Trump's Overseas Trip

[MDC 5,890]

 

Nice troll post. Did you even listen to the speech? This speech kicks ass. It is more to the point than 8 combined years of Obama apology speeches.

He has all the best words.

[Sho Nuff 719]

 

Nice troll post. Did you even listen to the speech? This speech kicks ass. It is more to the point than 8 combined years of Obama apology speeches.

Oh bullshit. This reads like someone who never actually listened to what Obama really said.

 

And yes...it's pure hypocrisy to whine about Obama not saying radical Islam and trump always being a puss when he is with people and being a keyboard cowboy when back in the White House with his phone (just as he did with the wall and the Mexican president)

 

It was mostly a good speech...but that praise is basically that he didn't crap himself and piss everyone off.

A large step down from Obama as a speaker.

[jerryskids 5,192]

He has all the best words.

 

The proof will be in the effect, but they laid out an impressive idea. Scott Adams calls him the Master Persuader, and having just been in Dubai, I was intrigued when he said "we [scans the room] are the leaders of our people. Our people turn to us for guidance." He was totally playing up the egos of the sheiks in the room.

[MDC 5,890]

 

The proof will be in the effect, but they laid out an impressive idea. Scott Adams calls him the Master Persuader, and having just been in Dubai, I was intrigued when he said "we [scans the room] are the leaders of our people. Our people turn to us for guidance." He was totally playing up the egos of the sheiks in the room.

I have no hope for either party getting it right in the ME. They both have an interventionist foreign policy that seems to funnel billions to the military industrial complex with little tangible benefit to taxpayers. Trump's words vs Obummer's words means nothing to me.

 

I agree with Rand Paul and Bernie Sanders on this issue.

[Sho Nuff 719]

Master persuader? Maybe when he could threaten to sue and striking arm people in real estate(or just not pay people who have provided services)

 

In the Oval his skills just have not done the same. Wall...healthcare...tax cuts. And that's with aGOP majority.

[cbfalcon 824]

 

Nice troll post. Did you even listen to the speech? This speech kicks ass. It is more to the point than 8 combined years of Obama apology speeches.

Its a troll post in the respect that I never cared one way or another what it was referred to. But it's a legit post in that it demonstrates Trump is a joke. The importance of saying that damn phrase was a political focus of Trump's for a long time. What a mo he is.

[jerryskids 5,192]

Its a troll post in the respect that I never cared one way or another what it was referred to. But it's a legit post in that it demonstrates Trump is a joke. The importance of saying that damn phrase was a political focus of Trump's for a long time. What a mo he is.

 

So you didn't listen to the speech, awesome, thanks for admitting it.

 

Here is a report from NBC, a left news source. It's proving to be a pain to copy and paste so I'll let you go to the link, which you won't, because joke words in your lemming position prohibit you from entertaining alternative ideas. I'll try to paste what I can:

 

RIYADH, Saudi Arabia — President Donald Trump offered a message of unity Sunday as he called on the Arab world to confront extremism during a highly anticipated speech in the birthplace of Islam.

"A better future is only possible if your nations drive out the terrorists and extremists," Trump told the dozens of Muslim leaders who attended his remarks.

"Drive. Them. Out. Drive them out of your places of worship," the president continued. "Drive them out of your communities. Drive them out of your holy land, and drive them out of his Earth!"

The speech during the initial stop of the president's first foreign trip was a stark contrast to his previous comments on Islam. As a candidate, Trump frequently criticized the religion, saying, "I think Islam hates us" and "there's a tremendous hatred there."

In Riyadh, Trump said, "This is not a battle between different faiths, different sects, or different civilizations. This is a battle between barbaric criminals who seek to obliterate human life, and decent people of all religions who seek to protect it."

Calling terrorists "the foot soldiers of evil," the president added, "If we do not stand in uniform condemnation of this killing, then we not only will be judged by our people, not only will we be judged by history, but we will be judged by God."

