Thread: President Donald Trump

Originally Posted by thailazer

Pompeo was on the news over the weekend strongly defending Trump. What made me concerned was that he did not once mention any possibility that Russia could be a menace. It was all about how great a man Trump is and he was tromping on the news sources. Makes one wonder if both the president and Pompeo are compromised in some way. Here is an article from a few months back:

https://www.vox.com/world/2017/11/9/...a-trump-russia

Pompeo has just spent the week running around the Gulf , presumably reassuring their leaders that the military will be working around baldy orange cunto because he hasn't got a clue what he's doing.

Originally Posted by CSFFan

Daddy, could you tell me stories about trump? Was he as stupid as the history book says?

In his tweet about serving the Clemson players fast food he misspelled hamburgers as hamberders.

Perhaps Clement Conger was right.

The late former White House curator once remarked that a large portrait of a pensive Abraham Lincoln — the one that had presided over the mantle of the State Dining Room since 1937 — might not be the right fit, mood-wise, for a space in which the president was expected to entertain.

“We thought the Lincoln portrait looked rather too brooding for that spot,” Conger said in 1973, according to the White House Historical Association. So, in a bout of redecorating, the portrait was shuffled off and briefly replaced with a landscape that was less of a killjoy.

Lincoln didn’t stay away from the dining room for long, though. The following year, his portrait was returned to its place above the mantel, and it has remained there, lending many White House events an (extra) air of gravitas.

And that is how, several administrations later, the nation’s 16th president came to gaze upon a pile of Big Macs, Quarter Pounders and Filet-O-Fish sandwiches one chilly Washington evening.

President Trump welcomed the Clemson Tigers to the White House for dinner Monday to celebrate their win against Alabama for the college football national championship. Trump had made headlines musing that he would serve the student athletes “McDonald’s, Wendy’s and Burger Kings with some pizza” — then he made good on that promise.

To the shock of many, including at least one Clemson player, sure enough, the fast-food buffet emerged in the State Dining Room on Monday night.

Much was made of the almost certainly lukewarm burgers and french fries resting under heat lamps. Many online couldn’t get over the disconnect between the candlelit room and the packets of McNugget dipping sauce nestled inside the White House’s fancy silver gravy boats. Late-night comedians had a field day joking about Trump’s penny-pinching. (The president said he paid for the meal on his own because much of the White House catering staff had been furloughed during the government shutdown.)

But for some, all they could focus on was Lincoln.

Lincoln!

There he was, the legendary statesman who had guided the United States through the bloody Civil War, now peering at stacks of either 300 hamburgers or “over 1000 hamberders,” depending on whom or when you asked.

It didn’t help that Trump gleefully presided over the spectacle while standing directly beneath Honest Abe.

“I like it all. It’s all good stuff,” Trump declared as a White House staffer finished lighting two majestic candelabras flanking the spread. “Great American food!”

Above him, a great American hunched deep into his chair, chin in hand, pondering life, liberty and the rights of man. If paintings on walls could talk, what might Lincoln even say?

https://www.washingtonpost.com/histo...=.93d56d019565

I hope the players didn't touch the cold food.

Originally Posted by bsnub

what might Lincoln even say?

"The Civil War was not fought so that an oaf could be president and serve hog swill to sports stars".

Great plug for McDonalds.

fooking loving it, awesome President

even Obama wasn't that cool,

Have to admire Trump in the new and imaginative ways he keeps coming up with almost daily to extract libtard tears. I'm pretty sure the average person couldn't give a flying fuk what The Don fed a bunch of no marks but not libtards this is another outrage for them requiring yet another trip to their shrink.

Originally Posted by buriramboy

Have to admire Trump in the new and imaginative ways he keeps coming up with almost daily to extract libtard tears. I'm pretty sure the average person couldn't give a flying fuk what The Don fed a bunch of no marks but not libtards this is another outrage for them requiring yet another trip to their shrink.

I suspect the only tears are those of laughter.

Except for trumpanzees like yourself of course, for whom baldy orange cunto's spread would probably be considered 'haute cuisine'.

Originally Posted by Maanaam

"Give them MacDonalds then, they'd like that."

he actually loves mcdonalds (and other popular fast food restaurants)....he was probably hoping for leftovers.

there are stories from trump world insiders that he feels that the food from these restaurants is 'safe' because the people preparing the food don't know it's for him, so no one will spit (or worse) in it.

and btw, he made sure to let everyone know that he paid for it. class!

Originally Posted by buriramboy

Have to admire Trump

of course you do.

'Owning / trolling the libs' — blatant self-sabotage for dumb political reasons.


"The problem is, the “owning the libs” model of politics doesn’t have a point of view.

It isn’t about furthering an ideological goal, only churlishness — it seeks to make the world a nastier and dumber place. The emptiness of it all is haunting".

^ and more often than not, what they're advocating for goes against their own best interests.

So, what did he do? Sign a personal cheque (do McD's accept cheques?) and send an aide (an unpaid aide) off to the local golden arches? How does that work? My angle is he claims to have paid for it...pittance to him of course, but how does the president of the US pay personally for something he is not present to collect and pay for? Give a wad of cash to the limo driver? Did he count the change? What are the tax implications?
Just wondering.

Originally Posted by harrybarracuda

I suspect the only tears are those of laughter.

Except for trumpanzees like yourself of course, for whom baldy orange cunto's spread would probably be considered 'haute cuisine'.

Errrm I think Trump is a twat but I'll always give credit where it's due even to twats. I may even have said good post once to you before.

Originally Posted by buriramboy

Errrm I think Trump is a twat but I'll always give credit where it's due even to twats. I may even have said good post once to you before.

Fascinating stuff, but doesn't really contradict what I said.

