(07-14-2017 10:45 AM)Rick Gerlach Wrote:  

(07-14-2017 08:54 AM)RiceLad15 Wrote:  

(07-14-2017 08:31 AM)JustAnotherAustinOwl Wrote:  Regardless of whether what happened with Trump and Russia was illegal vs. "just" unethical vs. stupid and incompetent, it seems strange that Trump defenders are OK with he and his administration being caught repeatedly in lies over it. The Trump Jr. emails make it clear that he, Manafort, and Kushner flat out lied about it and Pence and Trump either lied or didn't know what was happening. (Might be plausible in Pence's case.) And then Junior tells us we know everything now and within 24 hours we find out there was a Russian counter-intelligence officer present. And Trump, after claiming he know nothing has now changed his story to "maybe he was told about it". Hillary allegedly saying something about a video is the end of Western civilization but Trump and his cronies lie repeatedly and shamelessly that that's A-OK?

Exactly. When did we lower our bar of expectations for POTUS from ethical to technically not illegal? I understand that no one has been found (or necessarily will be found) guilty of anything, but that does not mean they are not deserving of criticism.

While some might answer "When we elected Trump . . ", as the expectations of his behavior were always low . . .

your post makes me roll my eyes . . . . .

If you think the Kennedy's were ethical in their campaigns, or that the DNC's treatment of Sanders was completely ethical, than you've got your own blinders on. And of course there was Nixon . . . .

Jimmy Carter . . . yes.

LBJ could play a mean game of political hardball and he had less than savory associates.

Huey Long?

Let's be real.

I am being real. You think that just because others have acted in similar manners that Trump should not be criticized? Others failing to meet expectations does not mean you have to adjust your expectations.

I never said this was unprecedented.

(07-14-2017 01:39 PM)RiceLad15 Wrote:  

(07-14-2017 10:45 AM)Rick Gerlach Wrote:  

(07-14-2017 08:54 AM)RiceLad15 Wrote:  

(07-14-2017 08:31 AM)JustAnotherAustinOwl Wrote:  Regardless of whether what happened with Trump and Russia was illegal vs. "just" unethical vs. stupid and incompetent, it seems strange that Trump defenders are OK with he and his administration being caught repeatedly in lies over it. The Trump Jr. emails make it clear that he, Manafort, and Kushner flat out lied about it and Pence and Trump either lied or didn't know what was happening. (Might be plausible in Pence's case.) And then Junior tells us we know everything now and within 24 hours we find out there was a Russian counter-intelligence officer present. And Trump, after claiming he know nothing has now changed his story to "maybe he was told about it". Hillary allegedly saying something about a video is the end of Western civilization but Trump and his cronies lie repeatedly and shamelessly that that's A-OK?

Exactly. When did we lower our bar of expectations for POTUS from ethical to technically not illegal? I understand that no one has been found (or necessarily will be found) guilty of anything, but that does not mean they are not deserving of criticism.

While some might answer "When we elected Trump . . ", as the expectations of his behavior were always low . . .

your post makes me roll my eyes . . . . .

If you think the Kennedy's were ethical in their campaigns, or that the DNC's treatment of Sanders was completely ethical, than you've got your own blinders on. And of course there was Nixon . . . .

Jimmy Carter . . . yes.

LBJ could play a mean game of political hardball and he had less than savory associates.

Huey Long?

Let's be real.

I am being real. You think that just because others have acted in similar manners that Trump should not be criticized? Others failing to meet expectations does not mean you have to adjust your expectations.

I never said this was unprecedented.

No one is asking you to lower your standards.

Your expectations are naive and ignore the historical conduct of both candidates in the last election. Much less other historical precedent

(07-14-2017 01:39 PM)RiceLad15 Wrote:  

(07-14-2017 10:45 AM)Rick Gerlach Wrote:  

(07-14-2017 08:54 AM)RiceLad15 Wrote:  

(07-14-2017 08:31 AM)JustAnotherAustinOwl Wrote:  Regardless of whether what happened with Trump and Russia was illegal vs. "just" unethical vs. stupid and incompetent, it seems strange that Trump defenders are OK with he and his administration being caught repeatedly in lies over it. The Trump Jr. emails make it clear that he, Manafort, and Kushner flat out lied about it and Pence and Trump either lied or didn't know what was happening. (Might be plausible in Pence's case.) And then Junior tells us we know everything now and within 24 hours we find out there was a Russian counter-intelligence officer present. And Trump, after claiming he know nothing has now changed his story to "maybe he was told about it". Hillary allegedly saying something about a video is the end of Western civilization but Trump and his cronies lie repeatedly and shamelessly that that's A-OK?

