New York Times: How Can We Get Rid of Trump?

No, Trump repeats his lies over and over again. There isn't any problem identifying them. He gets told the truth, and then he just keeps saying them.

Trump lost the popular vote by about 3 million.

McCain is right about the chaos in the Trump administration - obviously.

etc.

 

There are also plenty of lies told about the Trump administration. You don't even need to look hard to find them.

https://medium.com/theyoungturks/tw...-makes-trump-look-bad-651cef116fe8#.m534aq3z4

http://thehill.com/homenews/media/315486-trump-attacks-time-report-for-mistake-about-mlk-bust

Facts do not matter to the Trump administration, but if you want sound even remotely credible, the facts should also matter to you. For whatever reason, you seem to prefer the latter.

Irrelevant to anything I have referenced. I'm not even sure why you brought it up.

McCain has been wrong about many things. I'm also not sure why you are using him as an appeal to an authority.

- - - Updated - - -

Should Obama also be charged with War crimes? What authority did he get to start military conflicts in Syria and Libya?

 

First of all, this is an opinion piece, not a news story. Do you even know the difference????????

That's why it appeared in the Review section, which is the editorial page!

BTW, this is not the first such story that I have seen, and I don't read left wing blogs.

You had better get used to it. Because if he has a few more weeks like the last four, they're going to be on billboards.

 

I wasn't going to wade into this, but then I saw your last stunning lie. Obama did not start military conflicts in either Syria or Libya. That claim is so ridiculously false that it's just downright empty vitriol!

BTW, McCain has wrong about many things, Sarah Palin being one of them, but he's not wrong about Trump. If you want to condemn McCain, attack him for picking Palin in the first place. The fact that a major political party would elevate a tabloid worthy twit like Palin to the position of candidate for national office, was the culmination in the dumbing down of American elections, and the event the led directly to the Trump presidency.

Trump did lose the popular vote. But he won the electoral vote, and very very narrowly. In fact, the margin he won by was so small that it totaled 131.000 votes spread out over several states.

So, in a country of 324 million people, Trump became President by the assent of .0004% of the population. Or, roughly the number of registered voters in one (my) County.

You searched far and wide to find only two. Trump tells more lies than that in between breaths in any one of his press conferences. It's so bad and so obvious that reporters are fact checking him on live TV now...

 

Lacking in a sense of irony, are you?

 

He actually started more than 8 military conflicts. Syria and Libya were jusy a small number of them.

https://www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2016/03/obama-doctrine-wars-numbers/474531/

Well, you have a greater tolerance for losing than most people. Most people wouldn't consider a 131 point deficit "narrow." To each is own…

This doesn't make the slightest bit of sense. Your interreptation of this particular datapoint doesn't mean anything.

It only took two minutes on google. It really isn't my job to reveal a well known fact about the media; a fact that has earned the media's 6% approval rating.

 

The US had NOTHING to do with the Arab Spring and its magical thinking that we could have stopped or controlled what happened. Its naïve and childish.

 

Has the 25th ever been applied to a conscious, lucid President? I didn't even think the 25th would apply so long as the President remained conscious and lucid. Then again, I never thought I'd live to see a time when so many people were working so hard against someone who has won a presidential election.

No, it's called the "press" no longer being willing to provide people the "news". We're getting used to it.

The sooner "news" outfits like the NY Times close down, the better.

Exactly. I'm still waiting for someone to explain the items on The Federalist list:

Early November: Spike in Transgender Suicide Rates
November 22: The Tri-State Election Hacking Conspiracy Theory
December 1: The 27-Cent Foreclosure
January 20: Nancy Sinatra’s Complaints about the Inaugural Ball
January 20: The Nonexistent Climate Change Website ‘Purge’
January 20: The Great MLK Jr. Bust Controversy
January 20: Betsy DeVos, Grizzly Fighter
January 26: The ‘Resignations’ At the State Department
January 27: The Photoshopped Hands Affair
January 29: The Reuters Account Hoax
January 31: The White House-SCOTUS Twitter Mistake
January 31: The Big Travel Ban Lie
February 1: POTUS Threatens to Invade Mexico
February 2: Easing the Russian Sanctions
February 2: Renaming Black History Month
February 2: The House of Representatives’ Gun Control Measures

The article concludes with the following:

The items on The Federalist list (see above) have absolutely nothing to do with the 1st Amendment, speech or press. See, there may not be anything to prevent organizations from spouting complete cr*p, but there's also nothing to prevent the President and/or the public from ignoring those organizations. The freedoms guaranteed in the 1st Amendment ensure that no laws are put in place which prevent one from expressing himself / herself; it does not obligate people to read, listen to, or watch whatever it is these folks are attempting to peddle. If a news organization goes and squanders whatever good name they may have had, that's their problem, not ours.

