 3 came from Somalia or Iran which are on Trump's ban list) but is OK, with migrant from :
- Saudi Arabia (16 out of the 19 terrorists involved in 9/11 were frrom Saudi Arabia) ?
- UAE (one of the 9/11 terrorists was from UAE) ?
- Koweit (the guys wo bombed the WTYC in 1993 and the one who did the Chatanooga shooting in 2015 were from Kuweit) ?
- Egypt (one of the 9/11 terrorists was from Egypt) ?
- Pakistan (The guy responsible for the San Bernardino shooting was born in the US but his parents were from Pakistan) ?
- Russia and Kyrgyztan (One of the boston marathon bombers were from Kyrgystan, the other from Russia) ?

The truth is Trump's ban doesn't targets countries from which terrorist come from, it tzrget countries from which migrants come from.

If Trump to be tough on National Security, he needs to reconsider which countries are strong allies and which can't be trusted. Trump can't play the tough guy on national security and still consider Saudi Arabia as a key ally. For Fuck sake, there are members of the Saudi government/Royal Family who are secretely funding DAECH and many other Islamic Terror organisations. Saudi Arabia promote Wahhabism, probably the most conservative, puritanical and radical form of Islam, which is the key-stone of every islamic terror organisation.
This is America's key ally in the region ?!
 
I agree, Johan. Saudi Arabia is the home of Wahhabiism and is Mordor as far as I'm concerned. But these 7 countries are ones the Obama Administration singled out and President Trump is just following up on. Thanks Obama.
 
Because since 911 those countries have assisted with furnishing information through their data bases and are cooperating a little at least.
Still some are slipping through the cracks like the woman that came here and killed 24 in San Bernardino.

You don't like the the 7 countries being on the list? Take it up with Obama, it's his list.

Not to mention the six month ban on Iraqis..
 
Saudi Arabia is, at best, a double agent. The right hand cooperates with the US in the War on Terrorism, while the left hand is funding ISIS. This way they avoid being targeted by any of these two.

If the US want a real trustworthy ally in the region, they should look at Jordan
When you look type "Saudi Arabia ISIS" on Google, you find artiles about Saudi Arabia funding ISIS
When you type "Jorsan ISIS", you find articles about ISIS threatening to invade Jordan and slaughter King Abdullah

I agree, Johan. Saudi Arabia is the home of Wahhabiism and is Mordor as far as I'm concerned. But these 7 countries are ones the Obama Administration singled out and President Trump is just following up on. Thanks Obama.
Then, what was the point of voting for Trump if he just follows up on Obama ? You conservatives should be outraged by this.
 
Then, what was the point of voting for Trump if he just follows up on Obama ? You conservatives should be outraged by this.

Why would we be outraged? President Trump has taken Obama's list and is taking action on it. That list isn't set in stone, it can be expanded as well.

No, pointing out Obama's list was in response to the left's outrage to the "muslim ban."
 

meesterperfect

Hiliary 2020
Can someone tell me why is Trump banning migrants from Syria, , Irak, Yemen, Sudan and Lybia, contries from which not a single terrorist who striked the US came from (althought 3 came from Somalia or Iran which are on Trump's ban list) but is OK, with migrant from :
- Saudi Arabia (16 out of the 19 terrorists involved in 9/11 were frrom Saudi Arabia) ?
- UAE (one of the 9/11 terrorists was from UAE) ?
- Koweit (the guys wo bombed the WTYC in 1993 and the one who did the Chatanooga shooting in 2015 were from Kuweit) ?
- Egypt (one of the 9/11 terrorists was from Egypt) ?
- Pakistan (The guy responsible for the San Bernardino shooting was born in the US but his parents were from Pakistan) ?
- Russia and Kyrgyztan (One of the boston marathon bombers were from Kyrgystan, the other from Russia) ?

The truth is Trump's ban doesn't targets countries from which terrorist come from, it tzrget countries from which migrants come from.

If Trump to be tough on National Security, he needs to reconsider which countries are strong allies and which can't be trusted. Trump can't play the tough guy on national security and still consider Saudi Arabia as a key ally. For Fuck sake, there are members of the Saudi government/Royal Family who are secretely funding DAECH and many other Islamic Terror organisations. Saudi Arabia promote Wahhabism, probably the most conservative, puritanical and radical form of Islam, which is the key-stone of every islamic terror organisation.
This is America's key ally in the region ?!

1st youre using mostly false flags and hoaxes as examples.
plus some other things that arent completely correct.
Most of the funding of the bearded mercenary murder hoards comes from the USA. There is a government within the government that controls this and I have to think TRump must be aware by now but I don't know if he can fully stop it.
But your overall point about Saudi Arabia is very valid and I agree.

What people should be pissed about and consider at least a bad sign is what the US just did in Yemen.
Yeman was invaded. A US puppet leader installed. Saudis are bombing the hell out of Yemeni civilians daily with bombs courtesy of the USA. They are blowing up children on purpose. The Yemenis are fighting to save their country and their peoples lives. What would you do if you were in their shoes?

The TEMPORY FREEZE, not ban on the 7 countries is something we need to do.
I hope it's expanded. Then when the dust settles all immigration is more limited and sure, more vetting if it makes them happy.
More jobs for idiots to ask stupid useless questions and push papers.

News Flash people. Believe it or not Arabs are not nor never were a threat to the USA. You were sold something after 9/11.
Something that isnt reality.
The only threat Muslims pose to the US is if we follow the EU example of allowing millions into the country in a relatively short time.
And if the UN and the US would stop attacking and destroying country after country and handing them over to the bearded mercenary murder hoards there would be no reason to even have "Refugees"
When the fuck are people going to wake up and accept this basic simple in your face everyday reality?


