1 minute ago, rattlesnake said:

 

Please quote the part where you claim I say Hitler was right.

Let me make it easy for you:

 

When Trump says that immigrants are poisoning the blood of the country, do you agree with him?

6 minutes ago, Danderman123 said:

Let me make it easy for you:

 

When Trump says that immigrants are poisoning the blood of the country, do you agree with him?

 

Yes. Now please quote the part where you claim I say Hitler was right.

12 minutes ago, rattlesnake said:

Yes. Now please quote the part where you claim I say Hitler was right.

 

You agree with Trump when he directly channels Hitler but then claim you didn't say Hitler was right. Admit it, you weren't in the debating club at school were you?

 

On 12/5/2023 at 2:11 AM, CharlieH said:

Headlines blaring warnings about how a second Trump presidency could slip toward dictatorship on Monday prompted a stiff pushback from allies of the ex-president, who is topping GOP primary polls just weeks before the Iowa caucuses.

The Washington Post, The Atlantic and The New York Times each published stories referencing a “Trump dictatorship” in recent days, arguing a new Trump presidency posed a threat to democracy. The Times wrote a second Trump term likely would be more radical than his first.

 

“All of these articles calling Trump a dictator are about one thing: legitimizing illegal and violent conduct as we get closer to the election,” Sen. JD Vance (R-Ohio), a Trump ally, wrote on X, formerly Twitter. “Everyone needs to take a chill pill.”

“It’s August 2016 all over again. Skyrocketing cost of health care has millions worried. President Trump’s Dem. opponent off the campaign trail & hiding from the press,” senior Trump adviser Jason Miller wrote on X.

“Dems & their media allies have given up on debating issues & have shifted to name-calling & rhetorical fearmongering,” he added.

The Atlantic announced Monday the magazine’s January/February issue would be dedicated to what a second Trump term would mean for immigration, civil rights, the Justice Department, climate and more. The magazine’s editor-in-chief, Jeffrey Goldberg, wrote an editor’s note titled, “A Warning,” to introduce the series.

The New York Times on Monday published its latest piece in a series focused on what a second Trump term might mean for the country. In it, the reporters noted Trump’s rhetoric on the campaign trail “has attracted growing alarm and comparisons to historical fascist dictators and contemporary populist strongmen.”

And a Washington Post opinion column penned by editor-at-large Robert Kagan headlined, “A Trump dictatorship is increasingly inevitable. We should stop pretending,” made an extensive case that Trump’s reelection could feasibly set the U.S. on a path to becoming a dictatorship.

 

FULL STORY

 

I know it's all True because I saw it on TV.  Have people not learnt yet that the MSN is nothing more than War Mongers and have an agenda all of their own. "Just not good for our democracy" they say in unison.

4 minutes ago, Merrill said:

I know it's all True because I saw it on TV.  Have people not learnt yet that the MSN is nothing more than War Mongers and have an agenda all of their own. "Just not good for our democracy" they say in unison.

 

He said he was going to be a dictator. He has made many pronouncements which establish that intention unequivocally.

1 hour ago, ozimoron said:

 

You agree with Trump when he directly channels Hitler but then claim you didn't say Hitler was right. Admit it, you weren't in the debating club at school were you?

 

 

Danderman can’t quote me saying Hitler was right because I didn’t say it.

Now I asked you whether you had read Mein Kampf or not, because that is necessary to understand the context. Hitler’s political vision was steeped in race, his obsession was to safeguard the Aryan race and when he says “all great cultures of the past perished only because the originally creative race died out from blood poisoning”, it is pretty self-explanatory.

 

Trump’s political vision, however, is fundamentally protectionist and therefore, logically (as was the case with the original left such as embodied by Jean Jaurès) is against mass immigration. When he says immigrants are poisoning “the blood of our country”, he is referring to the economic and social fabric of the country.

