President Trump & the USA

[leicsmac]

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-45525325

 

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-45527465

 

Draining the swamp.

[Carl the Llama]

Not to be callous but I struggle to care about what a 50-something year old did once as a drunken frat boy back in the 80s... If it was the first in a series of incidents of attempted rape or worse it would be another story but if that's the only dirt they have on him then that's the sort of weak sauce press release that will guarantee him more popularity among the anti msm/dem crowd.

[leicsmac]

4 minutes ago, Carl the Llama said:

Not to be callous but I struggle to care about what a 50-something year old did once as a drunken frat boy back in the 80s... If it was the first in a series of incidents of attempted rape or worse it would be another story but if that's the only dirt they have on him then that's the sort of weak sauce press release that will guarantee him more popularity among the anti msm/dem crowd.

There's something in that, but that being said things are so polarised that he could have 10x as much dirt on him and those backing Trump still wouldn't care.

 

I guess it's alright that this info is all out in the open though, for what good it does.

[Koke]

Two years ago, they got great mileage out of talking about how Hillary was up to her neck in Wall Street (which she undoubtly was) but the corruption and authoritarian of Trump is remarkable

 

Trump supporters amaze me with their cult like mentality.

[leicsmac]

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-45546954

 

Will Kavanaugh get through?

[leicsmac]

Related to above:

 

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-45568450

 

Of course she has.

[Finnegan]

4 hours ago, leicsmac said:

Related to above:

 

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-45568450

 

Of course she has.

 

I got halfway through a rant and I just can't be bothered. 

 

**** people. I'm off to live in a cottage in Finnmark and never go out. 

[leicsmac]

3 hours ago, Finnegan said:

 

I got halfway through a rant and I just can't be bothered. 

 

**** people. I'm off to live in a cottage in Finnmark and never go out. 

But, but, but...women can talk about such things in the developed world without any fear because it's..well, developed, right? I mean, we've got all that equality, right?

 

Right?

 

(In the words of Michael DeSanta, sarcasm is all I've fvcking got.)

[Jattdogg]

17 hours ago, Finnegan said:

 

I got halfway through a rant and I just can't be bothered. 

 

**** people. I'm off to live in a cottage in Finnmark and never go out. 

Is that like a primark ripoff?

[leicsmac]

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-45606746

 

Well, this isn't going to make things any easier is it?

[leicsmac]

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-45632210

 

The West Wing has nothing on this.

[ozleicester]

sigh... reading this...

 

[MC Prussian]

What I find interesting - and not many people are talking about this at the moment nor seem to be aware of it - is an attempt at undermining the president by subversive measures within the government itself.

Several Federal employees have been exposed for using their resources to work against Trump:

You know - you can dislike people like Trump, Cruz or Nielsen - but this is going a step too far, this is calling for mobs to seek out who doesn't share your viewpoint, invade their privacy, then try to shut them down by imposing one's own ideology.

 

What next, US of A?

[leicsmac]

20 minutes ago, MC Prussian said:

What I find interesting - and not many people are talking about this at the moment nor seem to be aware of it - is an attempt at undermining the president by subversive measures within the government itself.

Several Federal employees have been exposed for using their resources to work against Trump:

You know - you can dislike people like Trump, Cruz or Nielsen - but this is going a step too far, this is calling for mobs to seek out who doesn't share your viewpoint, invade their privacy, then try to shut them down by imposing one's own ideology.

 

What next, US of A?

Interesting - though I view anything from Project Veritas with a pinch of salt the same way anyone from PV would view, say, a Salon or TellMAMA investigation with similar suspicion; they do have their own axe to grind.

 

Apparently, the lady involved has been sacked now, and it raises a question - if you are a government worker and you believe that your government is acting in a way that doesn't benefit the country as a whole, what can you do? What are you allowed to do? Work from within, whistleblow? Or can you do nothing but simply resign and wash your hands of the whole thing? Is absolute loyalty no matter what a prerequisite for the job?

 

I'm honestly not sure.

 

 

[MC Prussian]

2 minutes ago, leicsmac said:

Interesting - though I view anything from Project Veritas with a pinch of salt the same way anyone from PV would view, say, a Salon or TellMAMA investigation with similar suspicion; they do have their own axe to grind.

