Jump to content
Guests feel free to register and post ×
WELCOME NEW MEMBERS AND GUESTS FEEL FREE TO REGISTER AND POST ×
WELCOME NEW MEMBERS AND GUESTS ×

Search the Community

Showing results for tags 'trump'.

  • Search By Tags

    Type tags separated by commas.
  • Search By Author

Content Type


Forums

  • Main Rooms at the "Liberal Forum"
    • No Holds Barred Political Forum
    • Liberals Only Room
    • The Water Cooler Chat Room
    • Ninth Circle of Hell/Abandon all hope ye who enter here.
    • THE CONTRIBUTOR LOUNGE
  • Liberal Forum Perspectives On Helping America
    • Mod room.
  • Str8tEdge's Video Gaming Club's Post games you're currently playing or all time favorites!
  • The Movie Club's Topics
  • The Movie Club's Topics
  • Music Club's Good vibes
  • Music Club's Topics
  • Music Club's What am I listening to now...
  • The Liberal Council's Topics
  • Great hints from imgreatagain's Household odors
  • Great hints from imgreatagain's A good nights sleep.
  • Great hints from imgreatagain's WD-40
  • SPORTS's Jordon
  • SOBER HOUSE's Topics

Blogs

  • Kfools blog.
  • Life Beyond Legal Equality
  • 18 wheels and a dozen roses
  • deacon dan
  • LF.Org Card Casino
  • Nightowl
  • Working People Don't Care About Economic Inequality
  • Race And Conservatives

Find results in...

Find results that contain...


Date Created

  • Start

    End


Last Updated

  • Start

    End


Filter by number of...