In line with his protectionist vision, he also said that he was going to “stop the invasion of our southern border and begin the largest domestic deportation operation in American history."

There isn’t – and never was – a racial component to Trump’s political view. Only an ignorant or a mediocre sophist would say this.

 

Oh and while we’re on the subject, what’s your take on this?

"It's not confined to a party," Biden said regarding attitudes about race. "And I think the two-party system, although my Democratic colleagues don't like me saying this, I think the two-party system is good for the South, good for the Negro, good for the black in the South, and other than the fact that they still call me boy, I don't think they've changed their mind on this."

https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/news/biden-said-two-party-system-in-south-was-good-for-the-negro

4 hours ago, ozimoron said:

 

He said he was going to be a dictator. He has made many pronouncements which establish that intention unequivocally.

 

Please list a few of those pronouncements.

4 hours ago, rattlesnake said:

 

Danderman can’t quote me saying Hitler was right because I didn’t say it.

Now I asked you whether you had read Mein Kampf or not, because that is necessary to understand the context. Hitler’s political vision was steeped in race, his obsession was to safeguard the Aryan race and when he says “all great cultures of the past perished only because the originally creative race died out from blood poisoning”, it is pretty self-explanatory.

 

Trump’s political vision, however, is fundamentally protectionist and therefore, logically (as was the case with the original left such as embodied by Jean Jaurès) is against mass immigration. When he says immigrants are poisoning “the blood of our country”, he is referring to the economic and social fabric of the country.

In line with his protectionist vision, he also said that he was going to “stop the invasion of our southern border and begin the largest domestic deportation operation in American history."

There isn’t – and never was – a racial component to Trump’s political view. Only an ignorant or a mediocre sophist would say this.

 

Oh and while we’re on the subject, what’s your take on this?

"It's not confined to a party," Biden said regarding attitudes about race. "And I think the two-party system, although my Democratic colleagues don't like me saying this, I think the two-party system is good for the South, good for the Negro, good for the black in the South, and other than the fact that they still call me boy, I don't think they've changed their mind on this."

https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/news/biden-said-two-party-system-in-south-was-good-for-the-negro

A distinction without a difference.

 

"The blood of our country" = "the blood of our race". 

 

 

This will get the con man and fanboys upset.

 

https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/donald-trump/colorado-supreme-court-kicks-trump-states-2024-ballot-violating-us-con-rcna130484

dictatorship ... 

 

... simply shows how extremely ignorant & bias MSM is.  Thankfully presidents are appointed, and only for a 4 yr stretch at a time, limited to 2 terms.   Imagine if voting actually meant anything.  

 

People would probably re-elect the same idiots every time, and the place would really be a mess, year after year ... oh wait ... they do ... som nam na  

19 minutes ago, KhunLA said:

dictatorship ... 

 

... simply shows how extremely ignorant & bias MSM is.  Thankfully presidents are appointed, and only for a 4 yr stretch at a time, limited to 2 terms.   Imagine if voting actually meant anything.  

 

People would probably re-elect the same idiots every time, and the place would really be a mess, year after year ... oh wait ... they do ... som nam na  

Trump has already talked about invoking the Insurrection Act, which means he could cancel elections.

13 minutes ago, Danderman123 said:

Trump has already talked about invoking the Insurrection Act, which means he could cancel elections.

Even if he could (he can't) how would that allow him to ban future election and stay in office longer than 1 more term.

 

It would mean the military would agree with his decision, which they wouldn't.  All these 'what ifs' are so ridiculous, I find it hard to believe semi intelligent people even consider them as a possibility.

 

Trump suggested it's use to stop the BLM riots that swept the country, and never as a way for a president to stay in power.  Agree with that, since the Dem city/state let they riot.  Ask the locals if they wanted protecting that the left local govts weren't providing.   Don't think you'd be surprised of the answer.

 

Never let the facts get in the way of a good spin.

36 minutes ago, Georgealbert said:

This will get the con man and fanboys upset.