The U.S.'s Middle Eastern allies have often complained about America's focus on human rights, a stance Trump also seemed keen to make a break from.

"America is a sovereign nation and our first priority is always the safety and security of our citizens," the president said. "We are not here to lecture — we are not here to tell other people how to live, what to do, who to be, or how to worship. Instead, we are here to offer partnership — based on shared interests and values — to pursue a better future for us all."

Introducing Trump, Saudi Arabia's King Salman spoke of the need "to stand united to fight the forces of evil and extremism."

"There is no honor in committing murder," Salman said, adding that Islam is "the religion of peace and tolerance."

In his address, Trump defined the struggle against extremism as "a battle between good and evil."

"Barbarism will deliver you no glory — piety to evil will bring you no dignity," the president said. "If you choose the path of terror, your life will be empty, your life will be brief, and your soul will be condemned."

Trump also offered a firm rebuke of Iran — a notable departure from the Obama administration's overtures to the country which had caused a chill in relations with the Saudi government.

Calling out Iranian leaders for training terrorists and "spreading destruction and chaos across the region," Trump, who has called for ripping up the nuclear deal with Iran, implored all nations to "work together to isolate" Tehran until the regime is "willing to be a partner for peace."

"Pray for the day when the Iranian people have the just and righteous government they so richly deserve," he said.

Trump also included a brief reference to his hope for peace between Israel and the Palestinians — a deal he has repeatedly said he hopes to broker during his time in office. Trump noted "peace in this world is possible — including peace between Israelis and Palestinians. I will be meeting with both Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas."

In the speech at the King Abdul Aziz Conference Center, Trump did not use the phrase "radical Islamic terror" — one he uttered repeatedly on the campaign trail, and lambasted his predecessor for not saying. The president did refer to "confronting the crisis of Islamic extremism and the Islamists and Islamic terror of all kinds."

Asked about Trump's use of the multiple terms, a White House official attributed it to exhaustion, not pre-calculation. The president's "just an exhausted guy," the official said, who went through many drafts of the speech.

Trump called on countries in the region to do the hard work themselves and not to expect the U.S. to fight terror for them.

"The nations of the Middle East cannot wait for American power to crush this enemy for them. The nations of the Middle East will have to decide what kind of future they want for themselves, for their countries, and for their children," Trump said. "Muslim-majority countries must take the lead in combating radicalization."

Trump said he hoped the gathering of the region's leaders in Riyadh would mark the beginning of the end of terrorism and the start of peace in the Middle East.

"This region should not be a place that refugees flee, but to which newcomers flock,'' the president said.

...

 

http://www.nbcnews.com/storyline/trumps-first-foreign-trip/trump-speech-muslims-we-are-not-here-lecture-n762631

 

[cbfalcon 824]

 

So you didn't listen to the speech, awesome, thanks for admitting it.

 

Here is a report from NBC, a left news source. It's proving to be a pain to copy and paste so I'll let you go to the link, which you won't, because joke words in your lemming position prohibit you from entertaining alternative ideas. I'll try to paste what I can:

 

 

http://www.nbcnews.com/storyline/trumps-first-foreign-trip/trump-speech-muslims-we-are-not-here-lecture-n762631

 

It's almost as if you believe the content of the overall message is more important than a three word phrase....

 

If that's the case, I am with you buddy. I just hope you felt the same way a year ago. I'll assume you did, unlike Trump and others here.

[jerryskids 5,192]

It's almost as if you believe the content of the overall message is more important than a three word phrase....

 

If that's the case, I am with you buddy. I just hope you felt the same way a year ago. I'll assume you did, unlike Trump and others here.

 

Well buddy, I did feel that way a year ago, thanks for asking. I've consistently said that I voted for Trump kicking and screaming, and I did so because (1) I believe Hillary is evil incarnate, (2) I think we need some swamp draining in Washington. and (3) I think the office of the POTUS is such that it can survive a guy like Trump, much like it did Obama, who had about the experience of a first-level manager before assuming the most powerful position in the world. And Trump's speech is a great example.