Joined

  • Start

    End


Group


Gender


Location


Interests


Anti-Spam Check


Website URL

  1. Few people doubted that Hillary Clinton was going to win the presidential race in the USA. However following the election results, billionaire Donald Trump becomes the 45th POTUS. The news proved to be a real shock to the global politics and denoted the intensification of the anti-Trump campaign aimed at disputing his victory. Great Britain was the one most engaged in discrediting Donald Trump after the political elite had negotiated with Hillary Clinton for the status of privileged commercial and economic partner of the U.S. during and after Brexit. All hopes had been for the ex-Secretary of State. Today by a prior arrangement we publish an interview with an MI6 operative Richard Jones which he gave to us as insurance in case something happened to him. We haven't been able to get in touch with out informer for some time, so we believe it is our duty to keep our promise and make the interview available to public for consideration. · Before we start discussing the anti-Trump campaign, tell us why you went for the interview? · This is my protection in case something happens to me or my family. · Are you saying that MI6 wipes off its own operatives from the map? · Accidents take place and usually stay unnoticed by the public. · Has Christopher Steele's example had an impact on you? · No, it hasn't. · Have you met him? · I'd met him a couple of times before he left MI6 in 2009. · Steele's information, is it worth something? · MI6 has a stupendous Trump archive. And now there is no opportunity to distinguish the truth from the fiction invented by the operatives. · Alright, let's get back to the subject of our interview. What was the response of your colleagues to Trump's victory? · I remember the election day full well. We had been working round the clock for days and when it was announced that Trump had won the election we, just like many others, were puzzled, I would even say dazed by what had happened. All our efforts were fruitless. · What kind of efforts? · To discredit Trump. · Could you tell more about that? · British government staunchly supported Hillary Clinton after former PM David Cameron reached an agreement with her. · And what was this agreement about? · It was related to the UK's withdrawal from the European Union. · And how is Brexit relevant here? · Brexit means that Great Britain will have to review its economic relations with other countries and significantly change them. Clinton's victory would give Britain the status of a privileged economic partner unlike all other countries under the Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership when it is finally pushed through. In that way negative effect of Brexit would be minimal. · But Cameron's position was always pro-European. · Cameron had been up to date about the plan since the very beginning. His commitment to the European Union is just a peacockery. Ex-PM's goal was to make it look like an attempt to keep Britain in the EU. Well, he succeeded and then resigned so Brexit supporters with Theresa May in the lead could go further. · And Trump won... · Yes, and disrupted our plans. We had no agreements with Trump, not even a single contact. When he won, the highest ranks in MI6 and British political elite had gone mad, and today they continue looking for the guilty. · That is the reason for your concern. · Exactly. · Could you expand on your assignment? · Searching for and, if necessary, creating the damaging and sensitive information that could harm Trump as a presidential candidate, and now as president-elect. · So the work continues? · It has never stopped. We have a lot of prepared data on Trump that could irretrievably ruin his reputation. · And you are going to publish it. · I don't know whether MI6 is going to publish it or not. But this data is also in my possession and I keep it as a part of my insurance. · How could the data be made available to the public? · By means of the U.S. media that support Clinton. We pass all information on Trump to Clinton's team and the rest is their part. · Let's return to Trump and Britain. What is next? · Brexit supporters and their American allies, I mean Clinton and the U.S. Democratic Party, are not going to surrender. · What could be their goal now? · To impeach Trump and get rid of him. · Do you believe this is possible? · Brexit supporters have wide economic interests. The stakes are too high! Trump is unpredictable and if Britain loses the U.S. support in the process of leaving the EU, then it will face multibillion losses. The British government can't allow that, and Clinton's political ambitions have also not been satisfied, so I have no doubts that our work will go on. · Thank you for the interview. Source
  2. While looking for something to take my mind off the horror of today's "Inauguration," I found this ebook by Scott McMurrey: "Trump Revealed and Republicans Unconcealed for Millennials." It seems to be free today and tomorrow. ( See the author's website at bit.ly/ScottMcMurrey for the details.) https://www.amazon.com/dp/B01N7T7KZH It's for young people (and old) who don't follow politics much, and who think life will go on as before even with a troglodyte like Trump in the White House and a Congress full of slime balls. I'm going to give it to everyone I know like that. And there's also a free infographic to send around with a cheatsheet of actions anyone can take to resist the coming calamity. It took my mind off the dejection for a while today. Maybe it will do so for you too. Stay strong. You're going to have to be in the new, post-reality era.