They've already been made irrelevant by being unable to verify the "facts" in the stories that they're putting out. If people can't rely on the veracity of the "news" they're being provided, they should look elsewhere for it. That's the bottom line.

 

Sounds like another "Saddam had WMD" excuse to me.

I also don't see what you're excuse has to do with Camroon, Uganda, Afganistan, etc.

 

Predictably, they will make the case on psychiatric grounds and will attempt to get the Supreme Court to interpret the amendment as such. But this isn't why the plan won't work; it won't work because Trump cabinet (or vice president) will never invoke the 25th amendment.

Even if they do, they'll never vote against Trump. Even if by some miracle the votes end up becoming tied, the congress will never vote against Trump.

This is merely fan fiction; thought up among the truly deprived and desperate.

 

There is a difference between publishing fake news and criticizing POTUS. Trump can handle criticism.....Did you not see the US Presidential campaign?

 

Apparently they can't beat him in an election. In fact, Voters indicated by 45% that we were heading in the right direction, a higher level of optimism than found during any week of the Obama presidency. He had a higher approval rate than Obama had for his entire second term and most of his first term, save for the few first months of his honeymoon period and the last 10 days of his term. As for Trump, 53% of likely voters approve of his performance until the day after his solo press conference his ratings soared higher and now 55% of Likely U.S. Voters approve of President Trump’s job performance.

The president is running well ahead of the Democrats in the polls, has twice the approval rating of the Congress, which has risen since the end of gridlock, and three times the approval rating of the media. If he can produce a tax system that enriches the lower-income families while spurring business reinvestment, he can generate between 3% and 4% percent economic growth, which would itself reduce the deficit by $400 to 500 billion a year.

The Obama war on business and the Hillary Clinton ambition to flatline the economy by making the voting majority of Americans members of some category of benefit recipient would go with it. It will be a mighty accomplishment if Donald Trump can bring the country back from President Obama’s plan to “spread the wealth around” by increasing the size of the public sector and forcing more people into forms of welfare, and refocus it on the entitlement of people to their incomes, as surely as they are entitled to enjoyment of their property -- tempered only by the need to provide what the government must have to function, as opposed to buying votes with public money and inciting class warfare.

If at the same time, or right on the heels of it, he can produce a health-care plan that is universal, but based on tax credits for those with adequate incomes, and assistance for those who do not, he will have ended 20 years of stagnant, mainly gridlocked government. He will also coopt the entire center of the political ground. At the same time, he will have assisted the moderate Democrats to regain control of their party and make it again a centrist reform party capable of governing without reducing the country to shambles, as it did under LBJ, President Carter, and Mr. Obama. At that point, the popularity of the administration will cow even the more overwrought sectors of the media.

The confected hysteria is subsiding, and Democrats must now face the fact that many of their cherished mistaken policies are about to be torched and the ashes dispersed over the country.

http://www.nysun.com/national/atmosphere-for-trump-will-start-to-lighten-as/89902/

The Democrat party has collapsed as a national political force. In addition to losing control of Congress and the White House, they are one state legislature away from allowing Republicans to hold unilateral Constitutional conventions, which require support of two-thirds of the 50 legislatures.

Democrats are so "obsessed" with calling Trump names, they have failed to hold "autopsies" of their own electoral losses, as Republicans did in 2012 after former Gov. Mitt Romney (R-Mass.) lost to Obama.

Why, just this week, a Republican candidate for the Minnesota House, Anne Neu, trounced her opponent despite a concerted effort by the Democrats.

Donald Trump narrowly lost to Hillary Clinton in the contest at the top of the ticket in Minnesota this year, but in other respects Republicans had an astoundingly good year. They amplified their majority in the Minnesota House to an unprecedented number in a presidential election cycle, when the turnout advantage usually accrues to Democrats, and took the majority in the Minnesota Senate. Republicans haven’t held a majority in the state Senate in a long time. Senate Republicans in MN have endured the indignities of minority status for all but two of the past 44 years.