 

Apparently, the lady involved has been sacked now, and it raises a question - if you are a government worker and you believe that your government is acting in a way that doesn't benefit the country as a whole, what can you do? What are you allowed to do? Work from within, whistleblow? Or can you do nothing but simply resign and wash your hands of the whole thing? Is absolute loyalty no matter what a prerequisite for the job?

 

I'm honestly not sure.

 

 

In order to gain a more unbiased view, I agree that it is utterly important not to rely on one news source only these days.

Btw, if you think that I'm a fan of Project Veritas - I just discovered the site today.

 

The point is that it's

a) highly problematic, if not illegal, to use government resources (hardware, software, time) to work against the hand that feeds you - there's contracts and laws in place. Subversive measures shouldn't be tolerated, it is or borders on treason. If I was working in a job where I'm actively organizing resistance against my boss or the company, then I can't cry wolf once I'm exposed.

b) highly problematic that mainstream American media, such as CNN, MSNBC and a few others, try to push their agenda by spreading lies about the Trump administration - such as CNN's stance on the Russia connection (which some network figures claimed were only done to increase ratings - but it's not as if that wasn't generally known beforehand, they just confirmed it).

 

I'd like to emphasize that these views apply to both main US political parties and as a US citizen, I'd want to hold the people that are paid by taxpayers' money to the highest (moral) standard possible.

 

I know, a rather laughable idea.

[leicsmac]

4 minutes ago, MC Prussian said:

In order to gain a more unbiased view, I agree that it is utterly important not to rely on one news source only these days.

Btw, if you think that I'm a fan of Project Veritas - I just discovered the site today.

 

The point is that it's

a) highly problematic, if not illegal, to use government resources (hardware, software, time) to work against the hand that feeds you - there's contracts and laws in place. Subversive measures shouldn't be tolerated, it is or borders on treason. If I was working in a job where I'm actively organizing resistance against my boss or the company, then I can't cry wolf once I'm exposed.

b) highly problematic that mainstream American media, such as CNN, MSNBC and a few others, try to push their agenda by spreading lies about the Trump administration - such as CNN's stance on the Russia connection (which some network figures claimed were only done to increase ratings - but it's not as if that wasn't generally known beforehand, they just confirmed it).

 

I'd like to emphasize that these views apply to both main US political parties and as a US citizen, I'd want to hold the people that are paid by taxpayers' money to the highest (moral) standard possible.

 

I know, a rather laughable idea.

Totally agree wrt to many sources, you can't rely on just one.

 

a.) That's the question I was asking, really - if you truly, honestly believe that the body you're working for (whether government or private) is working against the interest of the people it serves, then what exactly can you do? What should you do? I'm honestly unsure. I'd definitely want to hold people working for the government to the highest standard possible too but I am very uneasy with the idea of not having much recourse to take action against an employer of any type who is acting badly.

 

b.) American media as a whole has a bias issue - there's a problem with lies everywhere, and you say CNN, MSNBC et al, I say Fox News, which covers about as much ground as all of them combined in terms of reach.

[Guest MattP]

46 minutes ago, MC Prussian said:

What I find interesting - and not many people are talking about this at the moment nor seem to be aware of it - is an attempt at undermining the president by subversive measures within the government itself.

Several Federal employees have been exposed for using their resources to work against Trump:

You know - you can dislike people like Trump, Cruz or Nielsen - but this is going a step too far, this is calling for mobs to seek out who doesn't share your viewpoint, invade their privacy, then try to shut them down by imposing one's own ideology.

What next, US of A?

It's terrible to be be quite frank, whatever one thinks of Trump he was democratically elected under the system and to have people behaving in the way they are is unacceptable, whoever wrote the New York Times articles should be completely ashamed and should face some sort of legal sanction.

There were people on here were accusing him of paranoia a couple of years when he said people inside the Whitehouse were working against him, he was completely right.

[MC Prussian]

2 hours ago, leicsmac said:

Totally agree wrt to many sources, you can't rely on just one.

 

a.) That's the question I was asking, really - if you truly, honestly believe that the body you're working for (whether government or private) is working against the interest of the people it serves, then what exactly can you do? What should you do? I'm honestly unsure. I'd definitely want to hold people working for the government to the highest standard possible too but I am very uneasy with the idea of not having much recourse to take action against an employer of any type who is acting badly.

 

b.) American media as a whole has a bias issue - there's a problem with lies everywhere, and you say CNN, MSNBC et al, I say Fox News, which covers about as much ground as all of them combined in terms of reach.