  3. When the vision of a cult comes to mind, it usually entails thoughts of a group like Charles Manson and the Manson Family, who brutally murdered 7 people in August 1969. Or maybe its Heaven’s Gate and the 39 members who committed suicide in order to reach what they believed to be an extraterrestrial spacecraft following the comet Hale-Bopp. Many cults, but not all, have some sort of religious aspect to them. However, there is another definition of cult that I find applicable to our current political situation, the Cult of Trump. Click to read more: http://leftcoastright.com/the-cult-of-trump/
  4. What are your thoughts on young American citizens protesting against presidential elect Trump on college campuses nationwide? I personally participated in a protest at Rutgers University yesterday where over a thousand people (students and faculty) came together to protest. I recorded some footage of the protest while I was there. Please skip through the footage before commenting your thoughts. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Gru5zX5kYrs
  5. Quit giving him money by dropping support of companies he's tied to. I found the spreadsheet in this article very helpful indeed. http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/boycott-trump-list-of-retailers_us_582c789de4b0aa8910bde58f
  6. If the idea of "liberal" has any meaning, we must adapt to the world we live in. As Einstein said, "Doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results IS the definition of insanity". Coming out of this election, if we retrench back to our old and comfortable lines, we insure the same process repeats. The reality is that this country's vote split pretty much down the middle. One half of the people voted for Trump and one half voted for Hillary. Because of our own arcane and unchanged rules, Trump won. That is a reality that we have to accept before we do anything else. TRUMP WON. Let your head wrap around that one for a moment. This is the president we have to live with for the next 4 years whether you want to or not. Saying anything else, wanting to play the election over or having some other process try to save us, is just grasping at straws. If we want this to be different then we need to BE different. The biggest fallacy of this campaign (and I was guilty of it too), was that Trump was so flawed that NO ONE would vote for him. He kept proving it over and over again so it seemed a no brainer. Guess what, that is a fallacy. 1 out of 2 people would and DID vote for him. This is an absolutely proven fact. The more Trump's flaws were pointed out, the more determined we made people to vote for him. What he DID do is offer people a choice over the tried and true Washington insider. He held out the promise and the possibility of something different beyond the same people reaping the rewards and the same people being left out. Guess what? The same people were very tired of being on the losing end. They were tired of their work closing and being left out of the economic upturn. People generally didn't want Trump but he was the only one in the ring that offered something different. He was the only one that did not scream "politics as usual!" Hillary came out and said, "If you like Obama, I'll give you more of the same!" The result tells us that wasn't enough. If we had accepted the split when it was first presented, that 1 out of 2 people would feel left out, that would have told us that you have to reach out to those people to reach them. Even a little! You can't take everyone with you but even a very few would have made a huge difference. It was entirely possible to reach to the set of people who had no job opportunities and give them those, It was entirely possible to listen to those people and give at least some of them a place at the table. When the decision was made that they weren't needed, they turned out in droves to tell the world that they were relevant. Calling that anything but a mistake is fruitless face saving. It WASN'T money. Hillary and crew spent boatloads. Poorly apparently because they didn't buy the election. Throwing more money at it is just stupidity if there isn't a message that resonates. Guess what? Insuring that every minority group gets their rights is not a resonating message unless you include EVERY group. If you put them in a basket they see themselves that way and vote that way. This IS reality for at least the next 10 years. It will take at least that long for significant numbers of the white, older, un-college educated, currently left behind to die off enough to impact the elections. 10 years is a long time to be out of power. If the liberal side of the argument reaches for the familiar it makes a mistake. Liberals need a message that include a significant chunk of the folks that voted for "something, anything DIFFERENT". It is entirely possible to offer these folks an education and an ability to get a job. Make them one of us instead of not us. Liberals cannot keep playing the game of automatically being on the other side from the right. "For everything they do, we do the opposite." That is just being the "loyal opposition". You let them set the agenda and we are on the negative side. Being a liberal has to stand for something, to take risks, to bring the benefits to people not normally thought of. If it doesn't, it just sets up to lose again. The liberal message already resonates, "give rights to EVERYONE" and this time don't automatically assume that white males know they are included when clearly they are not. You have to actively reach out to that group. This might be hard but seeing that this group already sees they are a group and excluded should tell us something. After all 10 years is a LONG, LONG time to lose.