 

https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/donald-trump/colorado-supreme-court-kicks-trump-states-2024-ballot-violating-us-con-rcna130484

Trump will no doubt appeal to his Supreme Court.

 

If we are lucky this will set a precedent for more states to come on board.

The ruling will no doubt be more ammunition for Jack Smith.

 

 

1 minute ago, LosLobo said:

Trump will no doubt appeal to his Supreme Court.

 

If we are lucky this will set a precedent for more states to come on board.

The ruling will no doubt be more ammunition for Jack Smith.

 

 

He can be president of the trustees in the penitentiary because that’s where he’s headed!! Another victory for democracy!

25 minutes ago, LosLobo said:

Trump will no doubt appeal to his Supreme Court.

 

If we are lucky this will set a precedent for more states to come on board.

The ruling will no doubt be more ammunition for Jack Smith.

 

 

This will not impact Jack Smith, this is just noise.

I decided to to actually read the OP, and stopped at this part ... nuff said

 

"The Washington Post, The Atlantic and The New York Times each published stories referencing a “Trump dictatorship” in recent days, 

 

At least they got the 'stories' part correct ...

... story time today, maybe "Winnie the Pooh" or "Curious George" 

 

Is that the same as reading stories in  MGN's rags, if living in the UK:  Daily Mirror, Sunday Mirror, The Sunday People ... etc etc ?

27 minutes ago, KhunLA said:

I decided to to actually read the OP, and stopped at this part ... nuff said

 

"The Washington Post, The Atlantic and The New York Times each published stories referencing a “Trump dictatorship” in recent days, 

 

At least they got the 'stories' part correct ...

... story time today, maybe "Winnie the Pooh" or "Curious George" 

 

Is that the same as reading stories in  MGN's rags, if living in the UK:  Daily Mirror, Sunday Mirror, The Sunday People ... etc etc ?

What Trump said is available all over the Internet. Perhaps you are trying to argue that he didn't say it.

 

The problem is that he paraphrased Hitler, and you don't care.

 

What's next?

12 minutes ago, Danderman123 said:

What Trump said is available all over the Internet. Perhaps you are trying to argue that he didn't say it.

 

The problem is that he paraphrased Hitler, and you don't care.

 

What's next?

I usually ignore such stuff, reported in tabloid rags, and simply googled, the 'Act', which came up with this on 'wiki' ...

 

"On June 1, 2020, President Donald Trump warned that he would invoke the Act in response to the George Floyd protests following the murder of George Floyd. In his official statement, Trump urged "every governor to deploy the National Guard in sufficient numbers" to re-establish civil law and order "until the violence has been quelled". Federal officials talked Trump out of invoking the Insurrection Act. The National Guard were called during the 2021 storming of the United States Capitol, but not active-duty military."

 

You did get the one part correct ... I don't care

10 minutes ago, KhunLA said:

I usually ignore such stuff, reported in tabloid rags, and simply googled, the 'Act', which came up with this on 'wiki' ...

 

"On June 1, 2020, President Donald Trump warned that he would invoke the Act in response to the George Floyd protests following the murder of George Floyd. In his official statement, Trump urged "every governor to deploy the National Guard in sufficient numbers" to re-establish civil law and order "until the violence has been quelled". Federal officials talked Trump out of invoking the Insurrection Act. The National Guard were called during the 2021 storming of the United States Capitol, but not active-duty military."

 

You did get the one part correct ... I don't care

Trump reportedly considered activating the Insurrection Act twice during his presidency — first to quell Black Lives Matter protests and later to hold on to power after his election defeat. 

 

 

But now, Trump is talking about suspending the Constitution. 

 

Of course, you don't care.

18 minutes ago, Danderman123 said:

Trump reportedly considered activating the Insurrection Act twice during his presidency — first to quell Black Lives Matter protests and later to hold on to power after his election defeat. 