That's easy - don't behave in illegal ways. Or quit your job. Again, you're somewhat implying that these people working against the government are working in the interest of the people it serves. I'd argue they're doing it for their "group" and for their own interests. And that their actions are despicable - no organization should be proud if they're engaged in a witch hunt or even just chasing after shadows or straw men.

 

Personally, I haven't heard of Republican or "right-wing" mobs hunting down "lefties" in the US, chasing after them in restaurants whilst they're eating. Or using government databases in order to find out where these people live in order to protest in front of their lawn. But I'm open for suggestions.

 

The Socialist Democrats of America seem like a very subversive and cunning organization and I'd say what we're seeing here is just the tip of the iceberg.

Edited 25 September 2018 by MC Prussian

[leicsmac]

12 minutes ago, MC Prussian said:

That's easy - don't behave in illegal ways. Or quit your job. Again, you're somewhat implying that these people working against the government are working in the interest of the people it serves. I'd argue their doing it for their "group" and for their own interests. And that their actions are despicable - no organization should be proud if they're engaged in a witch hunt or even just chasing after shadows or straw men.

 

Personally, I haven't heard of Republican or "right-wing" mobs hunting down "lefties" in the US, chasing after them in restaurants whilst they're eating. Or using government databases in order to find out where these people live in order to protest in front of their lawn. But I'm open for suggestions.

 

The Socialist Democrats of America seem like a very subversive and cunning organization and I'd say what we're seeing here is just the tip of the iceberg.

I'm implying that these people believe that they are working in the interest of the people they serve, nothing more.

 

I certainly think that working subversively (loaded word that) in this way isn't the best way to voice a grievance - not when there's the possibility of doing some kind of whistleblowing or other way of voicing grievances. I certainly think that some kind of grievance procedure should be in place rather than straight "you're working for me, you're loyal", though - they exist for a reason.

 

WRT the second paragraph, you're right - right-wing actors just drive cars into left-wing protestors like in Charlottesville, stab those who get in their way to death like in Portland, or doxx them without having to use government databases like 8chan do on a regular basis.

 

(Sorry if that's a bit catty there, but you did say that the views apply to both sides.)

[MC Prussian]

3 minutes ago, leicsmac said:

I'm implying that these people believe that they are working in the interest of the people they serve, nothing more.

 

I certainly think that working subversively (loaded word that) in this way isn't the best way to voice a grievance - not when there's the possibility of doing some kind of whistleblowing or other way of voicing grievances. I certainly think that some kind of grievance procedure should be in place rather than straight "you're working for me, you're loyal", though - they exist for a reason.

 

WRT the second paragraph, you're right - right-wing actors just drive cars into left-wing protestors like in Charlottesville, stab those who get in their way to death like in Portland, or doxx them without having to use government databases like 8chan do on a regular basis.

 

(Sorry if that's a bit catty there, but you did say that the views apply to both sides.)

At the heart of the Portland knife attack, you'll find that the criminal in question was mentally unstable.

 

Fields ploughing his car into the crowd in Charlottesville was a cowardly act by a nazi-loving ****, but the act of an individual still. This wasn't planned on a greater scale, this was the work of a highly disturbed individual.

 

What I'm seeing here with Hrabar and her cronies is much more grave and could have much more distinct and fatal consequences if it is allowed to continue - this is an organized attempt at undermining (and potentially overthrowing) a president that was democratically elected (based on the democratic process in the US elections), and that by force and by abusing government resources. Yes, Trump lost the Popular Vote, but he was still legally elected.

 

This isn't a conspiracy theory, it is a conspiracy - as seen in the videos of the people involved.

[leicsmac]

1 minute ago, MC Prussian said:

At the heart of the Portland knife attack, you'll find that the criminal in question was mentally unstable.

 

Fields ploughing his car into the crowd in Charlottesville was a cowardly act by a nazi-loving ****, but the act of an individual still. This wasn't planned on a greater scale, this was the work of a highly disturbed individual.

 

What I'm seeing here with Hrabar and her cronies is much more grave and could have much more distinct and fatal consequences if it is allowed to continue - this is an organized attempt at undermining (and potentially overthrowing) a president that was democratically elected (based on the democratic process in the US elections), and that by force and by abusing government resources. Yes, Trump lost the Popular Vote, but he was still legally elected.

 

This isn't a conspiracy theory, it is a conspiracy - as seen in the videos of the people involved.

Like I said, I don't necessarily agree with what she and her cronies are doing - there are channels for such complaints, use them.