  7. It’s too bad it took a Brit to tell the truth about the incestuous relationship between the American media and the Clintons.When Daily Mail opinion columnist Katie Hopkins appeared on CNN last week she deftly dropped the “Clinton News Network” epithet on her host, Hala Gorani. It really was quite delicious. In response to a question about whether Trump could win Hopkins replied, “I think he’s gonna win. I think you guys are in for a big surprise which I’m quite excited about. I think we’ve seen a very similar thing here in the UK with Brexit. We saw a lot of the liberal press kind of sneering at Brexiteers. We saw a lot of the sneering that we see from the Clinton News Network and I think it’s something—” At this point, Hala Gorani interrupted, “That’s CNN. You’re calling us the Clinton News Network.Why? Why do you call us the Clinton News Network when we prominently featured a Florida poll that showed Donald Trump had a couple of points lead [inaudible]?” Hopkins landed a clean shot on CNN’s jaw. Good for her. She is probably wrong about Trump’s chances but she was right to say that CNN is nothing but a front for Clinton, inc. Hala Gorani’s protests to the contrary came off as desperate, as if running a poll showing Trump leading in one state somehow proves that CNN is beholden to no one. If my memory serves me correctly, the term “Clinton News Network” dates back to the first Clinton presidency, which is to say about twenty years. As the name suggests, the world’s first 24-hour news network does not merely bend to the Democratic left—which is basically a given—but also that it’s specifically Clintonian. CNN oldtimer Larry King let that secret slip 24 years ago when he was caught on a hot mic sucking up to then-Governor Bill Clinton during the 1992 campaign. King slyly admitted that Ted Turner, who owned CNN at the time, would “serve” Clinton. It’s hard to imagine that he meant anything other than that Turner would be willing to put the massive influence of his network, which then had a monopoly on cable news, at Clinton’s disposal. Here’s the transcript: KING: Ted Turner changed the world. Big fan of yours, you know? CLINTON: Is he? KING: He would, uh, serve you. You know what I mean? CLINTON: You’re kidding. KING: Oh you’d be surprised. He’s [inaudible]. What’s he got left in life to gain? I’d call him after you’re elected. Think about it. CLINTON: Huh. KING: No dope. CLINTON: That’s for sure. I’m sure Hillary’s fan club would use the same old tactics they always use to deny the validity of that very candid moment—“It’s old news!” “That was Bill, not Hillary!” “Out of context!” and blah, blah, blah. But when it comes to the love affair between the Clintons and their network, some things never change. When the Hillary Clinton campaign hosted an “off the record” cocktail party at the Manhattan home of a prominent donor they invited “influential reporters, anchors and editors.” The purpose of the event was to coordinate directly with the media to get their message out and to gin up excitement about Mrs. Clinton’s candidacy. It was an egregious example of media players violating the professional distance they should maintain from the candidates they cover. Among the 38 who RSVP’ed were nine from CNN—more than from any other news outlet. CNN President Jeff Zucker apparently declined his invitation though he never mentioned publicly that this highly unprofessional schmooze-fest took place and there’s no indication that he disciplined any of his nine unethical employees. The fact that they still have jobs indicates his tacit approval. The Clinton News Network also employed Donna Brazile, the Democratic strategist and Clinton loyalist who was until very recently a regular contributor to several CNN programs. She was fired in October after Wikileaks emails revealed that she fed at least two questions to Clinton in advance of a debate or debates that took place during the Democratic primaries. In Brazile’s email she admits that “from time to time” she “get questions in advance,” which indicates that she’s done this before. One question involved the death penalty and another was a wiffleball about lead-contaminated water in Flint, Michigan. This wasn’t a case of CNN merely preferring Democrats over Republicans. This was an example of CNN rigging the game to boost a candidate named Clinton above even fellow Democrats. Naturally, CNN has denied any wrong-doing.“CNN never gave Brazile access to any questions, prep material, attendee list, background information or meetings in advance of a town hall or debate,” pronounced a network spokeswoman. The truth of the matter is more complicated. Obviously someone at the network leaked the questions, but who? According to Brazile’s own email, her source for at least one of the unknown total number of questions is Roland Martin, who has worked with but not for CNN. Martin reportedly received it from CNN’s Jake Tapper. To say that Brazile did not receive any access to questions may be a premature conclusion in light of the fact that no one knows how many questions she’s received over the years. In any case, her indirect access highlights serious ethical shortcomings at CNN. But CNN’s main contribution to this year’s Clinton campaign has not been in leaking debate questions or making a spectacle out of Donald Trump’s antics. Their primary utility has been in squashing stories—in other