Here's the thing I'm willing to bet my life on. This dickhead doesn't care about ties to Russia or the fact he's paid jack in taxes the past 30 years. The truth is he doesn't want the world to know how poor of a billionaire he actually is. That's all the dude cares about. He always brags he has over $10 Billion when it's actually closer to $2. Fuck, he wasn't even a billionaire until the Apprentice came along and everybody bought into it and started making deals with him like he was some sort of wiz.
The man is a glorified real estate agent who's daddy handed him an empire. Give anyone $40 million to spent on New York real estate in the 70's and they'd be a billionaire too.
Seriously, why does he keep refusing to release them? Everyone can tell that innocent people don't try this hard to hide things
I've thought this too. I don't think it has to do with how much he paid, just how much he got paid. That's why he never pays his contractors. He doesn't have the coin.
Is $0 more than $0?
Well there you have it. Self professed globalist. Let the gymnastics begin.
What the fuck. He literally ran on a populist, anti-globalist trade policy. How the fuck did this conman get in office.
BUT BUT BUT BUT
No like actually I have no idea what they'll say beyond "wtf globalism rocks now" except entirely unironically.
"I'm whatever the last person that I spoke to is."
That does seem to be the million dollar question, doesn't it?
Best quote directed to Spicer: "Come on, man".
Building Flynn to be the fall guy and then they can walk away from this relatively unscathed...
Like a fucking movie
Video of the "c'mon man".
Says it at :48.
I think the answer is plain: They are Party Members™. That means they are better than you. Like any aristocracy, they deserve things that you do not.
You should still call them and ask them why, though. I wonder if any of them will be truthful about it.
When Obamacare was passed, Congress and their staff were required to buy insurance through it just like everyone else. The logic was that if it was good enough for the rest of us, it should be good enough for them.
Now they want to keep all the benefits that they enjoy from Obamacare, but they want to strip it all away from us. Why?
What is so bad about Obamacare, if they want to stay on it? Once again, sadly, the answer is that they hate it because Obama did it.
Honestly, it seems as though the GOP is trying to make our society into a Caste System that for now, is based on anything that makes a person different than them, e.g. gay marriage, trans bathroom issue, voter ID laws, women's reproductive health, [public] education, healthcare, etc.
Essentially, the GOP is attempting to strip away the rights of people who are dissimilar to them, while simultaneously legally mandating special privileges for themselves.
"All animals are equal, but some animals are more equal than others."
How is it possible that we need to cut funding from the EPA, depts of housing, transportation, healthcare and education but we are getting too much money in taxes from the rich.
I wish they had to actually justify this to the voter's face, but they'll just talk it all off...
The issue is that these sociopathic wealthy have been on the gravy train for decades, and they have come to view it as an entitlement every bit as valid as welfare. In order to keep those wealthy welfare entitlements going, something else has to give way. So that means the poor/ working/ middle class get less so the wealthy can get more, and they feel justified because they feel like they create the jobs that pay everyone else.
At some point, someone has to stand up and say "Enough!" We've sacrificed enough to create a class of superwealthy oligarchs, and we are under no obligation to sacrifice more. In fact, it is time for them to do their part to give back to the system that made them so wealthy that nobody in their family will be concerned about money for many generations. The gravy train has to come to a halt, and they'll just have to get used to making a whole lot of money instead of obscene amounts of money. They'll still be rich, but they may have to trade in their yacht every 5 years instead of every 3. I think they'll survive just fine.
Surprised the tax plan doesn't just literally say "Donald J trump pays 0% taxes."
We HAVE to shrink gubment to the size we can drown it in the bathtub. This way the free man can be economically independent from regulation and able to start businesses. Or some shit like that. They have to remove all citizen protections in order to pillage.
it can never be repeated often enough: Emoluments Clause.
I'm screaming it constantly. This guy is breaking the law every single day! He is making a fortune by being President. He doesn't even try to hide it. No other President would be able to get away with this shit.
Since you're gonna get attacked by an ignorant trumpet about this at some point, here are the bullet points:
mar a lago was willed to the government by the post family in the late twenties to serve as a location for presidents to entertain foreign dignitaries
it was never used by the government despite being in their possession for a number of reasons (most boiling down to convenience, frankly)
in the 80's the government returned the property to the Post family trust
trump bought the club after this and has developed it into being a private club with an extremely exclusive membership list
the club continued to not be used once in any governmental function until 2016
Donald trump, now president of the United States, and continued owner of the club, begins regular use of the club
months later in 2017, the us state department attempts to justify this behavior by saying that he is simply fulfilling the clubs original purpose.
So in conclusion, despite the club being offered for government use, it went over fifty years in the governments possession and then another thirty years in private possession before being used for that purpose. Incidentally, the president to start using it for that purpose is also the private owner of the club now, and profits massively from its use in this manner (using it as such while publicly owned obviously would not have had the same impact).