 

Obama "evolves" on his postion on gay marriage, and you want to slob his knob even more. Trump avoids a 3-word phrase (but otherwise rips terrorism a new hole in front of several supporters of it), and here you are myopically focusing on the lack of that phrase. I would hope that you see the hypocrisy in that, but I don't have much hope. The koolaid is strong on the alt-left.

 

ETA: The best description of cons vs. libs wrt Trump, which I believe I've said here before, is: conservatives take Trump figuratively but not literally. Liberals take Trump literally but not figuratively.

[cbfalcon 824]

 

Well buddy, I did feel that way a year ago, thanks for asking. I've consistently said that I voted for Trump kicking and screaming, and I did so because (1) I believe Hillary is evil incarnate, (2) I think we need some swamp draining in Washington. and (3) I think the office of the POTUS is such that it can survive a guy like Trump, much like it did Obama, who had about the experience of a first-level manager before assuming the most powerful position in the world. And Trump's speech is a great example.

 

Obama "evolves" on his postion on gay marriage, and you want to slob his knob even more. Trump avoids a 3-word phrase (but otherwise rips terrorism a new hole in front of several supporters of it), and here you are myopically focusing on the lack of that phrase. I would hope that you see the hypocrisy in that, but I don't have much hope. The koolaid is strong on the alt-left.

 

ETA: The best description of cons vs. libs wrt Trump, which I believe I've said here before, is: conservatives take Trump figuratively but not literally. Liberals take Trump literally but not figuratively.

I doubt I ever said a word about Obama's gay positions.

 

Your miscalculaon in this moment is that you think I am here to talk about policy or a plan of action for the Middle East. Nope. I'm only here to see Trump go down for treason. Once that is wrapped up, I'll likely again skip 95% of political threads unless they deal with healthcare. All Trump's refusal to say "Radical Islamic Terrorism" is is hypocrisy to laugh at. But people don't spend the rest of their lives in prison for hypocrisy, so I laugh at the phonies and move on.

[Hardcore troubadour 12,630]

I doubt I ever said a word about Obama's gay positions.

 

Your miscalculaon in this moment is that you think I am here to talk about policy or a plan of action for the Middle East. Nope. I'm only here to see Trump go down for treason. Once that is wrapped up, I'll likely again skip 95% of political threads unless they deal with healthcare. All Trump's refusal to say "Radical Islamic Terrorism" is is hypocrisy to laugh at. But people don't spend the rest of their lives in prison for hypocrisy, so I laugh at the phonies and move on.

You're out of your league. I can tell because you dont realize you were squashed.

[jerryskids 5,192]

I doubt I ever said a word about Obama's gay positions.

 

Your miscalculaon in this moment is that you think I am here to talk about policy or a plan of action for the Middle East. Nope. I'm only here to see Trump go down for treason. Once that is wrapped up, I'll likely again skip 95% of political threads unless they deal with healthcare. All Trump's refusal to say "Radical Islamic Terrorism" is is hypocrisy to laugh at. But people don't spend the rest of their lives in prison for hypocrisy, so I laugh at the phonies and move on.

 

Hmm... Trump go down for treason? Have you missed the Dershowicz interview where he makes a compelling argument against any justification for independent council let alone treason? I'm guessing so. If you want a link let me know and I'll track it down for you. I'm guessing you won't because Trump/bad/treason/lemming words, but feel free to surprise me.

 

Your continued attempt to double down on "Radical Islamic Terrorism" is... I dunno what else to say. I guess the supposition that you didn't personally post on Obama's evolution regarding gays makes the analogy irrelevant? So seriously, did you want him to say that in front of that audience? Strike that, I know your answer.

 

You are the biggest reason the right keeps winning elections. Smug and sure Trump is evil. Carry on.