words, by doing exactly the opposite of what a free press is supposed to do. Think of CNN as a fire brigade that runs around putting out fires for their favorite candidate. Wherever there’s a story that could potentially harm Hillary’s electoral chances CNN is there to suffocate it with speed and ferocity. My favorite example of this was CNN’s desperate efforts to spin discussion of Mrs. Clinton’s ailing health as mere “conspiracy theories.” She’s fit as a fiddle! “The new birthers: Debunking the Hillary Clinton health conspiracy” blared a piece from August. Wherever would these conspiracy theorists get the idea that Mrs. Clinton is unwell? Maybe it’s because she can’t climb a few stairs and she hacks like an old barmaid. When Hillary was interviewed by the FBI about her email server she pleaded ignorance again and again, claiming that her memory hadn’t been the same since she suffered a concussion in 2012. She was probably lying about not being able to remember, of course, but she did faint at her home and hit her head. If she’s so healthy, why is she always stumbling and falling down? The article continued: “Clinton’s physician — the only person to speak on the record who has actually examined her — has repeatedly affirmed the former secretary of state’s health and fitness for the highest office in the land.” Sure—but that means nothing because Hillary Clinton would never employ a doctor who wouldn’t lie for her. As it turned out, Hillary was (or is) sick—only the diagnosis is unknown. She was forced to admit it after collapsing in New York in early September. Even then Clinton refused to go the hospital in hopes that she might be able to continue the charade. She now claims that she was fighting walking pneumonia. Maybe she was or maybe she’s been struggling with a more permanent medical condition but in either case her doctor is a liar. Can I blame CNN for that? Yes, I can. A denial from Clinton’s surrogate is nothing more than a denial from Clinton herself and no journalist should take it at face value. But that’s how CNN operates—they consider any charge to be “debunked” once it’s been denied by their preferred candidate. If you don’t believe her, you’re a “conspiracy theorist.” That’s not journalism, it’s public relations. It took CNN years of hard work to earn the title “Clinton News Network.” It isn’t easy being the lackey of the world’s most powerful couple. People start asking embarrassing questions like “Why are so many of your reporters at secret meetings with Clinton?” and “How the heck did Clinton know the debate questions in advance?” Then network spokespeople have to scramble to cover CNN’s bare backside. It’s almost enough to make me feel sorry for them. Almost. Source
  8. When I lived in Nevada there was a state election that happened when I was about 21 years old. My old man [a staunch conservative] owned [and still does] a small but surprisingly robust business with about 13 or so employees. He donated heavily to a conservative outsider during that Reno election. A state election of course not a national one. Nobody had ever heard of this guy running. Ever. He had no financial backing really, and almost no media support at all. He won that election. I met with him over dinner in a young republicans hall where there was 300 people or so attending. My dad asked him "How do you think you won?" Here is what he said "I took my message right to the people, I went to every single house I possibly could and talked directly to the voters...and when the election happened a lot of the people who voted for me didn't even like me...they just liked the fact that I at least went and talked to them" Now this is a personal story of mine of course. It is also not evidence of anything of course. Let me say this to you though. If we go back through the threads, and all the back and forth. We pretty much have not talked about any actual issues in a long time, we have only talked about scandal. Same with the media who sets the narrative usually for what is talked about on this forum good or bad. Yet Trump, Is out there rally after rally taking his message right to the people. 10 to 15 to 20 thousand at a time, who spread his message and his policies. That is the reason I think this election will be damned close. I mean knife edge close. Hillary may win or Trump may win I have no doubt he has a chance and it's better than many people think. I just wanted to see what you thought of that. Maybe a discussion where it's not my team vs your team but an actual discussion.
  9. If you can't see an apparent set up your children will pay the price. Comment will soon follow.
  10. Hillary Clinton’s campaign has a problem. A truth problem, to be specific. No, not the problem of being completely incapable of ever telling the truth, although that is a problem. The truth problem I’m talking about is the Clinton campaign’s inability to tell believable lies. “But why not just ask the Clinton campaign to tell the truth?” you might ask. “Wouldn’t that be easier?” source: http://whatsupic.com/news-politics-usa/1473947444.html
  11. Read the email here! WikiLeaks Missing Hillary Email Proves Trump Sandbagging Election BREAKING NEWS August 05, 2016 – London, UK – WikiLeaks has released a newly recovered email suggesting a Trump - Clinton conspiracy was being hatched as early as 2008, the night she lost the primary to Barack Obama, to ensure her election eight years later. Read Trump’s full confession of the conspiracy here: https://www.amazon.com/Unauthorized-Trump-Handed-Hillary-Presidency/dp/1535089741 http://unauthorizedtrump.com Table of Contents Chapter 1: What’s Good for Business is Good for America Chapter 2: All About My ‘Bill’-ions Chapter 3: Birth er’ a Master Plan Chapter 4: O Say Cain You See Chapter 5: A Left Crook and a Right Jeb Chapter 6: What Really Berns My Craw Chapter 7: Making Hillary Great Again Chapter 8: Putin’ the Smack Down Chapter 9: Systematically Dismantling the GOP Chapter 10: Mindful Mindlessness Chapter 11: If I Had Won The End.
