TheCatSite.com › Forums › General Forums › IMO: In My Opinion › Thoughts on a Trump government
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Thoughts on a Trump government - Page 22

post #631 of 2884

I think Donald Trump is playing the media again.  He has his press conference this morning about how he is separating himself from his business.  All of the sudden last night a story that has been knocking around for a very long time is all the news.  It is supposed to be about the Russians having a dossier on Trump.  It was bought way back during the primaries as opposition research from someone in Britain.  The person was supposed to have gotten the info in a meeting in Prague, these things always seem to happen in Prague.  There is no record of the person who was supposed to have gotten it ever being in Prague.  Intelligence people here have rejected it as unsubstantiated disinformation.  This diverts attention from what this press conference was supposed to be about and Tillerson's hearing that starts today.

 

It came out on Buzzfeed and CNN followed the rabbit.  The press needs to quit following these diversions.

post #632 of 2884

I am half watching Tillerson's hearing.  I don't like Marco Rubio one bit.  Tillerson kept saying that what Russia has done in the last few years violates international norms.  He also said that nothing of any magnitude happens without Putin's knowledge.  He then kept trying to get Tillerson to label Putin a war criminal.  Tillerson kept saying he needed all information including classified information before making that statement.  Rubio kept at it pulling out letters with what different people have said.  War Crimes are a legal determination.  There are war crimes trials that take months even years to gather the evidence for a war crimes trial, you don't just label someone as a war criminal.

post #633 of 2884
Quote:
Originally Posted by Denice View Post
 

I am half watching Tillerson's hearing.  I don't like Marco Rubio one bit.  Tillerson kept saying that what Russia has done in the last few years violates international norms.  He also said that nothing of any magnitude happens without Putin's knowledge.  He then kept trying to get Tillerson to label Putin a war criminal.  Tillerson kept saying he needed all information including classified information before making that statement.  Rubio kept at it pulling out letters with what different people have said.  War Crimes are a legal determination.  There are war crimes trials that take months even years to gather the evidence for a war crimes trial, you don't just label someone as a war criminal.

Marco is trying to make himself look relevant, looking ahead to 2020 perhaps.  I don't like him either.

Tillerson would have been an idiot to label Putin a "war criminal".  Then I guess Rubio better label GWB a "war criminal" also.

 

I watched it also and I wanted to reach inside the TV and slap little Marco.

post #634 of 2884
Quote:
Originally Posted by Denice View Post
 

I think Donald Trump is playing the media again.  He has his press conference this morning about how he is separating himself from his business.  All of the sudden last night a story that has been knocking around for a very long time is all the news.  It is supposed to be about the Russians having a dossier on Trump.  It was bought way back during the primaries as opposition research from someone in Britain.  The person was supposed to have gotten the info in a meeting in Prague, these things always seem to happen in Prague.  There is no record of the person who was supposed to have gotten it ever being in Prague.  Intelligence people here have rejected it as unsubstantiated disinformation.  This diverts attention from what this press conference was supposed to be about and Tillerson's hearing that starts today.

 

It came out on Buzzfeed and CNN followed the rabbit.  The press needs to quit following these diversions.

http://www.nbcnews.com/news/world/trump-cites-nazi-germany-rejects-dossier-alleged-russia-dealings-n705586

 

Here is a snip from the NBC link above

 

Quote:

Officials prepared a two-page summary of the dossier, which was originally generated as part of opposition research by anti-Trump Republicans and then shopped by Democrats. The officials said the summary was generated for Trump's briefing Friday at Trump Tower in New York.

Multiple officials say that the summary was included in the material prepared for the briefers, but the senior official told NBC News that the briefing was oral and no actual documents were left with the Trump team in New York. During the briefing, the president-elect was not briefed on the contents of the summary .

"Intel and law enforcement officials agree that none of the investigations have found any conclusive or direct link between Trump and the Russian government period," the senior official said.

post #635 of 2884

This is really getting out of hand.

 

Buzzfeed, best known for hard-hitting journalism like "The 32 Greatest Things That Ever Happened On Tumblr" and "15 Reasons You Know You're A 90s Kid," published an unverified, one-source story with explosive allegations, based on the words of an anonymous source who by the way just happened to be paid to dig up usable dirt on Trump during the campaign, true or not.

 

Right off the bat, Buzzfeed is breaking several fundamental rules of journalism. The story should have never been published if they could not verify the information or find at least another source making the same claims. There are serious, time-honored reasons for these rules, never mind the fact that extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence. If you're going to publish some insane story about Trump hiring call girls to defile a mattress the Obamas once slept on in a Russian hotel, you'd damn well better have something better than "it came from a guy who was paid by Trump's GOP primary opponents and the DNC."

