Jump to content

With time running out, Trump to go on offensive at debate in bid to catch Biden


webfact

Recommended Posts

45 minutes ago, Phoenix Rising said:

 

Dark times, indeed. People, with a few notable exceptions like yourself of course, are mindless drones and soon macho men will be played by women!

Now, if they even outlaw hyperbole you'll be in real trouble...:coffee1:

 

Thank you...... i think   haha.    If you do indeed understand where i am coming from then i take comfort that someone gets my "exaggerations" .   

I am pretty sure that many here just wonder what the hell i'm smoking.   As my good friend Bobby D. likes to say "its alright ma i'm only bleeding"

     And if my thought-dreams could be seen
They'd probably put my head in a guillotine
But it's alright, Ma, it's life, and life only

Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 minutes ago, canuckamuck said:

Christmas is coming early this year. I plan to spend Nov 4th replaying videos of progressives with multi colored hair, melting down and screaming at cameras. ho ho ho!

 

Orange hair, orange complexion, melting down and screaming at people. Deja vu.

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

My favorite part of the debate was how Trump responded to criticism of his policy of forcibly separating children from their parents and how 545 of those children still haven't been reconnected to their parents.

“They are so well taken care of,” Trump said of the children, some as young as 4 months old, whom his Customs and Border Protection agents ripped from their mothers and fathers before deporting the parents. “They’re in facilities that were so clean.”

https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2020/10/family-separation-trump-debate.html

What makes it even better is that his administration argued in court that they weren't responsible for providing the children dry clothing, toothbrushes, soap, towels, or sleep.

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

57 minutes ago, placeholder said:

My favorite part of the debate was how Trump responded to criticism of his policy of forcibly separating children from their parents and how 545 of those children still haven't been reconnected to their parents.

“They are so well taken care of,” Trump said of the children, some as young as 4 months old, whom his Customs and Border Protection agents ripped from their mothers and fathers before deporting the parents. “They’re in facilities that were so clean.”

https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2020/10/family-separation-trump-debate.html

What makes it even better is that his administration argued in court that they weren't responsible for providing the children dry clothing, toothbrushes, soap, towels, or sleep.

Who built the cages?

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Jingthing said:

https://www.bloomberg.com/features/2020-trump-faces-lawsuits-and-legal-threats/

 

President Trump has more at stake in this election than whether he remains in the White House. Holding the highest office in the land grants him effective immunity from federal criminal prosecution and gives him wide powers to stymie lawsuits against him and his business. That all changes once he becomes an ordinary citizen again.

... and the US has a real Attorney General again.  The road from the WH may lead to Allenwood.

The best that could happen to him is it gets decided that making him a convicted felon would be too much of a detriment to the presidency, which is why they didn't throw the book at Nixon.

 

On the other hand the relationship with Russia may qualify as treason, and DT gets to replace Benedict Arnold in US culture.  Congrats, Donnie.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 hours ago, rumak said:

 

I can't believe how many people actually believe the farce we call "voting"  is anymore than a contest to see which group ( which has absolutely no concern about the suckers   so called electorate) will have the most access to the big corporate pie.

I really don't know who to feel embarrassed for more :  the suit and tie lawyer/criminals  or the masses that march like robots to cast a meaningless vote.

 

have to admit though:  when i look at these 2 old guys I am really beyond amazed that these are

 what is being offered up as "choices".    man,  funnier than a skit on Saturday Night  (almost) Alive

It would be funny if it wasn't so sad that two old men with lots of baggage are the best the US can come up with to be president. It wouldn't matter if the position was ceremonial as with Ireland, but the US president has, IMO, too much power. Would be better if more power rested with the individual states, and less with the federal government, IMO.

  • Like 1
  • Confused 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, placeholder said:

Who purposely created a policy of separating  thousands and thousands of children - even infants and toddlers - from their parents? 545 of those children still are separated.

 

Something I don't understand. If one's children were forcibly separated from you by the US government, why would the parent/s be unable to advise the detail of their children to enable reunification? There would be NGOs and presumably Mexican government to assist the parents with formalities.

 

if Scott reads this post, can you provide a heads up?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 minutes ago, Scott said:

Also, there are a few parents who are not going to cooperate.   If they have been deported, they may very well have accomplished their goal of getting their child to a safe country.  

 

Am I correct / incorrect that at this point in time there is not enacted legislation to permit the children to be fostered / join the community at legal age of maturity?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

Quote

 

Rumak said

I can't believe how many people actually believe the farce we call "voting"  is anymore than a contest to see which group ( which has absolutely no concern about the suckers   so called electorate) will have the most access to the big corporate pie.

I really don't know who to feel embarrassed for more :  the suit and tie lawyer/criminals  or the masses that march like robots to cast a meaningless vote.

 

have to admit though:  when i look at these 2 old guys I am really beyond amazed that these are

 what is being offered up as "choices".    man,  funnier than a skit on Saturday Night  (almost) Alive

 

 

 

 

People and especially Foreigners love to yammer about this. Nostalgia time; I recall reading an op ed piece in the Bangkok Post, yes back when we read newspapers. It made the same argument. The rich and powerful would rule Amerika anyway, it was all a façade who was president. The year was 2004, Jr Bush vs Kerry.
 

What was so annoying back then and so numbingly obvious. Staring BP journos and all bar stool prophets & prognosticators  in the face, Jr Bush is romping in Iraq after WMD. If Al Gore is elected in 2000, (and he might have been BTW), there would have been be no Iraq adventure. That would never have happened.
 

Trump has appointed a slew of federal judges besides two Supreme Court justices, that will affect laws for decades after he has gone. He has also gutted as many laws, and agencies, as he could get away with. The list is ugly, and long. This is of course the real reason the Republican hierarchy really tolerated and supported him. The gutting of decades’ worth of legislation, environmental laws, tax regs, education, & on & on.
 

The fact that people do not know much about it is not surprising. People like the Koch brothers, Wall Street, Big Pharma, etc. count on that fact.

Edited by LomSak27
  • Like 2
  • Confused 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, thaibeachlovers said:

It would be funny if it wasn't so sad that two old men with lots of baggage are the best the US can come up with to be president. It wouldn't matter if the position was ceremonial as with Ireland, but the US president has, IMO, too much power. Would be better if more power rested with the individual states, and less with the federal government, IMO.

I’ll remind you of that the next time you whine about Congress, the courts and/or the press holding the President to account.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 hours ago, AndyFoxy said:

Who built the cages?

 

Funny, now they are called cages. Donald and company would never refer to them as cages before. Why the sudden change now? Just to make it an attack line?

 

Yes, they were built during the Obama presidency to handle the influx of immigrants coming into the US (when times were good in the US and people actually wanted to come to the USA). They were meant as a temporary holding area while people were processed into the USA. These temporary holding areas/cages were only meant to be used for a few hours to a few days while immigration would process these individuals. They were never meant to house people for weeks or months at a time as during Donald's administration.

 

Donald and company used these holding areas/cages to prevent/deter immigration. Quite the opposite of the intended function.

 

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.





×
×
  • Create New...