Donald J. Trump (For everyone else except Victor)
I assume it's still acceptable to have a Trump thread in a Politics forum?
So this is an obvious lie - basically aimed at
MAGA: why do people get away with calling us Nazis?
Also MAGA: *vice President bigly mad at Germany for suppressing the far right*
Shoutout absurdity
it isn't as you well know, any insult to immigrants or their dominant religions/culture can be a crime if police wakes up with the intent to arrest.
and when you strongly criticize someone, insults are *normal*, fully expected, and should never be a crime, as we can see in this very forum when people on the left talk about trump, musk, maga, afd, Meloni and so.
saying "country x has an abhorrent culture/religion, and this is why we should ban immigration from it and repatriate those already here" is a crime in the UK. saying "party x is abhorrent" isn't.
I still can’t believe that Trump has threatened war with three major allies, wants to pull out of Europe, wants to carve up Ukraine with Putin, and Luciom is still on here running cover for his administration. Truly amazing.
Trump supporters are all in, gonna lickspittle till the very end
it isn't as you well know, any insult to immigrants or their dominant religions/culture can be a crime if police wakes up with the intent to arrest.
and when you strongly criticize someone, insults are *normal*, fully expected, and should never be a crime, as we can see in this very forum when people on the left talk about trump, musk, maga, afd, Meloni and so.
saying "country x has an abhorrent culture/religion, and this is why we should ban immigration from it and repatriate those already here"
More rubbish. Talking about an individual is completely different to making generalised remarks about a group of people based on their race or ethnicity.
You're really not very good at this. No wonder you have no one in real life to debate with.
What is it that you're dying to say, again?
I still can’t believe that Trump has threatened war with three major allies, wants to pull out of Europe, wants to carve up Ukraine with Putin, and Luciom is still on here running cover for his administration. Truly amazing.
In the ukraine thread i wrote well before others that i dislike the direction things are going (but the only thing that matters is how it ends in practice).
As for the rest he hasn't threatened war with 3 major allies, and i am not sure what you mwan with "pull out of europe" but if a country of 500m with first world per captia gdp isn't FULLY able to defend itself completly without any help ever AND to project immense power on it's borders and be the kingmaker of it's area, it doesn't actually deserve to exist in the first place at all.
It shouldn't be Trump "pulling off", it should be us having dignity and behaving like adults in our home
In the ukraine thread i wrote well before others that i dislike the direction things are going (but the only thing that matters is how it ends in practice).
As for the rest he hasn't threatened war with 3 major allies, and i am not sure what you mwan with "pull out of europe" but if a country of 500m with first world per captia gdp isn't FULLY able to defend itself completly without any help ever AND to project immense power on it's borders and be the kingmaker of it's area, it doesn't actually d
I guess our northern neighbors, the kingdom of denmark, and a country with a canal that we have built and have had good relations with ever since don’t count as major allies?
The US’s presence in Europe has been a mainstay of Western security since the fall of nazi germany. This idea of “dignity” in spurning our help is idealistic nonsense.
I guess our northern neighbors, the kingdom of denmark, and a country with a canal that we have built and have had good relations with ever since don’t count as major allies?
The US’s presence in Europe has been a mainstay of Western security since the fall of nazi germany. This idea of “dignity” in spurning our help is idealistic nonsense.
There has been no threathening of war with Denmark or Canada. There has been a threating of undoing a treaty with Panama which is actually something the USA could do without it being an act of war.
The Panama neutrality treaty can always be walked back by the USA (only question is if congress is needed to do so, and personally i think it is, but it's another matter), as any other treaty is.
There is no superiority of treaties over basic laws in the USA framework (unlike for vassal countries like most european countries), the sovereign congress (and sometimes the executive by delegation) can always surpass any treaty and the will of the people as defined by the will of congress is always superior to any treaty with foreign aliens.
EXCEPT for the monetary obligations that developed from those treaties: those are covered by the constitution and nor congress neither the executive can just cancel them at all.
She’s desperate for information, but the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, a critical source of urgent analyses of the flu and other public health threats, has gone quiet in the weeks since President Donald Trump took office.
A critical analysis of the seasonal flu selected for distribution through the CDC’s Health Alert Network has stalled, according to people close to the CDC. They asked not to be identified because of fears of retaliation. The network, abbreviated as HAN, is the CDC’s main method of sharing urgent public health information with health officials, doctors, and, sometimes, the public.
