Re: The Trump Dump!
Posted: Wed Mar 13, 2019 12:24 pm
Imagine being one of those absolute suckers that really thought he'd drain the swamp. Instead he stocked it with Foxes.
Exposing the stupidity, lies, and hypocrisy of Social Justice Warriors since July 2012
http://slymepit.com/phpbb/
http://i.imgur.com/OYTTxQO.jpgCaptainFluffyBunny wrote: ↑ Silly engineers and experts. You're right, I'd rather believe an anonymously-sourced article that doesn't argue per se that the planes are dangerously over-engineered, but that pilots need more flying practice.
Nice white-knighting for Trump. These middle aged crushes are always so sweet.
https://arcdigital.media/how-batman-exp ... 422d19c1d5In a famous exchange, Bruce Wayne’s trusty butler Alfred explains the Joker’s rise as a reaction to Batman’s campaign against Gotham’s mob bosses:
You crossed the line first, sir. You squeezed them. You hammered them to the point of desperation. And in their desperation, they turned to a man they didn’t fully understand.
In 2016, convinced that Hillary Clinton following eight years of Obama represented an existential threat, Republicans turned to a man they didn’t fully understand.
“Hammered to the point of desperation” captures the feelings of many conservatives, under what they would describe as the rhetorical and cultural assault of the left. (The left would make its own argument about the aggressions of the right, but that’s something for a different analogy.)
After years being accused of racism, sexism, homophobia, xenophobia, and other _____-isms and _____-phobias they didn’t know existed, conservatives felt unfairly besieged. Take Joe Biden’s comment to an African-American audience that Mitt Romney wanted to “put you all back in chains.” Neither Romney, nor the 61 million Americans who voted for him, advocate a return to slavery.
Of course. Your first article simply stated that pilots needed more flying experience, not that computerized control of airplanes was fundamentally flawed. Now you post an abstract from 17 years ago that doesn't seem to state what you think it does. That there is a difference in understanding between the pilot and the aircraft doesn't mean we go back to dials and levers. It means training and modification to ensure safety. Remember that these systems were put in place to combat pilot error, which was responsible for a good number of crashes. There is a reason they're putting in the computers, and the fact the Orange Man (Bad) opines on engineering is kind of stupid.Brive1987 wrote: ↑http://i.imgur.com/OYTTxQO.jpgCaptainFluffyBunny wrote: ↑ Silly engineers and experts. You're right, I'd rather believe an anonymously-sourced article that doesn't argue per se that the planes are dangerously over-engineered, but that pilots need more flying practice.
Nice white-knighting for Trump. These middle aged crushes are always so sweet.
Trump wouldn’t fly if he thought every flight was an evens odds crap shoot. His point is that when there is an issue, the pilot is increasingly placed at a deadly disadvantage.
How many links would you like on the subject of glass cockpits, increasingly complex interrelated systems, primacy of technology inputs over human agency and the difficulty for pilots trouble shooting problems from a cyber perspective rather than using traditional flight skills.
5, 10? More? Or are you prepared to re-engage commonsense? “Whoop whoop, pull up pull up”
http://i.imgur.com/OYTTxQO.jpg
At this point, I really hope he's offered a full immunity deal for himself and his entire family as long as he accepts defeat and retires from politics. The only snag would be that I'm not sure he'd be smart enough to accept it.free thoughtpolice wrote: ↑ If Trump gets impeached or if he loses the next election he will claim that the presidency was stolen and will incite his followers to violence. As the malignant narcissist he is, he doesn't care about the consequences.
Think Saddam Hussein when he was thrown out of Kuwait, threw a giant tantrum and torched all those oil wells, except Trump won't have enough support of the military or the police to pull that off and the Republican establishment will bail out when they see he is finished. More likely there will be some rioting by the bikers for Trump bunch and some terrorism by the militia/ Tim McVeigh crowd.
