The Trump Card...

[Turtle]

The Republicans most definitely obstructed Obama, but they were amateurs compared to what the The Leff is doing now. The Republicans didn't file more than 50 lawsuits against the Obama administration in his 8 years trying to overturn his policies, yet the Democrats have already filed more then 400 against the Trump administration, and we're not even 2 years into his presidency.

No, there was no meeting at the Caucus House restaurant, but that was because they all got the memo.

Read the Confidential David Brock Memo Outlining Plans to Attack Trump

 

[dalscott]

The Republicans most definitely obstructed Obama, but they were amateurs compared to what the The Leff is doing now. The Republicans didn't file more than 50 lawsuits against the Obama administration in his 8 years trying to overturn his policies, yet the Democrats have already filed more then 400 against the Trump administration, and we're not even 2 years into his presidency.

No, there was no meeting at the Caucus House restaurant, but that was because they all got the memo.

Read the Confidential David Brock Memo Outlining Plans to Attack Trump

The only reason the “righties” didn’t have more lawsuits against Obama is because he didn’t have skeletons in his closet like Trump does. They tried to get anything on Obama that they could including the “birther” crap. On the other hand, Trump has a loooong history of lies, corruption, cheating and so on. He makes George W. Look intelligent and Nixon look honest. Again, after what the “righties”did to Bill Clinton, they don’t have any room to talk. The right-wing can dish it out, but they sure can’t take it!

 

[Turtle]

The only reason the “righties” didn’t have more lawsuits against Obama is because he didn’t have skeletons in his closet like Trump does.

No, Obama had plenty of skeletons in his closet, the Obama-friendly press simply downplayed or ignored it all. The reason the Republicans didn't file more resistance and obstructionist lawsuits against Obama is because the Republican Party is comprised chiefly of spineless wussies who won't fight dirty because they don't believe the ends justify the means.

They tried to get anything on Obama that they could including the “birther” crap.

They got plenty on Obama, but again, the MSM downplayed it or didn't cover it at all. Reverend Wright, prosecution of whistle-blowers, harassment of reporters, lying about Iran, Iraq, Bengazi, Obamacare, Fast and Furious, unmasking of Trump campaign officials for political purposes, it's a long list and I've just touched on it. But the media is like nothing to see here move along.

On the other hand, Trump has a loooong history of lies, corruption, cheating and so on.

That's it right there. He has a long a public history of things, and he still got elected, and liberals still can't believe he got elected over Hillary. Bbbwwwaaahhhaaa

 

[dalscott]

No, Obama had plenty of skeletons in his closet, the Obama-friendly press simply downplayed or ignored it all. The reason the Republicans didn't file more resistance and obstructionist lawsuits against Obama is because the Republican Party is comprised chiefly of spineless wussies who won't fight dirty because they don't believe the ends justify the means.

They got plenty on Obama, but again, the MSM downplayed it or didn't cover it at all. Reverend Wright, prosecution of whistle-blowers, harassment of reporters, lying about Iran, Iraq, Bengazi, Obamacare, Fast and Furious, unmasking of Trump campaign officials for political purposes, it's a long list and I've just touched on it. But the media is like nothing to see here move along.

That's it right there. He has a long a public history of things, and he still got elected, and liberals still can't believe he got elected over Hillary. Bbbwwwaaahhhaaa

Just like the righties couldn’t believe Clinton or Obama beat their boys and never got over it. The Right started this stuff with Clinton. What goes around comes around.


Sent from my iPhone using EO Forums

 

[muttly]

Most of The Press, Establishment and Deep State against him. He won regardless.

 

[muttly]

No, Obama had plenty of skeletons in his closet, the Obama-friendly press simply downplayed or ignored it all. The reason the Republicans didn't file more resistance and obstructionist lawsuits against Obama is because the Republican Party is comprised chiefly of spineless wussies who won't fight dirty because they don't believe the ends justify the means.