 

Not to mention the fact that, if anyone thought the allegations were legit, they would've made the press way before Nov. 8 and HRC's campaign would've been trumpeting the "dossier" every 5 minutes until the polls opened.

 

As for the press conference this afternoon, with CNN's Jim Acosta yelling at Trump, we've really reached rock bottom with absolutely no respect for the presidency. CNN gave up its objectivity and editorial integrity a long time ago. This is the same news organization that ambushed Trump's physician at his office and, instead of asking him a question, said: "So a lot of people are saying you're some sort of lunatic or something." That was the reporter's "question." (For people who missed most of the absurd campaign minutiae, the story ran in August when the media was temporarily obsessed with running stories about how Trump's Manhattan doctor was a quack.)

 

Acosta wasn't trying to ask a question. He was trying to create a viral moment. Reporters don't scream at presidents during WH briefings and say, "Can you give us a question? Give us a question! Give us a question! Sir, that is inappropriate, you are attacking our news organization!"

 

No. Reporters yell out their questions and continue if they're acknowledged, or go quiet if another reporter is called on. This is how it's been done for as long as everyone can remember, and everyone knows that's how it's done. If you want to be taken seriously and you want to be treated with respect, then you don't go publishing insanely ridiculous, clearly fake, bizarrely outlandish stories about call girls and mattresses in Moscow hotels.

 

Honestly, I don't think I've ever seen this much hate and so many people denying reality after an election. The guy isn't even president yet.

post #636 of 2884

I have to admit I enjoyed Trump's response to CNN at the news conference.  MSNBC has always been known as the 'liberal' news channel and they didn't run with it the way CNN did.  They did go over it but they did it completely.  The talked about this story bouncing around for a very long time and no one would touch it.  They wouldn't touch it not only because nothing could be verified but also there were glaring inconsistencies.  CNN had to know that as well.  They ran with it because a dubious online site did.  

post #637 of 2884
I don't doubt that the Russians have a lot of dirt on pretty much anyone important. That's kind of what they do, all the way back to the KGB, etc. Trump's reaction to it, though, makes me think he's worried. A confident reaction to something like that is either no reaction, or "lol, you get your news from Buzzfeed? Pfftt", not "OMG the CIA is terrible and you're all being mean!!!" the way he's reacting right now. That's really really not a confident response at all.

Not that anything would matter to his rabid supporters. He's right that he could murder someone on live TV and they'd still support him. But he's losing the confidence of those who aren't so rabid.
post #638 of 2884

Buzzfeed ran it first, CNN then ran with it with no caveats as to the dubious nature of it.  CNN is supposed to be a trusted news source.

post #639 of 2884
They claim that they only reported the info that Trump and Obama were briefed on, and they deliberately didn't publish details because of the unsubstantiated nature of the material. But I didn't see their story before all this happened so I can't say that for myself.

http://www.cnn.com/2017/01/11/politics/cnn-statement-trump-buzzfeed/index.html
post #640 of 2884

Trump wasn't briefed on the unverified Russian information.  They had a two page report with them the last briefing they gave to Trump.  They were going to use it if necessary to show Trump the difference between vetted intelligence and unsubstantiated disinformation.  He was not shown the info.  http://www.nbcnews.com/news/world/trump-cites-nazi-germany-rejects-dossier-alleged-russia-dealings-n705586

post #641 of 2884
Quote:
Originally Posted by Willowy View Post

They claim that they only reported the info that Trump and Obama were briefed on, and they deliberately didn't publish details because of the unsubstantiated nature of the material. But I didn't see their story before all this happened so I can't say that for myself.

http://www.cnn.com/2017/01/11/politics/cnn-statement-trump-buzzfeed/index.html

 

 

They're taking the weasel approach. By attributing the information to Buzzfeed and saying, "Look, Buzzfeed is reporting this!" they're legally insulating themselves from any repercussions that come with ignoring basic rules of journalism and blasting out an insane, one-source, anonymous allegation that can't even be verified.

 

In journalism, there's also the generally understood rule that you don't make yourself a part of the story. You don't inject yourself into the story, you don't make the story about you. You simply report the story as a detached observer.

 

But what CNN is doing here is putting themselves at the very center of the story. Notice how Jim Acosta didn't simply shout out his question during the White House press briefing, as reporters have been doing for decades. He kept talking over Trump, not with a question, but with the aim of creating a confrontation and a viral moment. I'm sure CNN's executives are very happy that they're getting a temporary traffic boost out of this.

post #642 of 2884

Trump "worried"?  Lol, I highly doubt it.

post #643 of 2884
His words are not those of a confident man dontknow.gif.
post #644 of 2884
Quote:
Originally Posted by Denice View Post
 

I have to admit I enjoyed Trump's response to CNN at the news conference.  MSNBC has always been known as the 'liberal' news channel and they didn't run with it the way CNN did.  They did go over it but they did it completely.  The talked about this story bouncing around for a very long time and no one would touch it.  They wouldn't touch it not only because nothing could be verified but also there were glaring inconsistencies.  CNN had to know that as well.  They ran with it because a dubious online site did.  