[12th Man 884]

 

Hmm... Trump go down for treason? Have you missed the Dershowicz interview where he makes a compelling argument against any justification for independent council let alone treason? I'm guessing so. If you want a link let me know and I'll track it down for you. I

It's right here on page one:

 

http://www.fftodayforums.com/forum/index.php?showtopic=465743

[Sho Nuff 719]

 

Hmm... Trump go down for treason? Have you missed the Dershowicz interview where he makes a compelling argument against any justification for independent council let alone treason? I'm guessing so. If you want a link let me know and I'll track it down for you. I'm guessing you won't because Trump/bad/treason/lemming words, but feel free to surprise me.

 

Your continued attempt to double down on "Radical Islamic Terrorism" is... I dunno what else to say. I guess the supposition that you didn't personally post on Obama's evolution regarding gays makes the analogy irrelevant? So seriously, did you want him to say that in front of that audience? Strike that, I know your answer.

 

You are the biggest reason the right keeps winning elections. Smug and sure Trump is evil. Carry on.

So Dershowitz is the end all be all now?

With him being privy to any of the evidence?

[jerryskids 5,192]

So Dershowitz is the end all be all now?

With him being privy to any of the evidence?

 

Sho, seriously, just stop. Let cb take his lumps, lick his wounds, and regroup to fight another day when the MSM tells him something else about Trump being evil. Meanwhile you can maintain your image as a centrist which you've done such an exemplary job portraying.

 

Or argue against the pre-eminent civil liberties attorney in the US, because... whatever.

[Sho Nuff 719]

 

Sho, seriously, just stop. Let cb take his lumps, lick his wounds, and regroup to fight another day when the MSM tells him something else about Trump being evil. Meanwhile you can maintain your image as a centrist which you've done such an exemplary job portraying.

 

Or argue against the pre-eminent civil liberties attorney in the US, because... whatever.

So yes...yiu believe the guy who has not had access to any of the evidence. That's all you had to say. Thanks

[Hardcore troubadour 12,630]

So yes...yiu believe the guy who has not had access to any of the evidence. That's all you had to say. Thanks

What evidence?

[jerryskids 5,192]

So yes...yiu believe the guy who has not had access to any of the evidence. That's all you had to say. Thanks

 

Sigh... OK I'll bite because I'm bored. Who who has access to evidence has indicated Trump committed treason?

[cbfalcon 824]

 

Hmm... Trump go down for treason? Have you missed the Dershowicz interview where he makes a compelling argument against any justification for independent council let alone treason? I'm guessing so. If you want a link let me know and I'll track it down for you. I'm guessing you won't because Trump/bad/treason/lemming words, but feel free to surprise me.

 

Your continued attempt to double down on "Radical Islamic Terrorism" is... I dunno what else to say. I guess the supposition that you didn't personally post on Obama's evolution regarding gays makes the analogy irrelevant? So seriously, did you want him to say that in front of that audience? Strike that, I know your answer.

 

You are the biggest reason the right keeps winning elections. Smug and sure Trump is evil. Carry on.

While I trust you when you say there is a lawyer/author that doesn't think Trump has done anything worthy of the Mueller appointment, I'm going to purposely prove you 100% incorrect by admitting I've only glossed over the AD opinion. While my views on the matter are based on a larger whole of information I've taken in over the course of the past year as opposed to any singular opinion, I always welcome the addition of a new opinion. Maybe it'll be enough to single handedly undo all the other knowledge I've gathered. Therefore, I would absolutely appreciate you providing a link to this particular lawyer/authors opinion.

 

Believe it or not, I get excited when an opinion of mine is changed. It always feels like growth. Thanks Jerry.

[cbfalcon 824]

You're out of your league. I can tell because you dont realize you were squashed.

Very much so apparently.

[Sho Nuff 719]

 

Sigh... OK I'll bite because I'm bored. Who who has access to evidence has indicated Trump committed treason?

