Thakkar

On 7/10/2017 at 8:59 AM, JHolmesJr said:

well i am sure if the russians had reached out to clinton with some golden shower tapes of trump, that meeting would have happened too.

 

Losers become hypocrites so fast.

You are confusing facts with hypotheticals. When it comes to meetings and imagined meetings, the latter didn't happen while the former did.

T

On 7/10/2017 at 7:44 AM, maewang99 said:

what is all this stuff. another one... a joint cyber security unit.... with the Russians????
 

an attempt at a joke?
 

that's another thing with Trump.... and our future Trump POTUS's...  they rarely ever cut jokes.. good ones.
 

very strange people. not just illiterate.

 
 

 

Actually, that is rather strange. All of them decades in the public eye, and not a single quote or recollection of a quote that shows any sort of witticism emanating from Trump or any of his brood.

T

2 hours ago, webfact said:

The Arizona senator underwent surgery on Saturday to remove a clot above his left eye discovered during a physical examination, forcing Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell to postpone a healthcare vote and throwing the timing of the debate into uncertainty

The fact that a two-inch blood clot is saving the American health care system

18 minutes ago, iReason said:

"Despite his son’s stunning revelations and crystal clear email chain,

Mr Trump called the whole matter a product of “fraudulent reporting.”

"Are you gonna believe me, or your lying eyes?"

1 minute ago, tonray said:

I wonder how quickly these guys would jump in front of a bullet? 

Jumping in front of a bullet seems easier than trying to defend Trump lies!

T

23 minutes ago, Berkshire said:

how can we possibly write a script where the President constantly lies and lies, yet, his nutty supporters still believe and trust him?  Nobody but nobody would believe that people can be that stupid.  It's not possible!

People who believe the earth is 6,000 years old and that Noah was alive a full sixth of that time and saved all the animals (but not the dinosaurs—not even the smallest ones) from a global flood, will believe anything. Believing is the easy part. Valiantly defending even as your hero undermines your defense the next day with a tweet is what's hard.

Hence now we see the all-encompassing, nutrient-free "nothing burger" defense. Suitable for all occasions and all imaginable Trump flip flops, and requiring no facts or intellectual rigor. It's the ideal Trumpology.

T

13 minutes ago, dunroaming said:

If this Presidency was written as a work of fiction it wouldn't get published because the publishers would say that nobody is gullible enough to believe such rubbish

If this presidency were suggested as a Twilight Zone episode, it would have been rejected as too outlandish.

T

6 minutes ago, mrwebb8825 said:

Foreign electoral interventions are attempts by external powers, covertly or overtly, to influence elections, or their results.

Theoretical and empirical research on foreign electoral intervention is weak overall,[1] however, a number of such studies have been conducted.

A 2016 study by Levin found that, among 938 global elections examined,[a] the United States and Russia combined had involved themselves in about one out of nine (117), with the majority of those (68%) being through covert, rather than overt, actions. The same study found that "on average, an electoral intervention in favor of one side contesting the election will increase its vote share by about 3 percent," an effect large enough to have potentially changed the results in seven out of 14 US presidential elections occurring after 1960.[2][c][d] According to the study, the U.S. intervened in 81 foreign elections between 1946 and 2000, while the Soviet Union or Russia intervened in 36.

 

So, which of the 14 previous presidents dating back to 1960 (before Trump) who have been proven guilty of the exact same thing are we to persecute 1st? Or is this just a "Trump-Hater" thing?

 

 

How clumsily disingenuous.

Countries covertly interfering in another country's elections is one thing.

The son of a candidate, one of his top advisors and the head of the campaign secretly meeting an agent of an adversarial power who promised to help them win an American election, is quite another.

T

10 hours ago, Opl said:

The wall could be a crowdfounding project promoted by Ivanka, what's the matter? 

 

Whats the matter?? I'll tell you what's the matter: her dad's romantic rival, Jared would prefer she work on some his projects once in a while, if you know what I mean.

T

4 minutes ago, iReason said:

BTW, how's that "promise" that Mexico will pay for it going?

Jeeze you loser lefty libtards just don't get it, do you?

The wall will be a 50 foot high, thousand mile long transparent solar Array using Trumpian technology that will generate electricity which will be sold to the Mexicans. THAT's how they'll pay for it, dummy. As soon as they stop laughing.