That will depend on how many Republicans find their spines. Shades of Nixon.Kirbmarc wrote: ↑At this point, I really hope he's offered a full immunity deal for himself and his entire family as long as he accepts defeat and retires from politics. The only snag would be that I'm not sure he'd be smart enough to accept it.free thoughtpolice wrote: ↑ If Trump gets impeached or if he loses the next election he will claim that the presidency was stolen and will incite his followers to violence. As the malignant narcissist he is, he doesn't care about the consequences.
Think Saddam Hussein when he was thrown out of Kuwait, threw a giant tantrum and torched all those oil wells, except Trump won't have enough support of the military or the police to pull that off and the Republican establishment will bail out when they see he is finished. More likely there will be some rioting by the bikers for Trump bunch and some terrorism by the militia/ Tim McVeigh crowd.
I'm not particularly worried of a military takeover of the US since the armed forces and law enforcement aren't going to be on his side even if being ordered to crack down on Trump's critics. But there's lots of gun nuts among the Trump cult, and some of them are crazy enough to believe complex conspiracy theories about pedophile rings, body doubles, and secret trials, so I'm sure that more than a few could actually turn violent, like the idiot who barged into the Comet Ping Pong pizza parlor to look for underground tunnels used to rape children, or the MAGA-bomber.
As a PhD, I’m appalled you quoted a secondary source instead of going primary.
https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2019 ... democrats/Trump’s comments came in a wider part of the conversation about how the left is more “vicious” than the right—and that the left in American politics plays “cuter and tougher.”
“So here’s the thing—it’s so terrible what’s happening,” Trump said when asked by Breitbart News Washington Political Editor Matthew Boyle about how the left is fighting hard. “You know, the left plays a tougher game, it’s very funny. I actually think that the people on the right are tougher, but they don’t play it tougher. Okay? I can tell you I have the support of the police, the support of the military, the support of the Bikers for Trump – I have the tough people, but they don’t play it tough — until they go to a certain point, and then it would be very bad, very bad. But the left plays it cuter and tougher. Like with all the nonsense that they do in Congress … with all this invest[igations]—that’s all they want to do is –you know, they do things that are nasty. Republicans never played this.”
You really don't seem to see that the context doesn't help much, if at all. And it was a goddamn stupid thing to say in any case. Makes George W Bush seem to be a master orator by comparison. He doesn't have those people. They (except the bikers)only enforce the law, they are sworn to the CONTUS, not that orange bloviating narcissist. And adding in the bikers...jesus christ on a pogo stick, what a grotesquely immature thing to say. It's a fucking threat, there's no other way to put it. And his support from LE is a lit less than he thinks. You don't constantly diss the FBI for over two years and expect them to love you.Brive1987 wrote: ↑As a PhD, I’m appalled you quoted a secondary source instead of going primary.
Whatever do they teach as school these days?
https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2019 ... democrats/Trump’s comments came in a wider part of the conversation about how the left is more “vicious” than the right—and that the left in American politics plays “cuter and tougher.”
“So here’s the thing—it’s so terrible what’s happening,” Trump said when asked by Breitbart News Washington Political Editor Matthew Boyle about how the left is fighting hard. “You know, the left plays a tougher game, it’s very funny. I actually think that the people on the right are tougher, but they don’t play it tougher. Okay? I can tell you I have the support of the police, the support of the military, the support of the Bikers for Trump – I have the tough people, but they don’t play it tough — until they go to a certain point, and then it would be very bad, very bad. But the left plays it cuter and tougher. Like with all the nonsense that they do in Congress … with all this invest[igations]—that’s all they want to do is –you know, they do things that are nasty. Republicans never played this.”
Not quite the beat up the secondary partisans would have you believe.
Fuck me, what a cluster. I weep.
Which isn’t used.