I never agreed treason was there. However...your post that cited Dershowitz was not only about Treason.

 

"Have you missed the Dershowicz interview where he makes a compelling argument against any justification for independent council let alone treason?"

[jerryskids 5,192]

It's right here on page one:

 

http://www.fftodayforums.com/forum/index.php?showtopic=465743

 

 

While I trust you when you say there is a lawyer/author that doesn't think Trump has done anything worthy of the Mueller appointment, I'm going to purposely prove you 100% incorrect by admitting I've only glossed over the AD opinion. While my views on the matter are based on a larger whole of information I've taken in over the course of the past year as opposed to any singular opinion, I always welcome the addition of a new opinion. Maybe it'll be enough to single handedly undo all the other knowledge I've gathered. Therefore, I would absolutely appreciate you providing a link to this particular lawyer/authors opinion.

 

Believe it or not, I get excited when an opinion of mine is changed. It always feels like growth. Thanks Jerry.

 

Here you go. You're welcome cb.

[drobeski 3,061]

Great speech, good to have a leader in there for a change.

[jerryskids 5,192]

I never agreed treason was there. However...your post that cited Dershowitz was not only about Treason.

 

"Have you missed the Dershowicz interview where he makes a compelling argument against any justification for independent council let alone treason?"

 

Well, yeah... watch the link?

[Sho Nuff 719]

 

Well, yeah... watch the link?

Of Dershowitz?

Read the transcript.

Care to refute what I've said?

[jerryskids 5,192]

Of Dershowitz?

Read the transcript.

Care to refute what I've said?

 

Post a link and I'll read it, unless it is mind-numbingly long.

[SUXBNME 1,325]

 

Post a link and I'll read it, unless it is mind-numbingly long.

Or just post a naomi thread

[RaiderHaters Revenge 3,578]

Speaking of this trip:

 

Man, our entire MAC must be utilized to capacity. We have approximately30- 50 different C130 planes worth of shiit pre-positioned at each spot Trump is to visit. Amazing amount of material and personnel (56 vehicles, 14 limos for ex). Just in Israel alone, approximately 900 people are already there or will be with the POTUS.

 

 

 

http://www.israelnationalnews.com/News/News.aspx/229581

 

One of the cooler things I read is that when POTUS stays in a hotel/whatever, the entire floor is designed as a self-contained "pod".

Impervious to radiation, chem/bio weps, power & communication independent, etc. And, as described, even if the entire building is levelled, the 'pod' is designed to stay intact even if everything above and below it blows up. Also, blimps, drones, etc. above for anti-missile, etc.

 

Pretty baller.

 

thats awesome but reminds me of that old joke about black boxes, and why not just make the entire plane out of one

[cbfalcon 824]

 

 

 

Here you go. You're welcome cb.

Appreciate it...watched it.

 

AD seems to be viewing two actions in a vacuum.

 

Maybe Trump can coordinate with Russia on the release of materials. But he can't ask them to hack anyone (which he did publicly). And even if we pretend Trump didn't mean it, he still can't promise them a reward (easing of sanctions) if they help him.

 

And as you and I (at least I think it was you) discussed in another thread...of course Trump has the right to fire Comey. But he can't do it for the purpose of affecting investigation into him....which Trump and his staff have essentially admitted to doing. That's pretty much the textbook definition of Obstruction of Justice.

 

Its as if AD is pointing out that it's perfectly legal to point a gun and pull the trigger, and ignoring things like doing it in a fit of anger and the bullet hitting someone in the chest.

 

But maybe he is right.

[Sho Nuff 719]

 

Post a link and I'll read it, unless it is mind-numbingly long.

Did you not read it or watch what he said? Yet trying to use it to argue?

 

He is not in the meetings or committees. Not privy to info Rosenstein had to appoint special counsel...how would he know the evidence was not there to do so?

[jerryskids 5,192]

Of Dershowitz?

Read the transcript.

Care to refute what I've said?