Public sentiment about deporting criminal illegal aliens and threats to cut off funds to sanctuary cities, despite all the tales of woe on your front pages, are policies that have substantial public support, even among Hispanic voters whom the Democrat Party was surely counting on to oppose them.

Trump voters approved 93 percent to 4 percent.
Clinton voters also approved 53 percent to 35 percent.
Republicans gave near unanimous support 92 percent to 6 percent.
Independents 66 percent to 18 percent.
Democrats approved 50 percent to 37 percent.
Hispanic voters also approved the deportation of criminal illegal immigrants 56 percent to 31 percent.

http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/p...ending-sanctuary-cities/article/2614791 (56%)

 

No it is an issue for our democracy if a large fraction of the voters are deciding issues on fake news that the social media is known to be full of.

 

My question is who in the hell is fact checking Trump public statements before he issue them?

 

For myself I never dream in my worst nightmare that someone like Trump who is so completely incompetent to hold the office of the presidency could ever be elected to that office.

- - - Updated - - -

Trump can handle criticism!!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

You don’t have to lie about Trump, just put him in front of a camera, best comedy show on the planet if you’re not American because they have to live with this three ring circus for four years.
He picks and has to fire a national security adviser who was in bed with Russia, a head of schools who can’t even spell. We eagerly wait the next 100 days ‘I’ll make America Great Again’ of course you will Donald, of course you will.

 

No, it is an issue for our democracy if a large portion of the mainstream news media is deciding to foist fake news to misinform the public. I am referring to fake news items like those listed within The Federalist article:

Early November: Spike in Transgender Suicide Rates
November 22: The Tri-State Election Hacking Conspiracy Theory
December 1: The 27-Cent Foreclosure
January 20: Nancy Sinatra’s Complaints about the Inaugural Ball
January 20: The Nonexistent Climate Change Website ‘Purge’
January 20: The Great MLK Jr. Bust Controversy
January 20: Betsy DeVos, Grizzly Fighter
January 26: The ‘Resignations’ At the State Department
January 27: The Photoshopped Hands Affair
January 29: The Reuters Account Hoax
January 31: The White House-SCOTUS Twitter Mistake
January 31: The Big Travel Ban Lie
February 1: POTUS Threatens to Invade Mexico
February 2: Easing the Russian Sanctions
February 2: Renaming Black History Month
February 2: The House of Representatives’ Gun Control Measures


The article goes in depth into each of these fake news incidents, and concludes by saying the following:

Care to explain how these fake news situations came about?

 

It's because the owners and senior editors are in thrall to the Washington establishment, and hope to get lucky with baubles of some sort or another, much like ours want to make it into the Upper House with gongs (honours and elevations to my American cousins) ermine, and of course daily attendance allowances and cheap booze in Annie's Bar.

 

Uh dude as he said in the press conference it ain't the criticism it's the lies. Criticism is one thing personal attacks quite another. Oh and by the way Obama tried repeatedly to shut out fox news and repeatedly and constantly dissed them and rarely did they ever attack him personally in the way that the Alphabet soup group has gone after Trump.But your stone cold bias is duly noted

 

in that case the president also has the freedom to tell them to (*)(*)(*)(*) off though and definatly has the right to shut them out if he doesnt want to talk to them
edit
also ignoring the press or shutting them out is not the same as trying to go after them, unlike dictators like erdogan i dont see trump jailing journalists for writing bad things about him

 

Trump is a mirror image of his supporters. He hears things through the grapevine and then believes them to be true. It's very common in the United States. You should be embarrassed. I've been embarrassed for years to call myself American. Long before Trump took office. His behavior is normal among the brainwashed masses. They are to ignorant to be embarrassed. As for the rest of the world being witness to it. I'm okay with that it should be exposed. Not swept under the rug to fester. Festering ignorance is why we are here in this very moment. Confusion has its uses for those that know how to exploit it.

 

Since the NY times is owned and run by the Council on Foreign Relations or CFR. I would not be surprised if they do good after Trump if they don't get more of their people in Trump's cabinet. They will still never publicly support him but if he caves on the National security adviser they will give him an at a boy behind the theatrical curtain.

 

Nothing you have said has any signifcance to anything I have pointed out.

 

Trump has repeatedly said that he would take Iraqi oil as "spoils of war".. In fact, he said it again last week. Today Mattis said that we won't be seizing Iraqi oil.

Looks like they are all going to be busy with fat old orange Donald.

 

Trump still thinks he's on the Apprentice and is abusing WH staff.