T

1 hour ago, mrwebb8825 said:

An absolutely Nothing story about Nothing happening and yet the loser brigade is clinging to it tooth and nail hoping they aren't as stupid as America already knows they are. Since when does digging up dirt on a political opponent become a criminal act? If that's the case then they need to go all the way back to George Washington and retroactively prosecute every politician in history. 

Digging up dirt on your political opponent: legal.

Accepting help from an adversarial foreign rep to dig up dirt on your opponent: NOT legal.

Simply meeting said foreigner to discuss above: potentially illegal & minimally Legally Blond stupid.

Failing to mention said meeting: suspicious

Lying when asked about such meetings: very suspicious

Admitting to said meeting only AFTER denial becomes impossible: "I applaud his transparency" (President Trump)

T

1 hour ago, Opl said:

 

“The ABC/Washington Post Poll, even though almost 40% is not bad at this time, was just about the most inaccurate poll around election time!” Trump tweeted.

 

Obama's almost 40% was not bad at that time...  

 

 

http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/months-record-low-trump-troubles-russia-health-care/story?id=48639490

Well, well, yeah, but Hillary's numbers, if she had become president, would've been much worse. ZING!

Didn't consider the hypotheticals when framing your factual argument did you? Weak. #MAGA!

T

3 minutes ago, boomerangutang said:

                   I would not be one bit surprised if Trump Sr was at that meeting.  If not, he was likely being kept apprised of it in real time.  The Russian lawyer said Manafort was doodling with his hand held phone (keeping the boss, upstairs, apprised?) the whole time he was at the meeting.

 

                      Melania (who speaks Russian), Ivanka, and/or Eric Trump may have also been at that meeting.  Certainly, any configuration of Trumps were at similar meetings throughout (and prior/after) the campaign.  Let's hope the FBI and Special Counsel team are doing their jobs ably.  I've given up thinking the Congressional committees can do decent jobs, because they're led by Republicans, so they're duty-bound to stifle any data which implicates you-know-who.

Probably The only one among them NOT meeting Russians was 10 year old Baron, because he's the smartest one among them and knew better than to meet secretly with representatives of an antagonist power in the midst of an election.

T

8 minutes ago, Destiny1990 said:

I remember seeing Trump begging  on tv calling out the russians if they could please hack Hilary email Account.His whole team were having meetings with Russians and now he desperately try to cover it up!He has been caught for how many lies till now?

Let's just say, if each lie we're a brick in the wall, he'd have have Mexican wall by now.

T

23 minutes ago, F4UCorsair said:

 

 

Well dig out the graphical data on that, or any other new president.   I really don't care whom you compare with whom, but what is interesting is that often popularity/acceptance/etc falls for a new man in the chair and as he beds in, the level rises.  I'm sure there are exceptions, just as there are for every situation.

 

I didn't comment specifically on Obama, but the trend when the leadership changes, so rather than compare Trump in his first months with Obama in his final months, it's more valid to compare with other presidents at the same stages of their administrations.

 

 

I'm too busy making fun of you. Since you're the one making the assertion that this isn't a fair comparison, why don't you dig up the data? If you don't like what you find, you don't have to share it here.

T

20 minutes ago, Ace of Pop said:

I think its the same Image.Bill the Zip Clinton, Obama , the Song n Dance Man , now its Don the Wall ,all good fun because they are just told what to do on major issues.?
Kennedy was yer last good chap.!.


Sent from my iPhone using Thaivisa Connect

While you may be a legend in your own mind (you certainly are in mine), what you personally think is somewhat less impactful than the results of a scientific survey of thousands of representative people in 37 countries.

But thanks for sharing anyway.

T

30 minutes ago, F4UCorsair said:

 

 

I think a more valid comparison, or certainly a parallel comparison, would be Obama with Clinton when Obama first took office.   I do know that Obama's approval/popularity soared in his final couple of years, and it's not unusual for approval to drop when a new leader takes office because the voters don't know what to expect.  Percentages will no doubt vary,  but broadly, those are traditional trends.

 

I don't have the time or level of interest to trawl through the net looking for similar graphical data, but I'm sure it's there somewhere, and you will be able to find something that expresses a contrary view.

 

You really need to compare apples with apples, not apples with durian.

"parallel comparison, would be Obama with Clinton when Obama first took office"

We all tend to black out bad memories, but I notice you skipped a whole eight years of the disastrous Bush presidency, you know, the one that directly preceded the Obama presidency.

T

T

These are all starting to sound like conversations between a serial philanderer and his long-suffering wife.

"Russians? What Russians?? Is that even a word?"