While not losing focus on Russia, we need to keep emoluments in mind as well. While lacking the glamour of Russia, it's an already-proven impeachable offense.
Why is Republican fuckery - and it is always Republicans - always soft-pedaled in headlines as "partisan," pretending like there's two sides to ONE party constantly breaking the law and betraying the country?
That's like reporting Confederate slavery as "racial tensions."
I can't believe the party of Ronald Reagan is being soft on RUSSIA! It's mind boggling.
Not "soft on." They are actively engaged in covering up, and therefore actively engaged in, treason. They're not being soft on Russia, they are actively working with Russia against the interests of the United States.
They are waging war on this country.
Why is this Committee completely ineffectual?
There is rumor of a recording in which Paul Ryan and Mitch McConnell discuss laundering Russian m.... If it is true, and they are complicit in all this, there's no way in hell they are going to allow a real investigation to occur.
His voter base, leaning towards white, non-college educated men, remains intact
Continuing to speak volumes right here.
Edit: unsurprisingly I now feel compelled to point out this does not equal "all white, non-college educated men". But his loyal base hugely depends on them. Bigly, even.
Edit 2: my inbox is letting the hate flow through it. So be it I guess, just a simple personal observation of a single sentence from a news article shrug
Let's not forget white women. For some reason, a lot of people on the Left assumed very incorrectly that a) women would feel some allegiance towards HRC and b) that women would feel a natural allegiance to Leftist causes (like reproductive rights, for example).
Oh how wrong we were.
He didn't, his was actually the highest. It's just that he's the first President for whom there was modern polling, so we can't confidently make assertions about anyone prior. Headlines like this are kind of misleading for that reason - they should say 'than any president in the history of modern opinion polling', though I guess that's a bit of a mouthful.
Agreed. It's just more and more evidence that poorly educated, indoctrinated people with limited life experience beyond their own sheltered views are the Republicans' greatest allies.
Edit: bolstered, of course, by racism from whites who feel "under threat"...and surprise, many of them fall under the previous category as well
Trump is such a national embarrassment. As former foreign Australian minister Gareth Evans said, Trump is "manifestly the most ill-informed, under-prepared, ethically challenged, and psychologically ill-equipped president in US history"
"Fake 'till you make it" obviously does not work for being president. This is a good lesson for everyone here.
So in other words...Stupid?
Stupid AND bad.
Unsurprisingly, the party that loves to tout being "constitutional" and make fun of liberals for playing victims are yet again acting unconstitutionally and saying their feelings were hurt. Classic projection as always from the right.
Ya Hillary for prison made a post about CNN backstabbing Hillary and I'll I said was " Hahaha yes let's keep focusing on the election that happened almost half a year ago. Let's make America great again by living in the past and not moving forward." And they banned me from commenting
I swear no one working with Trump knows how to run anything
Its time to stop pretending there are two equal sides.
There is the intellectually and morally superior side, and then there are the right wingers.
The right hates that we Reddit-browsing and NPR-listening coastal liberal "elites" are the winners in a service-based globalized multicultural society because of our superior intellect and open worldview, and they blame all their failures on minorities and undocumented immigrants. They are seeing how America is increasingly becoming vibrantly diverse, and how non-white people will soon be the majority and losing their privilege terrifies them. All of us liberal intellectuals who base our views on science will continue building robots and putting Trump supporters out of jobs and watch as their racist white communities die out. All of their kids will have to come to the big cities and be exposed to diversity and tolerance and see how much better it is than hate and bigotry that Trump represents. We will also grant citizenship to the tens of millions of undocumented immigrants, and allow more non-white people to come in, further solidifying a progressive diverse America that votes in universal healthcare, socialism, feminism and social justice policies that help everyone and dismantle white power structures that Trump supporters want to preserve.
I've come to realize that much of American history is made up of periods where liberals drag conservatives kicking and screaming into the future, then we try to compromise for a while, then we go back to dragging.
"No, conservatives, we're not going back to England."
"No, conservatives, we're not making George Washington a King."
"No, conservatives, you can't form your own country with blackjack and slaves."
"No, conservatives, you can't keep denying women the right to votes."
"No, conservatives, we're not going back to the way things were before the depression."
"No, conservatives, literacy tests aren't constitutional."
"No, conservatives, you can't deny homosexuals the right to marry."
The names of the parties change from era to era, but it's always been liberals dragging conservatives against their will into a better future. I grew up in one of the in-between eras, where we all thought that compromise was a possibility, but I'm more and more realizing how mistaken I was about that. It's time once again for liberals and progressives to stop being nice and drag our country into the 21st century.
The simple fact of the matter is that conservatives just aren't offering any good ideas any more. What's the compromise between "We need to stop climate change" and "Lol, climate change isn't a real?" Or "Homosexuals should have the right to marry" and "Homosexuals cause hurricanes?" It's like being in a group project with someone who didn't read the book and expecting them to do their share of the work.
Edit: Thanks for the gold kind stranger!