Exactly. When did we lower our bar of expectations for POTUS from ethical to technically not illegal? I understand that no one has been found (or necessarily will be found) guilty of anything, but that does not mean they are not deserving of criticism.

While some might answer "When we elected Trump . . ", as the expectations of his behavior were always low . . .

your post makes me roll my eyes . . . . .

If you think the Kennedy's were ethical in their campaigns, or that the DNC's treatment of Sanders was completely ethical, than you've got your own blinders on. And of course there was Nixon . . . .

Jimmy Carter . . . yes.

LBJ could play a mean game of political hardball and he had less than savory associates.

Huey Long?

Let's be real.

I am being real. You think that just because others have acted in similar manners that Trump should not be criticized? Others failing to meet expectations does not mean you have to adjust your expectations.

I never said this was unprecedented.

In his eulogy for Richard Nixon, Bill Clinton said you have to judge a man by his whole record. Nixon established the
EPA and gave serious consideration to Moynihan's Family Assistance Plan

Huey Long desegregated the state's charity hospital system, increased the literacy rate through a free text book program,
and built countless roads and bridges. He also took on Standard oil and a very entrenched ruling class. His last words
supposedly were, "Don't let me die, I have too much to do." The Chief Justice of the Supreme Court said Long had the finest
legal mind he ever encountered.

JFK gave us the Peace Corp and the Space Program and laid the ground work for the Civil Rights Act.

LBJ passed the Act and the Voting Rights Act.

I give Trump credit for trying to reform the VA but that's about it.

On another topic, Trump didn't just beat Clinton. He beat what was supposed to have been the
"deepest Republican bench in recent history."

(07-14-2017 02:05 PM)JSA Wrote:  

(07-14-2017 01:39 PM)RiceLad15 Wrote:  

(07-14-2017 10:45 AM)Rick Gerlach Wrote:  

(07-14-2017 08:54 AM)RiceLad15 Wrote:  

(07-14-2017 08:31 AM)JustAnotherAustinOwl Wrote:  Regardless of whether what happened with Trump and Russia was illegal vs. "just" unethical vs. stupid and incompetent, it seems strange that Trump defenders are OK with he and his administration being caught repeatedly in lies over it. The Trump Jr. emails make it clear that he, Manafort, and Kushner flat out lied about it and Pence and Trump either lied or didn't know what was happening. (Might be plausible in Pence's case.) And then Junior tells us we know everything now and within 24 hours we find out there was a Russian counter-intelligence officer present. And Trump, after claiming he know nothing has now changed his story to "maybe he was told about it". Hillary allegedly saying something about a video is the end of Western civilization but Trump and his cronies lie repeatedly and shamelessly that that's A-OK?

Exactly. When did we lower our bar of expectations for POTUS from ethical to technically not illegal? I understand that no one has been found (or necessarily will be found) guilty of anything, but that does not mean they are not deserving of criticism.

While some might answer "When we elected Trump . . ", as the expectations of his behavior were always low . . .

your post makes me roll my eyes . . . . .

If you think the Kennedy's were ethical in their campaigns, or that the DNC's treatment of Sanders was completely ethical, than you've got your own blinders on. And of course there was Nixon . . . .

Jimmy Carter . . . yes.

LBJ could play a mean game of political hardball and he had less than savory associates.

Huey Long?

Let's be real.

I am being real. You think that just because others have acted in similar manners that Trump should not be criticized? Others failing to meet expectations does not mean you have to adjust your expectations.

I never said this was unprecedented.