To sum up, and I hope some people get it.

1- The freeze is 100% legal.
2-The freeze is very very necessary.
3-After 90 days or however long it takes a more limited immigration program must be put in place for every country, not just those 7.
4- The war on terror is and always was 100% bullshit. No Middle East or African country ever was a threat to the USA. Never.
It was just an excuse to pillage and plunder those countries. It was an excuse to borrow and spend trillions from the worls bankers. It was an excuse to take ouit those countries legitimate governments and force them use the currency of the world bank.
It was an excuse to force them to sell their oil for the US Federal Reserve Note.
It was an excuse to break them up in smaller states that the USA can bully and push around forever.
It was an excuse to create mass immigration from those countries into Europe and weaken and eventually destroy Europe also.
It was an excuse for a small amount of war profiteers to get very very wealthy.
The "terror groups' are armed and funded by the USA, period. There is no getting around that fact. It is reality.
So wake up and start believing what is right in front of your face everyday instead of falling for the propaganda theyve been selling you for 16 years.
Thank you.
 
I felt bad or Garland. But he and definitely Obama knew that he wouldn't be voted on as the republicans straight up said they wouldn't until the next president took office. Yet Garland was still put out there by Obama as a pawn, tears flowing and all.

No.
Obama put Garland out there as a nominee in great part because a tremendous number of Republicans had lauded Garland, even to the point of recommending him, but didn't believe Obama would ever actually nominate him. He wasn't leftist enough, they reckoned. So in nominating him Obama not only proved them wrong about himself, but also challenged them to affirm their high opinion of Garland.

As a reminder, prior to Obama nominating him, Republican President pro tempore of the senate Orrin Hatch suggested Garland would be an excellent Supreme Court nominee. If nominated, Hatch stated Garland would be a “consensus nominee” and that there was “no question” he would be confirmed.
But then Obama actually nominated him, and we all know the rest of that story :)

Here's a good sized sampling of more republican praise for Garland prior to his actually being nominated:
http://www.afj.org/gop-words-of-praise-for-supreme-court-nominee-merrick-garland

So let's all be real honest here: the reason Garland was treated like a piece of shit - the reason this highly and widely acclaimed American jurist was not even given so much as a hearing was twofold...
1) Because Obama nominated him
2) Because the Republican senate is packed with infantile hypocrites

I'm reminded of the scene in "Pulp Fiction" where Samuel L. Jackson tells the guy who tried to steal his briefcase that "I'm trying reeeeeeeeeal hard to be the shepherd". Well, I'm trying reeeeeeeeal hard to give Trump some kind of chance, despite my knowledge and instincts about the man. But in this particular case I'm giving no quarter. As I stated in my first post, what I hope for Trump's nominee is that he's treated with exactly the same amount of respect that senate republicans demonstrated towards Merrick Garland.
 
No.
Obama put Garland out there as a nominee in great part because a tremendous number of Republicans had lauded Garland, even to the point of recommending him, but didn't believe Obama would ever actually nominate him. He wasn't leftist enough, they reckoned. So in nominating him Obama not only proved them wrong about himself, but also challenged them to affirm their high opinion of Garland.

As a reminder, prior to Obama nominating him, Republican President pro tempore of the senate Orrin Hatch suggested Garland would be an excellent Supreme Court nominee. If nominated, Hatch stated Garland would be a “consensus nominee” and that there was “no question” he would be confirmed.
But then Obama actually nominated him, and we all know the rest of that story :)

Here's a good sized sampling of more republican praise for Garland prior to his actually being nominated:
http://www.afj.org/gop-words-of-praise-for-supreme-court-nominee-merrick-garland

So let's all be real honest here: the reason Garland was treated like a piece of shit - the reason this highly and widely acclaimed American jurist was not even given so much as a hearing was twofold...
1) Because Obama nominated him
2) Because the Republican senate is packed with infantile hypocrites

I'm reminded of the scene in "Pulp Fiction" where Samuel L. Jackson tells the guy who tried to steal his briefcase that "I'm trying reeeeeeeeeal hard to be the shepherd". Well, I'm trying reeeeeeeeal hard to give Trump some kind of chance, despite my knowledge and instincts about the man. But in this particular case I'm giving no quarter. As I stated in my first post, what I hope for Trump's nominee is that he's treated with exactly the same amount of respect that senate republicans demonstrated towards Merrick Garland.

This is complete and utter bullshit.

You are assigning the nomination process a greater value than the senate's power of advice and consent. It is not greater, it is equal.
If Democrats and Obama had not conducted themselves in such a way and proven their policies more successful they could have had the numbers to push the nominee through.
No one berated Garland or disrespected him.

No one said the purely delusional things about him that are already being said about an immensely qualified nominee as Gorsuch.

The senate "advised" the president of their intentions, he nominated anyway. He made Garland the victim not the GOP Senators.

As an aside Gorsuch called Garland last night in a show of class.
 
The senate "advised" the president of their intentions, he nominated anyway. He made Garland the victim not the GOP Senators.

LOL @ "their intentions". You mean their implacable obstructionism? Yeah ok they did put Obama on notice that they might well exercise that against whomever he nominated. He surprised them with Garland, though. And in the end exposed them for being the hypocrites they are.

Funny reaction from the "victim" as well, who literally chocked up while calling his nomination "the greatest honor of my life". Poor guy apparently believed all that praise from republicans meant they might actually demonstrate some integrity in his case. Boy was he ever wrong :)

As an aside Gorsuch called Garland last night in a show of class.

Good for him. Garland is a class act too. Maybe if Gorsuch gets filibustered into oblivion they can get together and share war stories.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top