  12. Call him what you will but Donald Trump has some valid points - points no other presidential candidate of either party talks about yet nevertheless make a lot of sense. Take for instance the fact that the US assumes the burden of protecting so many countries who don't give us nothing in return. Why should we protect Japan, Saudi Arabia, Germany and other countries who can do it for themselves or at least pay us a hefty protection fee? And what about taking in refugees from Syria and other hotspots around the world? If There's even 1/10th of 1% chance a terrorist could slip into the US I doing want them here. Make them camps in their country or protected zones but don't bring then here to get on welfare and drain our resources. Also, we do need to control our borders but not with a wall. Otherwise we have no control of or nation's immigration policy. On and on he makes a lot of sense, especially with renegotiating trade agreements and penalizing companies who leave the US to avoid taxes while seeking their products here. Jobs is the rising tide that lifts all boats when it congress to the economy. Unfortunately, the Don is a grade-A con artist, and whack job that isn't fit to be commander in chief unless we want the US to become the new Roman Empire with all its vices. It has been said that real power is taken, not asked for. Obama got shafted by the Republicans for asking and pleading, Trump would govern like John Gotti. Clinton, well she's going to be a big yawn for the next for years. Same old monotone scripted crap of vintage administrations. To bad Trump picked the wrong team and choose to align himself with the right wing crazies. He is appealing in so many ways.
  13. New poster design, hope you all enjoy! http://imgur.com/ZAIs7qa
  14. There are 3,189,000 people in the 1%. This means there are 318,900 in the 1/10th of 1%. Donald Trump (who, according to Forbes, is the 121st richest person in America) occupies the 1/4000th of 1%. When Trump says he wants to make America great again, "GREAT" for who? Great for Trump?
  15. Islam is NOT responsible for the attacks today. Counter arguments welcome.
  16. I just started up a YouTube channel based around politics and society from a progressive point of view. My first video is actually a video where I talk about Trump. You guys can check it out here https://youtu.be/slIaK3Ug6_I
  17. Plain and simple and I just want to hear if people think this is a possible way to take our power back and start making Washington work for us and Wall Street lose at least a little and slowly maybe even more and more. Instead of being the 99% camping out on Wall Street being labeled as losers, lazy and many other negative things we somehow turn our attention to the media starting with local news stations in as many towns as we can. Start picketing them to follow up on stories they initially start about corruption in government locally including branches where funds were misused by those in charge of education, human services, etc. In Des Moines we had the head of education give herself some ridiculous raise in the hundreds of thousands while school budgets were cut further and further down, art, music and drama programs cut, grades dropped among students due to teacher cut backs and more. The local news reported her name and her crime. Congress requested her appear and answer questions. She refused a few times. No warrant or arrest was made like should be the case. Then, in the end, she appeared, answered some questions that weren't very tough considering her crime. Nothing more was ever reported. Her name was forgotten. Did she have to pay the money back. I don't think so but there was no local news program that claimed this to be an outrage. I don't even remember if they followed up with the findings. No jail time was heard of but she lost her position. Let's push the reporters to stop giggling about their own banter and a goat that was confused in traffic this morning and make them remember that their real purpose was to be the watchdogs for the people. Let's make it not so fun to go into work and leave the building throughout the day until they giggle less and deal with the serious stuff more.
  18. What does it say about the Republicans that Donald Trump is leading the most recent polls among the GOP field of presidential candidates according the most recent FOX News poll . Well, as far as I'm concerned it confirms the idea that the Republican Party is as batsh*t crazy as it's ever been. Donald Trump? This guy that spewed some of the most insulting comments about illegal Mexican immigrants ever heard and then proclaimed he would win the Latino vote. Who says he'll construct an impenetrable wall along the Mexican border and will make Mexico pay for it. Who proclaims to be the smartest businessman in history, yet filed for bankruptcy so many times even he has lost count. To be honest, I doubt it tells us anything about how things will shake out by the summer of 2016. I'm going to go out on a limb and predict Bush will finally get the nomination and will tap Rubio for VP. But for now, I'll have to admit the Republican dog and pony show is hilarious.
×
×
  • Create New...