They got plenty on Obama, but again, the MSM downplayed it or didn't cover it at all. Reverend Wright, prosecution of whistle-blowers, harassment of reporters, lying about Iran, Iraq, Bengazi, Obamacare, Fast and Furious, unmasking of Trump campaign officials for political purposes, it's a long list and I've just touched on it. But the media is like nothing to see here move along.

That's it right there. He has a long a public history of things, and he still got elected, and liberals still can't believe he got elected over Hillary. Bbbwwwaaahhhaaa

Just like the righties couldn’t believe Clinton or Obama beat their boys and never got over it. The Right started this stuff with Clinton. What goes around comes around.


Sent from my iPhone using EO Forums

Some need to be careful what they ask for or demand (impeachment). Very well could be a backlash like what happened with Clinton. Which could mean more republicans elected to help Trump with his agenda. #unintededconsequences

 

[Turtle]

Just like the righties couldn’t believe Clinton or Obama beat their boys and never got over it.

I know you want to lash out with a "waaah, waaah, waaah, so there" kind of thing, but you need to at least lash out with the truth. The righties absolutely could believe Clinton and Obama beat their boys, because their boys were lame, luzer candidates and they knew it. They had no trouble getting over "Read My Lips" George losing to Clinton, because they knew he wasn't going to win. Likewise, they had no trouble getting over the fact that Obama trounced John McCain and his Cracker Jack running mate Sarah Palin, because they knew McCain couldn't win.

They didn't obstruct Clinton or Obama because they got their widdle feewings hurt and couldn't get over losing, they obstructed both because both were snotty and arrogant and in retaliation for what the Democrats did to Robert Bork and for what they did to Clarence Thomas.

The Right started this stuff with Clinton. What goes around comes around.

Sorry, no. The right didn't start this with Clinton. The current partisan climate started with Reagan, although it was much less back then. But because the Democrats in Congress didn't obstruct Reagan enough to suit those on the father left, they elected members to Congress who would obstruct the Republicans and it's grown ever since then. But even obstruction is general is hardly a new thing. It goes back to John Adams, the second President, where obstruction was taken to a high art form.

 

[RoadTime]

I know you want to lash out with a "waaah, waaah, waaah, so there" kind of thing, but you need to at least lash out with the truth. The righties absolutely could believe Clinton and Obama beat their boys, because their boys were lame, luzer candidates and they knew it. They had no trouble getting over "Read My Lips" George losing to Clinton, because they knew he wasn't going to win. Likewise, they had no trouble getting over the fact that Obama trounced John McCain and his Cracker Jack running mate Sarah Palin, because they knew McCain couldn't win.

I could not of said that better. No surprise at all with those outcomes

 

[dalscott]

Some need to be careful what they ask for or demand (impeachment). Very well could be a backlash like what happened with Clinton. Which could mean more republicans elected to help Trump with his agenda. #unintededconsequences

I agree. I actually don’t want to see him impeached. Among other things is the reason you stated and that we would have the VP take over and get more extreme things through.


Sent from my iPhone using EO Forums

 

[dalscott]

I know you want to lash out with a "waaah, waaah, waaah, so there" kind of thing, but you need to at least lash out with the truth. The righties absolutely could believe Clinton and Obama beat their boys, because their boys were lame, luzer candidates and they knew it. They had no trouble getting over "Read My Lips" George losing to Clinton, because they knew he wasn't going to win. Likewise, they had no trouble getting over the fact that Obama trounced John McCain and his Cracker Jack running mate Sarah Palin, because they knew McCain couldn't win.

They didn't obstruct Clinton or Obama because they got their widdle feewings hurt and couldn't get over losing, they obstructed both because both were snotty and arrogant and in retaliation for what the Democrats did to Robert Bork and for what they did to Clarence Thomas.