In his eulogy for Richard Nixon, Bill Clinton said you have to judge a man by his whole record. Nixon established the
EPA and gave serious consideration to Moynihan's Family Assistance Plan

Huey Long desegregated the state's charity hospital system, increased the literacy rate through a free text book program,
and built countless roads and bridges. He also took on Standard oil and a very entrenched ruling class. His last words
supposedly were, "Don't let me die, I have too much to do." The Chief Justice of the Supreme Court said Long had the finest
legal mind he ever encountered.

JFK gave us the Peace Corp and the Space Program and laid the ground work for the Civil Rights Act.

LBJ passed the Act and the Voting Rights Act.

I give Trump credit for trying to reform the VA but that's about it.

On another topic, Trump didn't just beat Clinton. He beat what was supposed to have been the
"deepest Republican bench in recent history."

Awesome job comparing (multiple) full term achievements to less than 6 mos in office. But then again the Nobel committee pulled that same crap when rendering the Peace prize to Obama.....

I'm not a fan of Trump's but I do find it rather stupid to automatically compare his achievements (if any) on his Presidential tenure at this stage of the game. That is, unless I: a) am prescient to a massive degree (which would then beg the question why I am not the wealthiest person in creation); or b) automatically and knee jerk dismissive (which seems to be an awful common syndrome, to say the least, these days).

I'll be happy to compare the records of, for ***** and giggles, Van Buren and Coolidge, since their histories are at this point known. And, to be blunt, I am not awfully optimistic of the history of Trump acheivements. But, that history not yet in the books, I think I'll stay away from automatically pre-writing it. I'm not quite that prescient nor am I quite that sage and smart to think that I could do so at this stage.

(07-14-2017 02:10 PM)tanqtonic Wrote:  

(07-14-2017 02:05 PM)JSA Wrote:  

(07-14-2017 01:39 PM)RiceLad15 Wrote:  

(07-14-2017 10:45 AM)Rick Gerlach Wrote:  

(07-14-2017 08:54 AM)RiceLad15 Wrote:  Exactly. When did we lower our bar of expectations for POTUS from ethical to technically not illegal? I understand that no one has been found (or necessarily will be found) guilty of anything, but that does not mean they are not deserving of criticism.

While some might answer "When we elected Trump . . ", as the expectations of his behavior were always low . . .

your post makes me roll my eyes . . . . .

If you think the Kennedy's were ethical in their campaigns, or that the DNC's treatment of Sanders was completely ethical, than you've got your own blinders on. And of course there was Nixon . . . .

Jimmy Carter . . . yes.

LBJ could play a mean game of political hardball and he had less than savory associates.

Huey Long?

Let's be real.

I am being real. You think that just because others have acted in similar manners that Trump should not be criticized? Others failing to meet expectations does not mean you have to adjust your expectations.

I never said this was unprecedented.

In his eulogy for Richard Nixon, Bill Clinton said you have to judge a man by his whole record. Nixon established the
EPA and gave serious consideration to Moynihan's Family Assistance Plan

Huey Long desegregated the state's charity hospital system, increased the literacy rate through a free text book program,
and built countless roads and bridges. He also took on Standard oil and a very entrenched ruling class. His last words
supposedly were, "Don't let me die, I have too much to do." The Chief Justice of the Supreme Court said Long had the finest
legal mind he ever encountered.

JFK gave us the Peace Corp and the Space Program and laid the ground work for the Civil Rights Act.

LBJ passed the Act and the Voting Rights Act.

I give Trump credit for trying to reform the VA but that's about it.

On another topic, Trump didn't just beat Clinton. He beat what was supposed to have been the
"deepest Republican bench in recent history."

Awesome job comparing (multiple) full term achievements to less than 6 mos in office. But then again the Nobel committee pulled that same crap when rendering the Peace prize to Obama.....

I'm not a fan of Trump's but I do find it rather stupid to automatically compare his achievements (if any) on his Presidential tenure at this stage of the game. That is, unless I: a) am prescient to a massive degree (which would then beg the question why I am not the wealthiest person in creation); or b) automatically and knee jerk dismissive (which seems to be an awful common syndrome, to say the least, these days).

I'll be happy to compare the records of, for ***** and giggles, Van Buren and Coolidge, since their histories are at this point known. And, to be blunt, I am not awfully optimistic of the history of Trump acheivements. But, that history not yet in the books, I think I'll stay away from automatically pre-writing it. I'm not quite that prescient nor am I quite that sage and smart to think that I could do so at this stage.