Investigations are nasty, really bad. What happens if they indict Donald Jr. for lying to congress, or that hot thot piece of pussy Ivanka for fraud during the inauguration, or worse still if they impeach Trump or he loses the next eledtion, which of course could only happen if the dems rig the election.until they go to a certain point, and then it would be very bad, very bad
Context, how does it fucking work. :lol:Like with all the nonsense that they do in Congress … with all this invest[igations]—that’s all they want to do is –you know, they do things that are nasty. ”
Trump Uni was more an applied life lesson. Seminars in Ballrooms leading to costly additional classes ..... :lol:
Painful ingratitude. The old-school Democrats would be arguing for a new “porch nigga”.CaptainFluffyBunny wrote: ↑ https..://mobile.twitter.com/thehill/status/1106324146223570944
The reasonable left starts policing the extreme elements. Despite the howls of the right that her and AOC speak for the whole party.
“A broken window in Congress leads to street crime and the breakdown of community”free thoughtpolice wrote: ↑Context, how does it fucking work. :lol:Like with all the nonsense that they do in Congress … with all this invest[igations]—that’s all they want to do is –you know, they do things that are nasty. ”
Hmm. Sounds familiar.CaptainFluffyBunny wrote: ↑
I suppose it's only quaint that I still think of things as intangible as "values" and "honor" as important precepts in politics. While they are rare, they at least used to be aspirations of both political parties. And while they differed in approach, both parties valued their country first, their party second.
*snip*
If both teams are sham, You do still get to wear the sham colours. One set is closer to traditional nationalism than the other. One set is closer to SJWism than the other. My working hypothesis is that both camps mobilise their own deluded but hopeful mass. If Trump doesn’t want to make America Great, you can bet Pelosi isn’t really weddded to making America fair.We use words like honor, code, loyalty. We use these words as the backbone of a life spent defending something, you use them as a punchline.
I personally hope these people violently resist, so that they can be put down. Preferably with lethal force. These fucking twats are always on about "taking up arms" but anyone who is familiar with the Randy Weaver case knows how that ends.free thoughtpolice wrote: ↑ If Trump gets impeached or if he loses the next election he will claim that the presidency was stolen and will incite his followers to violence. As the malignant narcissist he is, he doesn't care about the consequences.
Think Saddam Hussein when he was thrown out of Kuwait, threw a giant tantrum and torched all those oil wells, except Trump won't have enough support of the military or the police to pull that off and the Republican establishment will bail out when they see he is finished. More likely there will be some rioting by the bikers for Trump bunch and some terrorism by the militia/ Tim McVeigh crowd.
free thoughtpolice wrote: ↑ I don't see it as any better in context. He talks about how tough his supporters are, like the bikers for Trump. Talking about police, military and bikers isn't a threat of violence? In context he is talking about retaliating against "investigations" as if the congress doesn't have a duty of oversight against possible criminal conduct in government.
On top of that, he then tells a huge whopper that repubs never aggressively investigated the dems or tried to impeach and remove Clinton for comparatively minor shit compared to stuff that is happening in the Trump sphere.
You must be joking, but you know Hannah Gadsby and Aussie humor doesn't click with everyone so I can't tell.
I don't like these violent idiots one bit, but I don't think it's wise to wish for this. The Randy Weaver/Ruby Ridge case was part of what motivated the Oklahoma City bombing. Escalation is a real thing, and I'm not ready to cheer on it.Old_ones wrote: ↑I personally hope these people violently resist, so that they can be put down. Preferably with lethal force. These fucking twats are always on about "taking up arms" but anyone who is familiar with the Randy Weaver case knows how that ends.free thoughtpolice wrote: ↑ If Trump gets impeached or if he loses the next election he will claim that the presidency was stolen and will incite his followers to violence. As the malignant narcissist he is, he doesn't care about the consequences.
Think Saddam Hussein when he was thrown out of Kuwait, threw a giant tantrum and torched all those oil wells, except Trump won't have enough support of the military or the police to pull that off and the Republican establishment will bail out when they see he is finished. More likely there will be some rioting by the bikers for Trump bunch and some terrorism by the militia/ Tim McVeigh crowd.