 

I thought you were saying "reed," apparently you were telling me "red" without a subject?

 

Did you not read it or watch what he said? Yet trying to use it to argue?

 

He is not in the meetings or committees. Not privy to info Rosenstein had to appoint special counsel...how would he know the evidence was not there to do so?

 

Presuming I am correct above, what evidence has come forward? Or is this where you say we won't know until we pass the indictment? In that case I guess we'll agree to disagree, except for the due process part.

[Sho Nuff 719]

 

I thought you were saying "reed," apparently you were telling me "red" without a subject?

 

 

Presuming I am correct above, what evidence has come forward? Or is this where you say we won't know until we pass the indictment? In that case I guess we'll agree to disagree, except for the due process part.

Evidence doesn't typically come out in public before the investigation is over. That's my point...Dershowitz wouldn't have a clue what evidence there was leading Rosenstein to appoint Mueller.

 

So you are taking the word of a man who hasn't seen what others have...it's like doctorsmaking diagnosis without ever examining a patient.

[Cdub100 3,380]

DRIVE OUT THE TERRORIST!

[SUXBNME 1,325]

...it's like doctorsmaking diagnosis without ever examining a patient.

Which happens all the time based on the symptoms and known cures.

Some of it is pretty basic and more often correct than wrong.

 

Trust me, I know this sh1t. I work on automobiles for a living. Same concept, different "patients".

 

And yes, I have thrown known good parts at a vehicle with hopes that given the symptoms, said known good part will fix the problem. Not always the case.

 

Back to what you were saying. I do 100% agree that none of us (geek club) know what is really going on / happened / happening.

I could / do imagine that Dershowitz might be privy to some intel that we don't know about.

He's a tad bit more informed with the DC insiders than we are.

 

He's also an alleged kid toucher of sorts. He did win the case, though

 

 

eta: Yes, I am drawing a parallel of what doctors do for a living vs what my dumb ass does for a living. So there

[Sho Nuff 719]

And Rosenstein is privy to even more. As was Comey and the Intel committees.

AsI have said...rising to impeachment or conviction in a manner to reach Trump will be tough with this congress for sure.

But members of his campaign and admin will be in some trouble . Some of them quite deep too.

[SUXBNME 1,325]

But members of his campaign and admin will be in some trouble . Some of them quite deep too.

It would not surprise me one bit if he doesn't start cleaning house in a bigly way with his current admin...Soon

I'm guessing that he's not accustomed to people not doing the jobs the way he outlined them or expected them to do and still remain gainfully employed.

Mebbe DC needs this kind of shake up.

[Sho Nuff 719]

It would not surprise me one bit if he doesn't start cleaning house in a bigly way with his current admin...Soon

I'm guessing that he's not accustomed to people not doing the jobs the way he outlined them or expected them to do and still remain gainfully employed.

Mebbe DC needs this kind of shake up.

Is it really a shake up if he is firing the people he put into power?

 

The crap of him hiring the best people has surely been exposed as BS

[SUXBNME 1,325]

Is it really a shake up if he is firing the people he put into power?

 

The crap of him hiring the best people has surely been exposed as BS

I believe that it's a shake up. Even better that it IS the people that he put in to power, imo.

False promises made on the employees part?

Unrealistic expectations on Trumps part?

Who knows?

 

He's just prolly realizing that the swamp is more the size of one of the great lakes and this sh1t isn't as easy as he thought it might be.

I like the general direction, though. So far, anyways.

[wiffleball 4,639]

Two things:

1) Mere days ago, Derpwitz was talking about "this is the most serious charge on a POTUS EVER!

 

2) Have you guys forgotten we know him because he defended OJ?

 

He ain't exactly Thurgood Marshall.

[titans&bucs&bearsohmy! 2,745]

Great speech, good to have a leader in there for a change.

Jesus focking Christ. I get that you're a hack, but calling trump a leader? I hope your fingers sprained just typing that.