Trump doesn't seem to share your concerns about judging his administration too early....

(07-14-2017 02:34 PM)OldOwlNewHeel2 Wrote:  

(07-14-2017 02:10 PM)tanqtonic Wrote:  

(07-14-2017 02:05 PM)JSA Wrote:  

(07-14-2017 01:39 PM)RiceLad15 Wrote:  

(07-14-2017 10:45 AM)Rick Gerlach Wrote:  While some might answer "When we elected Trump . . ", as the expectations of his behavior were always low . . .

your post makes me roll my eyes . . . . .

If you think the Kennedy's were ethical in their campaigns, or that the DNC's treatment of Sanders was completely ethical, than you've got your own blinders on. And of course there was Nixon . . . .

Jimmy Carter . . . yes.

LBJ could play a mean game of political hardball and he had less than savory associates.

Huey Long?

Let's be real.

I am being real. You think that just because others have acted in similar manners that Trump should not be criticized? Others failing to meet expectations does not mean you have to adjust your expectations.

I never said this was unprecedented.

In his eulogy for Richard Nixon, Bill Clinton said you have to judge a man by his whole record. Nixon established the
EPA and gave serious consideration to Moynihan's Family Assistance Plan

Huey Long desegregated the state's charity hospital system, increased the literacy rate through a free text book program,
and built countless roads and bridges. He also took on Standard oil and a very entrenched ruling class. His last words
supposedly were, "Don't let me die, I have too much to do." The Chief Justice of the Supreme Court said Long had the finest
legal mind he ever encountered.

JFK gave us the Peace Corp and the Space Program and laid the ground work for the Civil Rights Act.

LBJ passed the Act and the Voting Rights Act.

I give Trump credit for trying to reform the VA but that's about it.

On another topic, Trump didn't just beat Clinton. He beat what was supposed to have been the
"deepest Republican bench in recent history."

Awesome job comparing (multiple) full term achievements to less than 6 mos in office. But then again the Nobel committee pulled that same crap when rendering the Peace prize to Obama.....

I'm not a fan of Trump's but I do find it rather stupid to automatically compare his achievements (if any) on his Presidential tenure at this stage of the game. That is, unless I: a) am prescient to a massive degree (which would then beg the question why I am not the wealthiest person in creation); or b) automatically and knee jerk dismissive (which seems to be an awful common syndrome, to say the least, these days).

I'll be happy to compare the records of, for ***** and giggles, Van Buren and Coolidge, since their histories are at this point known. And, to be blunt, I am not awfully optimistic of the history of Trump acheivements. But, that history not yet in the books, I think I'll stay away from automatically pre-writing it. I'm not quite that prescient nor am I quite that sage and smart to think that I could do so at this stage.

Trump doesn't seem to share your concerns about judging his administration too early....

I am sure that Harding felt the same way about his ability, as did Reagan, as did Carter, as probably does Obama still. So your point is...... what..... exactly? Aside from venting some of that TDS that seems to bubble in your veins....

(07-14-2017 04:08 PM)tanqtonic Wrote:  

(07-14-2017 02:34 PM)OldOwlNewHeel2 Wrote:  

(07-14-2017 02:10 PM)tanqtonic Wrote:  

(07-14-2017 02:05 PM)JSA Wrote:  

(07-14-2017 01:39 PM)RiceLad15 Wrote:  I am being real. You think that just because others have acted in similar manners that Trump should not be criticized? Others failing to meet expectations does not mean you have to adjust your expectations.

I never said this was unprecedented.

In his eulogy for Richard Nixon, Bill Clinton said you have to judge a man by his whole record. Nixon established the
EPA and gave serious consideration to Moynihan's Family Assistance Plan

Huey Long desegregated the state's charity hospital system, increased the literacy rate through a free text book program,
and built countless roads and bridges. He also took on Standard oil and a very entrenched ruling class. His last words
supposedly were, "Don't let me die, I have too much to do." The Chief Justice of the Supreme Court said Long had the finest
legal mind he ever encountered.

JFK gave us the Peace Corp and the Space Program and laid the ground work for the Civil Rights Act.