Although the CDC’s flu dashboard shows a surge of influenza, it doesn’t include all data needed to interpret the situation. Nor does it offer the tailored advice found in HAN alerts that tells health care workers how to protect patients and the public. In 2023, for example, a report urged clinics to test patients with respiratory symptoms rather than assume cases are the flu, since other viruses were causing similar issues that year.
Just pathetic. Completely indefensible. Kind of like this censorship.
Leading to books being banned in some government schools like this one:
Julianne Moore in ‘Great Shock’ After Donald Trump Bans Her Children’s Book ‘Freckleface Strawberry’ From Schools: ‘I Can’t Help But Wonder What Is So Controversial’
“It is a great shock for me to learn that my first book, ‘Freckleface Strawberry,’ has been banned by the Trump Administration from schools run by the Department of Defense,” Moore wrote. “‘Freckleface Strawberry’ is a semi-autobiographical story about a seven year old girl who dislikes her freckles but eventually learns to live with them when she realizes that she is different ‘just like everybody else.’ It is a book I wrote for my children and for other kids to remind them that we all struggle, but are united by our humanity and our community.”
We must protect children from...learning that having freckles is ok.
APPARENTLY.
Shame on anyone defending this bs.
There are lots more examples of disgusting censorship happening right now. For example:
Books mentioning slavery, civil rights removed from shelves at Fort Campbell schools
There has been no threathening of war with Denmark or Canada. There has been a threating of undoing a treaty with Panama which is actually something the USA could do without it being an act of war.
The Panama neutrality treaty can always be walked back by the USA (only question is if congress is needed to do so, and personally i think it is, but it's another matter), as any other treaty is.
There is no superiority of treaties over basic laws in the USA framework (unlike for vassal countries like m
In the weeks before he was inaugurated to this second term, Trump spoke about his plans to annex Greenland and regain control of the Panama Canal, something Secretary of State Marco Rubio also spoke about when visiting Panama last week.
Asked whether his push to make Canada the 51st state is a "real thing" during a taped interview with Fox News' “Special Report” that aired ahead of the Super Bowl, Trump said, "Yeah, it is."
"I think Canada would be much better off being a 51st state, because we lose $200 billion a year with Canada. And I'm not going to let that happen. It's too much. Why are we paying $200 billion a year essentially in subsidy to Canada? Now, if they're a 51st state, I don't mind doing it," he added.
https://www.nbcnews.com/news/amp/rcna191...
President Donald Trump reiterated his vow to “take back” the Panama Canal on Sunday, warning of “powerful” US action in an escalating diplomatic dispute with the Central American country over China’s presence around the vital waterway.
“China is running the Panama Canal that was not given to China, that was given to Panama foolishly, but they violated the agreement, and we’re going to take it back, or something very powerful is going to happen,” Trump told reporters.
Hours earlier, the diplomatic stir caused by Trump’s repeated and publicly stated desire for the US to retake control of the canal had appeared to ease after Secretary of State Marco Rubio, making his first overseas trip as the top US diplomat, met with Panama’s President Raúl Mulino.
Don’t believe your lying eyes, right Luciom?
for Panama I answered already, it's about a treaty they can walk back from (not an act of war if they do).
lol , really lol, at you taking those phrases about Denmark and Canada as "threatening war".
this kind of attitude is what makes normies feel like you people are utterly insufferable
for Panama I answered already, it's about a treaty they can walk back from (not an act of war if they do).
lol , really lol, at you taking those phrases about Denmark and Canada as "threatening war".
this kind of attitude is what makes normies feel like you people are utterly insufferable
Not normie Canadians or people from Greenland or people from Panama.
Besides, you have no idea what normies from the US actually think. You are just circumscribing a particularly rabidly conservative portion of Americans as “normies” and excluding the normie libs arbitrarily as being anathema to such a group. It’s a rhetorical flourish, there’s no substance to that charge.
Hold up, did that fucking clownass just imply he’s a ‘normy’?
Not normie Canadians or people from Greenland or people from Panama.