Originally Posted by Maanaam

So, what did he do? Sign a personal cheque (do McD's accept cheques?) and send an aide (an unpaid aide) off to the local golden arches? How does that work? My angle is he claims to have paid for it...pittance to him of course, but how does the president of the US pay personally for something he is not present to collect and pay for? Give a wad of cash to the limo driver? Did he count the change? What are the tax implications?
Just wondering.

I'm guessing he cut a deal with restaurants free advertisising for free burgers. The burger chains were mentioned by name and pizza was added genrically. Poor guy had to pay cash for the pizza.

Originally Posted by harrybarracuda

I suspect the only tears are those of laughter.

Just reaffirming what we already know about the idiot. Nobody was up in arms shit they were laughing there asses off at this white trash president.

Originally Posted by raycarey

and more often than not, what they're advocating for goes against their own best interests.

This is the reality of it for most dumb trumpanzees and the right in general. Unless you have a massive personal fortune you are just being duped. It is a real master stroke by the right wing oligarchs to basically turn a large amount of the country into lemmings who will constantly vote in a way that will just enrich the .001% and make their own lives harder.

I mean you know they won the propaganda war when he convinced working people that raising the minimum wage was bad. I mean you have to really be stupid too buy into the argument that giving yourself a raise is somehow a bad thing.

Jimmy Kimmel has a solution to the shut down: just pretend to build the wall.

And he has a point. Trumptards don't care about the truth, that's why they're Trumptards in the first place, and it's not like they're going to go down and check it's actually being built. They just want to believe it's being built to keep all those nasty little brown people out.

So Trump can tell them it is, he saves face, they'll believe him, shut down ends, all the people actually responsible for ensuring border security can start to get paid again. Win-win!

Is it really about the wall though, Trump was goading Pelosi and Chuck that he would own any shut down and they've taken the bait. Now apparently after 30 days of shutdown these staff can all get laid off permanently basically fired and Republicans are always saying they want less government, one way to achieve it.

Sometimes the best power moves in politics are conveyed in the most mundane language."Sadly, given the security concerns and unless government re-opens this week, I suggest we work together to determine another suitable date after government has re-opened for this address or for you to consider delivering your State of the Union address in writing to the Congress on January 29," wrote Speaker Nancy Pelosi to President Donald Trump on Wednesday.

Make no mistake: Pelosi's decision to disinvite Trump from delivering his "State of the Union" address to Congress is a total power play designed to remind Trump that a) Congress is a co-equal branch of government and b) his willingness to keep the government shuttered until he gets money for a border wall is going to have impacts on him, too.

Just in case you missed that message, Pelosi delivered it again in an interview with CNN's Ashley Killough. "This is a housekeeping matter in the Congress of the United States, so we can honor the responsibility of the invitation we extended to the President," said Pelosi. "He can make it from the Oval Office if he wants."

"He can make it from the Oval Office if he wants(!)"

What Pelosi is saying there is, essentially, this: Look, Trump can give a speech if he wants. But we are not giving him the platform of a bipartisan session of Congress to do it unless and until he reopens the government. (House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer of Maryland went a step further in an interview with CNN's Kate Bolduan Wednesday afternoon, declaring that "the State of the Union is off.")

And from a logistical standpoint, Pelosi is well within her rights to rescind the invitation. As CNN's Phil Mattingly and Ted Barrett explain:

"It's the House speaker's prerogative to invite the President to give the State of the Union. While there's no precedent for it (that we're aware of), if Pelosi decides the President shouldn't go to the Capitol to speak on January 29, the President will not go on January 29.

"Keep in mind, in order to green light the State of the Union, both the House and the Senate have to pass resolutions. Neither have done so yet — and Pelosi controls whether the House passes one at all."

It's in keeping with her repeated and pointed emphasis -- in public and private -- that the new Democratic majority in the House stands on equal footing with Trump, and will remind him of that fact whenever she/they deem it necessary.

In her initial letter inviting Trump to deliver the "State of the Union" on January 29, Pelosi made sure to note: "The Constitution established the legislative, executive and judicial branches as co-equal branches of government, to be a check and balance on each other." And, when asked by The New York Times earlier this month whether she considered herself to be Trump's equal, Pelosi responded: "The Constitution does."

Pelosi's latest effort to assert the power of the House -- and her party -- over Trump will play extremely well with her base who wants maximum confrontation with and embarrassment of Trump.

There's an argument to be made, however, that it could backfire on Pelosi -- and in the process hand Trump a much-needed foothold in a debate he is very much losing at the moment.

Donald Trump Jr., in an interview with the conservative Daily Caller website, gave a preview of what the argument coming out of the White House might sound like when he said this Wednesday:

"Speaker Pelosi is clearly attempting to block my father from giving his State of the Union speech, not because 20% of the government is shut down, but because she is terrified of him having another opportunity to speak directly to the American people about her party's obstruction, unfiltered and without her friends in the media running interference for her."

Pelosi -- and Democrats -- will, of course, scoff at that logic. They will note that Kirstjen Nielsen, the secretary of the Department of Homeland Security, was the one who designated the SOTU speech as a special security event. And that it is Trump who continues to demand $5 billion for his border wall -- keeping the government closed until he gets it. And that Pelosi is doing what she feels is the best course to keep everyone safe under the current circumstances.

But the question is whether voters who may not like Trump but who just want the government to reopen and politicians to get back to working for the people who voted them into office will see Pelosi's move to effectively cancel the State of the Union as an unnecessary provocation. And whether Trump, who is desperately in search of a life preserver in this whole mess, can seize on Pelosi's decision as evidence that the left is trying to silence him.

My guess is he's going to try like hell to make that case.

https://www.cnn.com/2019/01/16/polit...ump/index.html

^ A belittling attack on the cnut's fragile ego. Well played Madame Speaker!