LBJ passed the Act and the Voting Rights Act.

I give Trump credit for trying to reform the VA but that's about it.

On another topic, Trump didn't just beat Clinton. He beat what was supposed to have been the
"deepest Republican bench in recent history."

Awesome job comparing (multiple) full term achievements to less than 6 mos in office. But then again the Nobel committee pulled that same crap when rendering the Peace prize to Obama.....

I'm not a fan of Trump's but I do find it rather stupid to automatically compare his achievements (if any) on his Presidential tenure at this stage of the game. That is, unless I: a) am prescient to a massive degree (which would then beg the question why I am not the wealthiest person in creation); or b) automatically and knee jerk dismissive (which seems to be an awful common syndrome, to say the least, these days).

I'll be happy to compare the records of, for ***** and giggles, Van Buren and Coolidge, since their histories are at this point known. And, to be blunt, I am not awfully optimistic of the history of Trump acheivements. But, that history not yet in the books, I think I'll stay away from automatically pre-writing it. I'm not quite that prescient nor am I quite that sage and smart to think that I could do so at this stage.

Trump doesn't seem to share your concerns about judging his administration too early....

I am sure that Harding felt the same way about his ability, as did Reagan, as did Carter, as probably does Obama still. So your point is...... what..... exactly? Aside from venting some of that TDS that seems to bubble in your veins....

I said you should judge someone by their whole record.
What in Donald Trump's record up to now (his whole record, not just as President) makes you think he's going to accomplish anything comparable to the others mentioned?

Funny, while you said "whole record" you only gave head elected office examples and items achieved during their tenure in said office. Glaring in the omission is *anything* that those individuals did outside their respective tenures in the chief office.

Notwithstanding the inconsistency, I have nothing to point to in Trump's past to make me state categorically he "will achieve." Nor is their anything to point to to say he will be "an utter Carter-like failure."

In that regard he is equivalent to both Reagan, Carter, and Clinton (two very good presidents and one wholesomely utter failure, might I add) at this point in their tenure. I am not so presumptuous to state otherwise.

But then again, like many that don't bear TDS, I am willing to see where the cards fall and *then* make grandiose statements about their term in office. That is, *after* their term in office.

I am glad to see that you are seemingly far more prescient then myself on this.

(07-14-2017 04:48 PM)tanqtonic Wrote:  Funny, while you said "whole record" you only gave head elected office examples and items achieved during their tenure in said office. Glaring in the omission is *anything* that those individuals did outside their respective tenures in the chief office.

Notwithstanding the inconsistency, I have nothing to point to in Trump's past to make me state categorically he "will achieve." Nor is their anything to point to to say he will be "an utter Carter-like failure."

In that regard he is equivalent to both Reagan, Carter, and Clinton (two very good presidents and one wholesomely utter failure, might I add) at this point in their tenure. I am not so presumptuous to state otherwise.

But then again, like many that don't bear TDS, I am willing to see where the cards fall and *then* make grandiose statements about their term in office. That is, *after* their term in office.

I am glad to see that you are seemingly far more prescient then myself on this.

Me, too.

(07-14-2017 05:02 PM)JSA Wrote:  

(07-14-2017 04:48 PM)tanqtonic Wrote:  Funny, while you said "whole record" you only gave head elected office examples and items achieved during their tenure in said office. Glaring in the omission is *anything* that those individuals did outside their respective tenures in the chief office.

Notwithstanding the inconsistency, I have nothing to point to in Trump's past to make me state categorically he "will achieve." Nor is their anything to point to to say he will be "an utter Carter-like failure."

In that regard he is equivalent to both Reagan, Carter, and Clinton (two very good presidents and one wholesomely utter failure, might I add) at this point in their tenure. I am not so presumptuous to state otherwise.

But then again, like many that don't bear TDS, I am willing to see where the cards fall and *then* make grandiose statements about their term in office. That is, *after* their term in office.

I am glad to see that you are seemingly far more prescient then myself on this.

Me, too.

Im sure you are. Given that prescience, would you care to give this board some lotto numbers to play?