Sorry, no. The right didn't start this with Clinton. The current partisan climate started with Reagan, although it was much less back then. But because the Democrats in Congress didn't obstruct Reagan enough to suit those on the father left, they elected members to Congress who would obstruct the Republicans and it's grown ever since then. But even obstruction is general is hardly a new thing. It goes back to John Adams, the second President, where obstruction was taken to a high art form.

That may be somewhat true but it went into overdrive against Obama.


Sent from my iPhone using EO Forums

 

[Kip life]

They went overdrive against oBama for one simple reason their inner racist views could not accept it.. deplorables was a perfect description.

Sent from my SM-N900T using EO Forums mobile app

 

[muttly]

Some need to be careful what they ask for or demand (impeachment). Very well could be a backlash like what happened with Clinton. Which could mean more republicans elected to help Trump with his agenda. #unintededconsequences

I agree. I actually don’t want to see him impeached. Among other things is the reason you stated and that we would have the VP take over and get more extreme things through.


Sent from my iPhone using EO Forums

I think if some people that oppose Trump out of hand would look at the policies that he supports, they would realize how much agreement they have with him. They probably disagree a bit more with Pence. But right now Trump is the bogeyman for them.

 

[dalscott]

I think if some people that oppose Trump out of hand would look at the policies that he supports, they would realize how much agreement they have with him. They probably disagree a bit more with Pence. But right now Trump is the bogeyman for them.

Actually, I do agree with some of his ideas such as trade. I’ve been preaching about this
since the early 80’s. We should never have dropped our tariffs or our limits on imports. Also agree with enforcing our immigration laws but we should enforce the laws that we have. I’m not anti-immigrant as my mother was born in Scotland. They moved to Windsor, ON in the mid twenties and to Detroit in twenty-nine. They jumped through all the hoops and were very proud to become Americans. I agree the if you want to be here, you should try to fit in. I’m not saying you should forget your heritage by any means but you should make an effort to speak English and not expect the rest of us to bend over backwards for you.
As far as how the “liberal” media treats him, he asks for it. He can’t keep his big mouth shut. On top of that, there are all of those tweets, many it not most are ridiculous.


Sent from my iPhone using EO Forums

 

[muttly]

I think if some people that oppose Trump out of hand would look at the policies that he supports, they would realize how much agreement they have with him. They probably disagree a bit more with Pence. But right now Trump is the bogeyman for them.

As far as how the “liberal” media treats him, he asks for it. He can’t keep his big mouth shut. On top of that, there are all of those tweets, many it not most are ridiculous.


Sent from my iPhone using EO Forums

Many of his tweets are in response to an attack on him. There have been many times when the media in their thirst to get Trump got their stories wrong. It's his way of responding and fighting back. If he didn't, it would be a one way street of negativity towards him from many that call themselves journalists, but are really just liberal activists trying to shape a narrative because they have an agenda.
There is some funny irony in that Trump uses a liberal controlled social media platform like Twitter to his advantage.

 

[ATeam]

Recently, the Woodward book and the New York Times anonymous editorial came out. I dislike both because of the anonymity both provide to their so-called sources. Until now, I have never referenced such works in this forum because, at bottom, anonymous-source reporting (fabricated stories?) is suspicious at best and corrupt at worst.

While I remain opposed to anonymous-source products like those mentioned above, Trump's response is not anonymous and his words are plain-fact items of public record. His one-word tweet, "TREASON?" says a lot.

Significantly, and astoundingly (to me at least), Trump did not deny that one or more of his highest-ranking administration officials are working to thwart him. He did not come out praising the loyalty of his staff and unity of his team. In a single word, Trump enhanced if not outright confirmed the credibility of the Woodward and NY Times pieces.

In that tweet and other responses, Trump himself confirmed that a number of people in his administration disrespect him, are proactively working to thwart at least parts of his agenda, and some, seeing him as a threat to the country, are intentionally and covertly insubordinate.