Besides, you have no idea what normies from the US actually think. You are just circumscribing a particularly rabidly conservative portion of Americans as “normies” and excluding the normie libs arbitrarily as being anathema to such a group. It’s a rhetorical flourish, there’s no substance to that charge.
Hm no , I am circumscribing it to the people who were uncertain whether to vote Harris or Trump till the end.
I do have a very good idea about what they thought on November 2025 because I studied polls about them as nauseam to understand the election results.
And they truly deeply hate liberal snobbery a lot.
Anyway given than neither Denmark nor Canada went to their equivalent of high DEFCON, recalled ambassadors, and started putting troops on the ready, there was no actual threatening of any war.
But go on and keep insisting that the clownish trump remarks were actual threats of war even if the purported targets disregarded them.
Hm no , I am circumscribing it to the people who were uncertain whether to vote Harris or Trump till the end.
I do have a very good idea about what they thought on November 2025 because I studied polls about them as nauseam to understand the election results.
And they truly deeply hate liberal snobbery a lot.
Anyway given than neither Denmark nor Canada went to their equivalent of high DEFCON, recalled ambassadors, and started putting troops on the ready, there was no actual threatening of any war.
lol really? it’s only a threat of war if countries go into high defcon? I’d love to see you sustain that definition throughout all examples of political brinksmanship throughout history. I’m sure that’s not just an ad hoc standard designed to exclude the very threats that are at issue, much as your standard of normie is. “yeah man a normie is just the people who are undecided between Trump and Harris. and a threat of war is just when countries respond to the threat such that they enter into high levels of security publicly for all to see”
I don't know how much the American Imperialism period of 1890-1910 is taught in schools anywhere, but it is a fascinating time period which both fans and opponents of the current's administration's idea of annexing territory would do well to learn.
Basically, the justification used by the American government at the time was rooted in bringing freedom to their conquests and to benefit their own industry. I realize as I write this, that plenty of socialists froth at the mouths to explain how little has changed. Which a couple of months ago might have been a slightly more debatable analysis, but today it is harder to discount.
Anyways, this American imperialism was often clumsily carried out, both politically and diplomatically. Clumsily does not sufficiently describe the military aspect of this US policy, the word "catastrophic" would be more apt. A lot of American soldiers and sailors died during the period and later as a result of residual conflict and war. We probably also should not forget to mention the McKinley administration's "benevolent assimilation" phase, aka. concentration camps used to kill people seen as problematic for American colonial rule.
Anyways, it is a good lesson in how imperialism in the hands of the very inept looks like. Not that I know if imperialism has ever been in the hands of the truly competent, but you know... these things are relative.
On the other hand, you did annex Hawaii, which I have heard is nice.
Just finished watching this actually. I don't like Trump but Oliver is a bit disingenuous and it's not the first time either. He mentions migrant families being persecuted or terrorised by ICE, neglecting to mention that it's illegal migrants. Words and tone have meaning and there's a strong implication that innocent terrified vulnerable migrants are being terrorised by jack booted thugs, simply because they're migrants. This isn't true. They're illegal. Yes there's a human aspect here, especially regarding US born children and one can feel empathy here, but bottom line, there's also a strong context here- they're illegal. Legal migrants have nothing to fear here.
Just finished watching this actually. I don't like Trump but Oliver is a bit disingenuous and it's not the first time either. He mentions migrant families being persecuted or terrorised by ICE, neglecting to mention that it's illegal migrants. Words and tone have meaning and there's a strong implication that innocent terrified vulnerable migrants are being terrorised by jack booted thugs, simply because they're migrants. This isn't true. They're illegal. Yes there's a human aspect here, especial
There might be some case of people legally in the USA caught up in the big net and suffering through the ordeal, that's expected given the numbers of deportations that will happen.
But as usual those cases cannot be used to deny the necessity of applying the law, and ofc that only happens because too many illegals immigrants were allowed to enter before. If there were few around, it would be far harder for innocent people to get caught up because the net wouldn't be as big
There might be some case of people legally in the USA caught up in the big net and suffering through the ordeal, that's expected given the numbers of deportations that will happen.
Yeah, nbd. Just some worthwhile casualties for the better good. You know, like Americans born in the US of Japanese descent having their property stolen from them and placed in concentration camps in the US in the 1940's. No big deal. I'm sure they were happy to do this as a service for their country.