 

 

But now, Trump is talking about suspending the Constitution. 

 

Of course, you don't care.

suspending the Constitution ... 

 

... stop, you're killing me.  That's right up there with GW/MMCC and them rising seas.   Next I'll be avoiding rain puddles and speed bumps in my EVs if I believed half the stuff some of y'all read and believe. & post about.  Why I usually avoid these threads.   But thanks for the chuckle.

 

Suspend the Constitution ... good one.

 

And yet, when I mention WEF, Davos, Bilderburg , and their puppeteers, I'm called a conspiracy nutter ... go figure.

 

You're obviously not a Yank, or completely ignorant to how the USA (3 branches of govt) or the world works.

 

Have a nice day.

8 hours ago, Danderman123 said:

Let me make it easy for you:

 

When Trump says that immigrants are poisoning the blood of the country, do you agree with him?

 

Didn't that happen ~250 years ago? I find it almost funny when a nation so young as the USA, built almost totally on immigration, suddenly thinks it has a huge immigration issue.

 

How can you, with a straight face, give weight to a comment by Trump about the dilution of American blood by immigration when 2 out of 3 of his wives have been foreigners? 4 out of 5 of his children were born to those women. He has diluted the blood line (how and when do you measure what you believe is 100% American blood?) more than the vast majority of the nation.

 

He's a hypocrite, amongst many other things.

 

 

Here's one way to get rid of the orange baboon: 

Colorado Supreme Court removes Trump from 2024 ballot

https://edition.cnn.com/politics/live-news/colorado-trump-14th-amendment-12-19-23/index.html

 

24 minutes ago, KhunLA said:

suspending the Constitution ... 

 

... stop, you're killing me.  That's right up there with GW/MMCC and them rising seas.   Next I'll be avoiding rain puddles and speed bumps in my EVs if I believed half the stuff some of y'all read and believe. & post about.  Why I usually avoid these threads.   But thanks for the chuckle.

 

Suspend the Constitution ... good one.

 

And yet, when I mention WEF, Davos, Bilderburg , and their puppeteers, I'm called a conspiracy nutter ... go figure.

 

You're obviously not a Yank, or completely ignorant to how the USA (3 branches of govt) or the world works.

 

Have a nice day.

Wow, you have a terrible track record where Trump is concerned:

 

Former President Donald Trump faced rebuke Sunday from officials in both parties after calling for the “termination” of parts of the Constitution over his lie that the 2020 election was stolen.

25 minutes ago, Woof999 said:

 

Didn't that happen ~250 years ago? I find it almost funny when a nation so young as the USA, built almost totally on immigration, suddenly thinks it has a huge immigration issue.

 

How can you, with a straight face, give weight to a comment by Trump about the dilution of American blood by immigration when 2 out of 3 of his wives have been foreigners? 4 out of 5 of his children were born to those women. He has diluted the blood line (how and when do you measure what you believe is 100% American blood?) more than the vast majority of the nation.

 

He's a hypocrite, amongst many other things.

 

 

I agree.

 

Trump is a hypocrite.  But his fans don't care.

18 minutes ago, Danderman123 said:

Wow, you have a terrible track record where Trump is concerned:

 

Former President Donald Trump faced rebuke Sunday from officials in both parties after calling for the “termination” of parts of the Constitution over his lie that the 2020 election was stolen.

OK, now it's 'part' of the Constitution.   Again, if not ignorant, you know how silly saying, or even thinking that would be a reality is.  One can only hope.

 

And you actually waste your time reading such op-eds ... and then post as a 'what if' scenario ... 

 

This is why the world is the way it is, because 'some folks'(to be kind) actually believe all these divisionary op-eds, read, believe, and are distracted by, while what they should be worried  about and thinking about, happens right in front of them.

 

Can't be bothered with your next silly scenario ... BYE BYE

10 minutes ago, KhunLA said:

OK, now it's 'part' of the Constitution.   Again, if not ignorant, you know how silly saying, or even thinking that would be a reality is.  One can only hope.