"What! I just looked at the Russian from the corner of my eye; it's not like I was staring"

"Yeah, well, that is a Russian number on my phone. I have no idea how it got there."

"Those photos? good god, my phone's been hacked!"

"Aren't those *your* panties?"

"No! That can't be! Where does it say 'made in Russia'?"

"Well, yeah, alright, technically that is my dick inside her. But it's all your fault; Waddya doin' home so early anyway?"

T

57 minutes ago, JHolmesJr said:

if there wasn't an entire world out there, you would think the donald has already been tried, sentenced and impeached….by a bunch of guys who've fled to Isaan.

Nobody's saying any of that, not even at this forum, let alone in the mainstream media. Unless you've been living in a cave, here's where we are:

Some of president Trump's closest associates are under investigation by a special counsel, and various bipartisan committees in Congress on suspicion of colluding with a foreign adversarial power to interfere in an American election.

That there was interference in the elections is accepted by everyone except the willfully blind.

That Trump associates initially hid their contacts with foreign operatives is a fact.

That Trump associates lied repeatedly about their contacts with foreign operatives is a fact.

That Trump's Adult son, his soon-to-be campaign manager and and his son-in-law who is now part of the Administration's inner sanctum secretly met with a Russian government connected lawyer who an intermediary promised had dirt on their campaign opponent—a meeting they first hid, then denied, then claimed was "unproductive"—is a fact.

That the Trump campaign's *only* input into the GOP policy agenda after Trump's nomination was to water down US support for the Ukrainian government—a key Russian objective—is a fact.

That Trump has alienated NATO allies—a Russian objective—is a fact.

That Trump has isolated America from many friendly countries—another Russian objective—by needlessly withdrawing from the non binding Paris Climate Accord is a fact. The withdrawal damages American credibility without serving any useful purpose in terms of American interests.

Within the civilian administration, the State Department has been the most vehemently anti-Russian. Trump appointed a former oil man well-liked by Russia to Sec. of State who went on to decimate the State Dept, slash its budget, fail to appoint key ambassadors and gut it of expert staffing—none of which serves American interests, but does serve Russian interests.

T

23 minutes ago, maewang99 said:

the wall thing isn't so far fetched to many in his base... really.  folks who literally believe Noah built an Ark.. an actually ship in which they put 2 of each species..... The Wall fits in just fine. we have a new museum in the USA that is built around that {the Ark thing]... and The Wall is "believable"....

especially when you have a magical "builder" POTUS to go with it....

it rings a lot like many Bible stories do. 

it ain't no accident of words that these same folks will say that the do not "believe" in Climate Change, instead of putting it as they are "not convinced" or that it is "too complicated to understand"... they believe in a wall. even if he doesn't ever build any of it at all.       

 

??

Trump is a the culmination of "wanting a president just like one of us" :

fake piety

easy answers to complicated issues

white male

a worldview based on strong convictions devoid of facts

bogus "family values"

On 7/14/2017 at 5:40 AM, webfact said:

"As horrible as it sounds, when they throw the large sacks of drugs over, and if you have people on the other side of the wall, you don't see them. They hit you on the head with 60 pounds of stuff? It's over," Trump said.

Climate change: Hoax

300 million guns in the country and growing: not a worry.

Healthcare: Repeal! Don't worry about replacing.

Bag of drugs thrown over a wall: DANGER!!

T

10 hours ago, webfact said:

It was a short meeting. It was a meeting that went very, very quickly, very fast,"

"...and like I've told Malania a thousand times, if I ejaculated within 30 seconds, it doesn't count as infedility, so there!"

T

So, Trump is in France, and he's going to be so disappointed when he learns "qui, qui" doesn't mean what he thinks it does.

~Colbert

52 minutes ago, JHolmesJr said:

yay….link produced…job done….tyvm.

 

now get the proof that irrefutably supports this claim.

 

Credible links only…lol.

You are right to doubt all major American intelligence agencies, many European intelligence agencies, all major news organizations (including Fox) in America and abroad, all Democrat and many Republican senators and congresspeople, major world leaders, major think tanks, including the Rightwing Heritage Foundation— it is a conspiracy so deep and wide and obvious that it's mind boggling how gullible the sheeple of the world are.

Alex Jones knows the truth. That's why "they" are trying to shut him up, discredit him, depict him as a conman charlatan. But you and I know better, don't we? See you at the next convention. Bring your own adult diapers; you can't have mine.

T