(07-14-2017 05:13 PM)tanqtonic Wrote:  

(07-14-2017 05:02 PM)JSA Wrote:  

(07-14-2017 04:48 PM)tanqtonic Wrote:  Funny, while you said "whole record" you only gave head elected office examples and items achieved during their tenure in said office. Glaring in the omission is *anything* that those individuals did outside their respective tenures in the chief office.

Notwithstanding the inconsistency, I have nothing to point to in Trump's past to make me state categorically he "will achieve." Nor is their anything to point to to say he will be "an utter Carter-like failure."

In that regard he is equivalent to both Reagan, Carter, and Clinton (two very good presidents and one wholesomely utter failure, might I add) at this point in their tenure. I am not so presumptuous to state otherwise.

But then again, like many that don't bear TDS, I am willing to see where the cards fall and *then* make grandiose statements about their term in office. That is, *after* their term in office.

I am glad to see that you are seemingly far more prescient then myself on this.

Me, too.

Im sure you are. Given that prescience, would you care to give this board some lotto numbers to play?

I'll admit that there is no way to tell if this admninistration will do something that is worthwhile, but I have a hard time believing an administration that cannot competently explain a meeting (see further revelations today about Don Jr) can do anything consequential.

“Together we’re going to deliver real change that once again puts Americans first. That begins with immediately repealing and replacing the disaster known as Obamacare…You’re going to have such great health care, at a tiny fraction of the cost—and it’s going to be so easy.”

Donald Trump, October 2016

How could we have known this guy was a con man after such high integrity ventures as Trump University?

(07-18-2017 07:40 AM)JustAnotherAustinOwl Wrote:  “Together we’re going to deliver real change that once again puts Americans first. That begins with immediately repealing and replacing the disaster known as Obamacare…You’re going to have such great health care, at a tiny fraction of the cost—and it’s going to be so easy.”

Donald Trump, October 2016

How could we have known this guy was a con man after such high integrity ventures as Trump University?

Donal trump - proof that Americans love a good slogan.

Trump tweeting again about dropping the legislative filibuster:

https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/stat...epublicans

Daily Beast just dropped a crazy article that ties the same people involved with the Jr. meeting to Dana R, the congressman from California who has had a strange affinity for Russia and was warned by the FBI that Russians were trying to recruit him back in 2013. The same group fed Dana info on Magnitsky in order to try and get the Act of the same name stopped. Dana tried, unsuccessfully, to do just that.

Wow.

http://www.thedailybeast.com/gop-lawmake...back-to-dc

Sean Spicer resigns

(07-21-2017 11:32 AM)westsidewolf1989 Wrote:  Sean Spicer resigns

Very bad news for Melissa McCarthy....

*posted this elswhere, so pardon the repeat to those that already read it.

(07-21-2017 01:06 PM)tanqtonic Wrote:  

(07-21-2017 11:32 AM)westsidewolf1989 Wrote:  Sean Spicer resigns

Very bad news for Melissa McCarthy....

*posted this elswhere, so pardon the repeat to those that already read it.

The White House press room just went down a couple of scoville levels.

(I too stole that one).

Oh God, this is the best story yet.

Quote: Russian President Vladimir Putin told President Trump that Russian hackers wouldn't have gotten caught if they did hack Democratic groups because they're too skilled at spying, The New York Times reported Monday.

Trump has since repeated the claim, according to White House communications director Anthony Scaramucci.

Scaramucci told CNN's "State of the Union" on Sunday that someone told him that if Moscow hacked the Democratic National Committee, "you would have never seen it. You would have never had any evidence of them, meaning that they’re super-confident in their deception skills and hacking."

http://thehill.com/homenews/administrati...get-caught

(07-24-2017 11:00 AM)RiceLad15 Wrote:  Oh God, this is the best story yet.

Quote: Russian President Vladimir Putin told President Trump that Russian hackers wouldn't have gotten caught if they did hack Democratic groups because they're too skilled at spying, The New York Times reported Monday.

Trump has since repeated the claim, according to White House communications director Anthony Scaramucci.

Scaramucci told CNN's "State of the Union" on Sunday that someone told him that if Moscow hacked the Democratic National Committee, "you would have never seen it. You would have never had any evidence of them, meaning that they’re super-confident in their deception skills and hacking."

http://thehill.com/homenews/administrati...get-caught