An awkward moment to be the first pitter to call for active ideological genocide.Old_ones wrote: ↑I personally hope these people violently resist, so that they can be put down. Preferably with lethal force. These fucking twats are always on about "taking up arms" but anyone who is familiar with the Randy Weaver case knows how that ends.free thoughtpolice wrote: ↑ If Trump gets impeached or if he loses the next election he will claim that the presidency was stolen and will incite his followers to violence. As the malignant narcissist he is, he doesn't care about the consequences.
Think Saddam Hussein when he was thrown out of Kuwait, threw a giant tantrum and torched all those oil wells, except Trump won't have enough support of the military or the police to pull that off and the Republican establishment will bail out when they see he is finished. More likely there will be some rioting by the bikers for Trump bunch and some terrorism by the militia/ Tim McVeigh crowd.
I love the smell of straw in the morning.Brive1987 wrote: ↑An awkward moment to be the first pitter to call for active ideological genocide.Old_ones wrote: ↑I personally hope these people violently resist, so that they can be put down. Preferably with lethal force. These fucking twats are always on about "taking up arms" but anyone who is familiar with the Randy Weaver case knows how that ends.free thoughtpolice wrote: ↑ If Trump gets impeached or if he loses the next election he will claim that the presidency was stolen and will incite his followers to violence. As the malignant narcissist he is, he doesn't care about the consequences.
Think Saddam Hussein when he was thrown out of Kuwait, threw a giant tantrum and torched all those oil wells, except Trump won't have enough support of the military or the police to pull that off and the Republican establishment will bail out when they see he is finished. More likely there will be some rioting by the bikers for Trump bunch and some terrorism by the militia/ Tim McVeigh crowd.
So Trump, the President of the United States, can say that his supporters only behave "until they go to a certain point, and then it would be very bad, very bad" and relate this to "all the nonsense that they do in Congress" and that's no big deal.
I didn't call for "active ideological genocide". People who take up arms against the government are enemies of the state, and traitors, and they should get what they deserve. I'm tired of wannabe macho men talking about how they need to "preserve liberty" with their guns, and all this other bullshit. I feel the same way about Antifa, but from the look of it they are at least smart enough not to pick fights with the three letter agencies. Nobody should let these pieces of garbage intimidate them or craft policies to try to pacify them. If they rise up they should get the same treatment as al Qaeda. Period.Brive1987 wrote: ↑An awkward moment to be the first pitter to call for active ideological genocide.Old_ones wrote: ↑I personally hope these people violently resist, so that they can be put down. Preferably with lethal force. These fucking twats are always on about "taking up arms" but anyone who is familiar with the Randy Weaver case knows how that ends.free thoughtpolice wrote: ↑ If Trump gets impeached or if he loses the next election he will claim that the presidency was stolen and will incite his followers to violence. As the malignant narcissist he is, he doesn't care about the consequences.
Think Saddam Hussein when he was thrown out of Kuwait, threw a giant tantrum and torched all those oil wells, except Trump won't have enough support of the military or the police to pull that off and the Republican establishment will bail out when they see he is finished. More likely there will be some rioting by the bikers for Trump bunch and some terrorism by the militia/ Tim McVeigh crowd.
This guy is a useless commentator.... but... whatever floats your boat man.free thoughtpolice wrote: ↑ Trump must have some blackmail on Lindsey Graham and it has to be worse than he's a closeted gay. WTF?
:lol: That is rich coming from the dude that frequently posts Shirtless Satanist Jesus, and buy Brainforce PJ Watson.This guy is a useless commentator.... but... whatever floats your boat man.
Trump pointed out that the left was encouraging systemic aggression and violence as a means to an end. In an inverse sliding scale from Congress to the grass roots. And he pointed out that fisty cuffs wasn’t something you wanted to provoke when you were a latte leftie. And your ideological opponents were not.Kirbmarc wrote: ↑So Trump, the President of the United States, can say that his supporters only behave "until they go to a certain point, and then it would be very bad, very bad" and relate this to "all the nonsense that they do in Congress" and that's no big deal.