 

It's been in the news before. I remember hearing about this back in November, but at the time, everyone was talking about whether or not Russians did the hacking, and it got swept under the rug.

 

CNN did not to my knowledge reveal what was in the memos; only BuzzFeed did, and you can read them here: https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/3259984-Trump-Intelligence-Allegations.html. CNN only reported that BuzzFeed had published them.

 

Trump certainly ended the debate over what is "fake news." He clearly said today that anything unfavorable to him is fake news.

post #645 of 2884

Yesterday was supposed to be about Donald Trump separating himself from his business, Tillerson's confirmation hearing and to a lesser extent Robert F Kennedy Jr of all people possibly heading a commission on vaccine safety and what was it about?  The media chasing this phantom rabbit.  This is a reoccurring pattern.  The media is so frustrated, angry, caught up in this stereotype caricature of Donald Trump that they are not covering anything substantive about him.  They get on their moral high horse and agree with the left, 'We can't normalize Donald Trump'.  Donald Trump is not dumb and he is not crazy he is a very shrewd person.  I still believe that he is playing the media like a cheap violin and many of them still haven't caught on.

post #646 of 2884
I don't know how much of this story is accurate but it seems interesting.

BRITISH AGENT HIRED TO SMEAR TRUMP
post #647 of 2884

That was how it started.  I guess it is common for retired intelligence people to do opposition research for politicians.  He started with Republican opponents during the primaries and then he worked for the Clinton campaign.  He was supposed to have gotten info in a meeting in Prague and there is no record of him being in Prague.  He also is supposed to have a wide variety of contacts in Moscow, too many to be credible.  That is the glaring inconsistencies.  That is why none of his opponents used the info and why, until now, no news organization would touch the story.  I just think it is odd that it comes out the night before Donald Trump's news conference about separating himself from his businesses, his major cabinet appointments hearings beginning, and appointing someone like Robert F Kennedy to a committee to look into vaccine safety.  All of this got knocked out of the news for the most part while the media went into a frenzy chasing this phantom rabbit.  It certainly helped Donald Trump.

post #648 of 2884
Quote:
Originally Posted by Denice View Post
 

Yesterday was supposed to be about Donald Trump separating himself from his business, Tillerson's confirmation hearing and to a lesser extent Robert F Kennedy Jr of all people possibly heading a commission on vaccine safety and what was it about?  The media chasing this phantom rabbit.  This is a reoccurring pattern.  The media is so frustrated, angry, caught up in this stereotype caricature of Donald Trump that they are not covering anything substantive about him.  They get on their moral high horse and agree with the left, 'We can't normalize Donald Trump'.  Donald Trump is not dumb and he is not crazy he is a very shrewd person.  I still believe that he is playing the media like a cheap violin and many of them still haven't caught on.

 

I guess that depends on what media you are paying attention to. I've read several substantive articles on Tillerson's hearing, Kennedy's vaccine stand and Trump's totally ineffective plan for addressing his conflict of interest problem.

 

Frankly I think it is only social media, not mainstream media, that is obsessed with issues like you describe.

post #649 of 2884

I don't think there is a way to put up a wall between him and his business.  The majority of his business is now licensing the right to the name Trump.  The only way out of that issue is breaking those licensing agreements and a fire sale of the properties.  

 

The only possible way out would be a completely neutral trustee and some type of deal where all profits while he is in office going to charity or as his attorney brought up for the hotel in D.C. going to the Treasury.

post #650 of 2884

NEVER happen.  Greed trumps all. 

post #651 of 2884
Hmm. I wonder what's going to happen between Trump and some of his guys. Both Tillerson and Pompeo have said in their confirmation hearings that Russia is an enemy and they totally hacked everything, they believe the intelligence reports. All while Trump is saying "yay, Putin! The intelligence agencies are stupid and biased!" Wonder how that's going to end up.
post #652 of 2884
Quote:
Originally Posted by Denice View Post
 

I don't think there is a way to put up a wall between him and his business.  The majority of his business is now licensing the right to the name Trump.  The only way out of that issue is breaking those licensing agreements and a fire sale of the properties.  

 

The only possible way out would be a completely neutral trustee and some type of deal where all profits while he is in office going to charity or as his attorney brought up for the hotel in D.C. going to the Treasury.