 

And you actually waste your time reading such op-eds ... and then post as a 'what if' scenario ... 

 

This is why the world is the way it is, because 'some folks'(to be kind) actually believe all these divisionary op-eds, read, believe, and are distracted by, while what they should be worried  about and thinking about, happens right in front of them.

 

Can't be bothered with your next silly scenario ... BYE BYE

So, for you, suspending the Constitution is a bad thing only if 100% is suspended. But you are okay if, for example, Trump just suspends the Bill of Rights. Or the 13th Amendment.

 

Got it.

1 minute ago, Danderman123 said:

So, for you, suspending the Constitution is a bad thing only if 100% is suspended. But you are okay if, for example, Trump just suspends the Bill of Rights. Or the 13th Amendment.

 

Got it.

I can only laugh ... 

 

That an intelligent person even thinks any part of that statement is a reality.  Part of, 100%, 13th or any other silly thing about the Constitution you can think of, can be suspended.

 

Stop ... seriously, stop, don't bother, as you're now on my ignore list.   Replied too many times already.

 

Apparently 'have a nice day' & 'bye bye' wasn't enough of a clue.

 

 

8 hours ago, rattlesnake said:

 

Danderman can’t quote me saying Hitler was right because I didn’t say it.

Now I asked you whether you had read Mein Kampf or not, because that is necessary to understand the context. Hitler’s political vision was steeped in race, his obsession was to safeguard the Aryan race and when he says “all great cultures of the past perished only because the originally creative race died out from blood poisoning”, it is pretty self-explanatory.

 

Trump’s political vision, however, is fundamentally protectionist and therefore, logically (as was the case with the original left such as embodied by Jean Jaurès) is against mass immigration. When he says immigrants are poisoning “the blood of our country”, he is referring to the economic and social fabric of the country.

In line with his protectionist vision, he also said that he was going to “stop the invasion of our southern border and begin the largest domestic deportation operation in American history."

There isn’t – and never was – a racial component to Trump’s political view. Only an ignorant or a mediocre sophist would say this.

 

Oh and while we’re on the subject, what’s your take on this?

"It's not confined to a party," Biden said regarding attitudes about race. "And I think the two-party system, although my Democratic colleagues don't like me saying this, I think the two-party system is good for the South, good for the Negro, good for the black in the South, and other than the fact that they still call me boy, I don't think they've changed their mind on this."

https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/news/biden-said-two-party-system-in-south-was-good-for-the-negro

 

Complete rubbish. Trumps agenda has nothing at all to do with protectionism. He is on record as being anti-protectionist. He has outsourced manufacturing to China. His motivation is racism, pure and simple.

On 12/19/2023 at 9:19 AM, Tug said:

Awww look at the cute new label lol 😂 I know it’s hard on the retrumplikans to stomach the stellar stockmarket or the outstanding employment data inflation coming down the country moving forward gotta be tough on you guys to stomach the stellar stockmarket

LOL...look at Biden, and how stellar he makes Trump look on just about EVERYTHING stock market included.

 

 

https://www.marketwatch.com/story/the-stock-markets-performance-under-biden-remains-worse-than-under-obama-or-trump-even-with-recent-gains-767209cf?mod=search_headline

1 hour ago, KhunLA said:

I can only laugh ... 

 

That an intelligent person even thinks any part of that statement is a reality.  Part of, 100%, 13th or any other silly thing about the Constitution you can think of, can be suspended.

 

Stop ... seriously, stop, don't bother, as you're now on my ignore list.   Replied too many times already.

 

Apparently 'have a nice day' & 'bye bye' wasn't enough of a clue.

 

 

"A Massive Fraud of this type and magnitude allows for the termination of all rules, regulations, and articles, even those found in the Constitution."

 

You can argue with your Orange Jesus. He doesn't seem to agree with you.