But an anonymous guy on a forum hopes that people who are fond of threatening political violence will actually get violent, so that they can be identified and put down, and that's a call for genocide based on political affiliation.
The important thing is that "your" side is always the victim, I guess. Dugin's explicit calls for genocide are just Russian jokes, Goldy using Nazi memes is just provocation, Trump implying political violence is simply to trigger the libtards, the MAGA-bomber and Brievik are just "broken dollies" and it's all the fault of the Evil Libtards anyway.
Meanwhile, in the real world, a guy who is inspired by Dugin's ideas, Candace Owens, and other right-tards has opened fire on two mosques, killing probably more than 40 people. But he's probably a "broken dolly" too, and the libtards are probably to blame, 'mright?
Because a) Trump has ALSO encouraged violence and aggression in the past (praising Gianforte for bodyslamming a journalist, promising to pay the legal expenses of people who got into fights to throw out people at his rallies B) we already had violence inspired by Trump's rhetoric in the past (the MAGA-bomber) and C) that's not ALL that Trump was saying:Brive1987 wrote:Trump pointed out that the left was encouraging systemic aggression and violence as a means to an end. In an inverse sliding scale from Congress to the grass roots. And he pointed out that fisty cuffs wasn’t something you wanted to provoke when you were a latte leftie. And your ideological opponents were not.
Why are you too obtuse to understand this?
Here Trump isn't talking about Antifa or the "punch a Nazi" crowd. He's talking about Congress investigations. Unless you're into po-mo word games, investigations aren't violence, but Trump is talking about them in the context of discussing violence, and claiming to have support of the military, low enforcement and other "tough people".You know, the left plays a tougher game, it’s very funny. I actually think that the people on the right are tougher, but they don’t play it tougher. Okay? I can tell you I have the support of the police, the support of the military, the support of the Bikers for Trump – I have the tough people, but they don’t play it tough — until they go to a certain point, and then it would be very bad, very bad. But the left plays it cuter and tougher. Like with all the nonsense that they do in Congress … with all this invest[igations]—that’s all they want to do is –you know, they do things that are nasty. Republicans never played this.”
You must be able to read Trump's mind. The only provocation he mentioned in that tweet was he didn't want to get investigated by congress. Nothing about antifa starting fights during demonstrations or whatever BS you want to insert to muddy up the argument. If he didn't say it don't add shit that kind of props up your argument. That is a sign to me you lost the argument.Trump pointed out that the left was encouraging systemic aggression and violence as a means to an end. In an inverse sliding scale from Congress to the grass roots. And he pointed out that fisty cuffs wasn’t something you wanted to provoke when you were a latte leftie.
He's not going to dismiss Mueller, because at this point it isn't going to do him any good. He could dismiss Mueller, and congress could still subpoena Mueller for the evidence he's compiled or ask him to come testify. I can't remember which analyst I read, but someone suggested that at this point Trump would be trying to block a report rather than an investigation, and there are a lot of ways a finished report can find it's way out and into the public consciousness. That also points at the fundamental problem for Trump in general - he hasn't kept his crimes covered. Even if Mueller titles his report "Nothing to See Here: No Collusion of Any Kind" the SDNY investigation has already found evidence of multiple felonies. If Trump has any brains at all he should be terrified by the fact that the Manhattan DA went after Manafort. His "red lines" around finances haven't worked and there is blood in the water.CaptainFluffyBunny wrote: ↑ Sigh. It's not partisan to interpret it as a threat. There is no doubt he meant it as a threat. Trump is increasingly understanding the peril he's in. Once he thought he could get away with anything, he said as much. Then he thought he could pardon himself and his out of trouble. Now those options are being ground away, and even if he dismisses Mueller, he's still got the House and SDNY. His unveiled threat is quite clear to those that don't reflexively spin his words to try and make him appear either intelligent or moral. He is neither.