 

Yeah, I don't really think there is any practical way for him to truly separate himself from his businesses.  But given that I wonder if it is possible for him to avoid charges of conflict of interest? Just having his sons take over management does absolutely nothing. He will still know where his money is invested and how the policies he pushes will affect his wealth. Just think of it, congress passes a bill that would adversely affect the profitability of one or more of his businesses and, for whatever reason he gives, he vetoes it. How can that not cause a monumental scandal if not charges of abuse of power?

post #653 of 2884
Quote:
Originally Posted by Willowy View Post

Hmm. I wonder what's going to happen between Trump and some of his guys. Both Tillerson and Pompeo have said in their confirmation hearings that Russia is an enemy and they totally hacked everything, they believe the intelligence reports. All while Trump is saying "yay, Putin! The intelligence agencies are stupid and biased!" Wonder how that's going to end up.

 

There is something I don't understand. As Secretary of State wouldn't it be Tillerson's job to promote and advance the presidents agenda?  I mean, isn't that literally what his job would be? So what difference does it make if he disagrees with Trump. Wouldn't he still have to do Trumps bidding???

 

OK, never mind. I just read that the S of S is an advisor. So Tillerson may be able to change Trumps mind about some of his positions. But in the end, Tillerson would have to do Trumps bidding. I guess he would be better than having someone who just agrees with Trump and doesn't even try to change his mind.

post #654 of 2884
I don't know either! That's why I'm wondering how this will play out.

I assume at some point the S of S could refuse to do what the President wanted. . .probably get fired but at least they could refuse without ending up in jail. . .I think.
post #655 of 2884

I don't think there is any question of jail. Even in Washington it isn't against the law to not do your job. He would be fired or would choose to resign if he felt he couldn't abide by something Trump wanted him to do.

post #656 of 2884
Quote:
Even in Washington it isn't against the law to not do your job.

Haha, yeah, I'm probably thinking of the military, where you get court-martialed if you disobey orders.
post #657 of 2884

ok so what about money that other people have and they are in office? Bush had oil stocks. Everyone who runs for big office is rich and has businesses they run or at least money making schemes that they claim is charity but is just pay to play. Either way none of these people in congress can relate to any of us. They won't have to worry about healthcare, food, fuel, housing etc. their kids go to special schools for the rich. they all have bunkers they can run to and hide in case SHTF. And the rest of us peasants well we will just have to wing it. Too bad the kids don't do boy/girl scouts as much anymore to at least teach the kids some good skills incase of a bad scenario. I wouldn't put it past the regime/elitist to crash our currency while they all have safe houses to squirrel away to. Ask any higher up government official and they will say it's classified information.

 

I worry about the postering with Russia=why didn't Obama sent troops when he was originally asked for help months ago? BEcause now it all falls into place. I don't trust any of them. They are not looking out for us. Too bad people don't see it. The laws are for the pheasants so they can keep taking our hard earned money but they get to opt out. Scary times.

post #658 of 2884

Most of these guys don't have businesses.  They have everything in stocks and cash.  Everything goes into a blind trust, someone takes care of their money for them.  The person taking care of it is usually some type of licensed professional and keeping things blind to the owner is part of what they need to do to remain licensed.  I think it is even common for all stock to be sold.  Everything is in things like T-bills, money market accounts and different types of bonds.

 

Someone with the kind of business that Donald Trump has has never been President.  Not only is his business international with a lot of different operations but it also depends heavily on the Trump name.  He basically sells his name to be put on properties around the world.  He and the Trump  name are the business.

post #659 of 2884
Quote:
Originally Posted by DreamerRose View Post
 

 

It's been in the news before. I remember hearing about this back in November, but at the time, everyone was talking about whether or not Russians did the hacking, and it got swept under the rug.

 

CNN did not to my knowledge reveal what was in the memos; only BuzzFeed did, and you can read them here: https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/3259984-Trump-Intelligence-Allegations.html. CNN only reported that BuzzFeed had published them.

 

Trump certainly ended the debate over what is "fake news." He clearly said today that anything unfavorable to him is fake news.

Trump did not say that "anything unfavorable to him is fake news," that isn't true.

post #660 of 2884
Quote:
Originally Posted by xlpooper View Post
 

Trump did not say that "anything unfavorable to him is fake news," that isn't true.

 

You are way too literal. I did not say that in quotes, so it was not a direct quote. He called CNN "fake news" is what he did, and he called them that because they released information on the BuzzFeed disclosure, which was not favorable to him. So, he was calling something not favorable to him "fake news." What a double standard.

New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: IMO: In My Opinion
TheCatSite.com › Forums › General Forums › IMO: In My Opinion › Thoughts on a Trump government