Trumps team leadership style has failed. It may have worked in Trump Tower but it is not well suited for the White House. His attempt to apply his business style in a political setting has produced a team in which some of his key people are (in their view) literally working to keep the country and the world safe from Donald Trump.

It's important to note that these insiders were not put there by the "lefties" or the establishment. They were put there by Donald Trump himself. Once again, we have reason to disbelieve Trump's claim that he picks "the best people." But that's minor given what's now emerging, not as a narrative, but as a truth confirmed by Trump himself.

None of this makes Trump look strong or in control. As his perceived strength and competence continues to weaken, so will his base. While there will always be people who will believe in Trump to their dying day, a larger number of Americans will come to form a critical mass of anti-Trump sentiment, such that the Republicans who have the power to do so will see fit to impeach Trump.

 

[Turtle]

In a single word, Trump enhanced if not outright confirmed the credibility of the Woodward and NY Times pieces.

Sounds more like wishful thinking than hard, critical analysis. You assume Trump knows the identity of the author of the op-ed and, despite the outright denials from Mattias, Kelly and Dowd, Trump thinks they're lying in their denials.

The simple fact is, nothing in the op-ed piece (or Woodward 's book, for that matter, as far as we know), are things that aren't said by somebody about every CEO or boss in every large company.

 

[ATeam]

You assume Trump knows the identity of the author of the op-ed ...

No. I am not assuming that. If Trump knew the identity of that person, he would fire him or her.

That makes it all the worse. He has what he considers to be a treasonous operative on his team but does not know who it is. Real leaders do not have such problems.

Way earlier in this thread, I suggested that Trump’s leadership style is ill-suited for use in a political context. We are seeing that play out now. Things are not going to get better for Trump. . They are going to get worse. The mythology of the great leader-businessman is crumbling and his people are looking to save their own skin.

 

[ATeam]

The simple fact is, nothing in the op-ed piece (or Woodward 's book, for that matter, as far as we know), are things that aren't said by somebody about every CEO or boss in every large company.

How many boards of directors of large companies would keep a CEO who admitted that he had a treasonous operative on staff who is proactively trying to thwart the CEO and the CEO does not know who that person is?

Trump is in deep trouble.

 

[Turtle]

No. I am not assuming that. If Trump knew the identity of that person, he would fire him or her.

You are assuming he believes it to be true. He didn't admit to anything. He didn't Tweet "This is treason!", he Tweeted a question, specifically, "Treason?"

We don't know who it is or where they even work. We don't know if they even work in the White House.

After his "Treason?" Tweet, he then Tweeted:

"Does the so-called “Senior Administration Official” really exist, or is it just the Failing New York Times with another phony source? If the GUTLESS anonymous person does indeed exist, the Times must, for National Security purposes, turn him/her over to government at once!"

So for all we know, the op-ed was written by Bob Woodward. <snort>

I think the timing is astonishing, and I think it's hilarious that the op-ed manages to hit on every single liberal media hot-button issue they've been pounding away at since the election, almost as if there was a checklist to go by.

25th Amendment? Check.
Out of his league? Check.
Doesn't know what he's doing? Check.
Clueless? Check.
Off the rails? Check.
Adults in the room? Check.

You see my point, I hope.

 

[ATeam]

You see my point, I hope.

Yes, I see your point, and as you know, you and I perceive things differently. I believe Trump is now in deep trouble not because of the points you are making and many Trump supporters agree with, but because the image of Trump as a competent leader is beginning to crumble. It's getting more difficult for the Republicans who have the power to impeach Trump to defend him.

Regarding the Trump impeachment, it does not matter what you or I believe or what points we make. It matters what the Republicans who have the power to impeach Trump believe. The instant they conclude Trump's weaknesses outweigh his strengths, impeachment becomes the likely outcome.

Remember, almost all of them opposed Trump at first. They came around when Trump showed he had the ability to win. As that perceived strength fades, those same Republicans will find it just as easy to let Trump go.