 

However, I have to ask, based on your first two paragraphs, I must ask: do you not believe that there is an alt-right organisation in the US seeking to intimidate (and in some cases commit flat-out violence against) those who oppose Trump's presidency? And that this is in fact an organised, united effort as opposed to a disparate group of suddenly mentally unwell right-wingers?

[MC Prussian]

2 hours ago, leicsmac said:

Like I said, I don't necessarily agree with what she and her cronies are doing - there are channels for such complaints, use them.

 

However, I have to ask, based on your first two paragraphs, I must ask: do you not believe that there is an alt-right organisation in the US seeking to intimidate (and in some cases commit flat-out violence against) those who oppose Trump's presidency? And that this is in fact an organised, united effort as opposed to a disparate group of suddenly mentally unwell right-wingers?

I can't tell.

The incidents that you have named have something in common: Fvcked up individuals acting on their own behalf. Neither Portland nor Charlottesville were the product of a bigger conspiracy or the result of a (right-wing) organization.

 

From what I can gather, the Left in the US (if that actually exists, because the Dems certainly aren't "Lefties" in the European sense, just more on the left than the Republicans) has the bigger problems with SJWs, Antifa and a rather prevalent and flat-out dangerous Marxist-Leninist train of thought on US campuses.

There seem to be more groups operating in the shadows of the Democrats than there are on the other side. But that's just me.

 

Can you name some far-right US organizations that use group thinking, intimidations, shutting down, scare and subversive tactics as much as the SDoA and Antifa are doing at present?

I mean, if they were, I'm sure CNN and MSNBC and the likes would be all over them.

[leicsmac]

17 minutes ago, MC Prussian said:

I can't tell.

The incidents that you have named have something in common: Fvcked up individuals acting on their own behalf. Neither Portland nor Charlottesville were the product of a bigger conspiracy or the result of a (right-wing) organization.

 

From what I can gather, the Left in the US (if that actually exists, because the Dems certainly aren't "Lefties" in the European sense, just more on the left than the Republicans) has the bigger problems with SJWs, Antifa and a rather prevalent and flat-out dangerous Marxist-Leninist train of thought on US campuses.

There seem to be more groups operating in the shadows of the Democrats than there are on the other side. But that's just me.

 

Can you name some far-right US organizations that use group thinking, intimidations, shutting down, scare and subversive tactics as much as the SDoA and Antifa are doing at present?

I mean, if they were, I'm sure CNN and MSNBC and the likes would be all over them.

1

Safe to say we disagree entirely on the bolded part. I'm not having that left-wing organisations causing trouble in the US are part of some conspiracy while at the same time the right-wing actions are merely "fvcked-up individuals acting on their own behalf". Not when their structures and the ways they act are often similar. Either they're both organised, or neither are.

 

The alt-right (who have a figurehead in Spencer but rather decentralised and cellular in the way that organisations on the other side are too) use exactly planned group-thinking, intimidation and scare tactics that have been emboldened by the election of "their man" in order to maintain their share of power. CNN and MSNBC have been all over them - I'm sure you've seen the amount of coverage they get.

 

Honestly, I don't get how someone can dismiss the alt-right as an organised political player right now while at the same time thinking Antifa et al are such too.

 

(Definitely agree there isn't much of a "Left" in the US, though.)

Edited 25 September 2018 by leicsmac

[MC Prussian]

39 minutes ago, leicsmac said:

Safe to say we disagree entirely on the bolded part. I'm not having that left-wing organisations causing trouble in the US are part of some conspiracy while at the same time the right-wing actions are merely "fvcked-up individuals acting on their own behalf". Not when their structures and the ways they act are often similar. Either they're both organised, or neither are.

 

The alt-right (who have a figurehead in Spencer but rather decentralised and cellular in the way that organisations on the other side are too) use exactly planned group-thinking, intimidation and scare tactics that have been emboldened by the election of "their man" in order to maintain their share of power. CNN and MSNBC have been all over them - I'm sure you've seen the amount of coverage they get.

 

Honestly, I don't get how someone can dismiss the alt-right as an organised political player right now while at the same time thinking Antifa et al are such too.

 

(Definitely agree there isn't much of a "Left" in the US, though.)

That's not what I was saying.

I cited the example of members of the SDoA being part of a conspiracy against Trump and his administration, abusing their positions as government employees (which has been proven), I didn't stretch that accusation to other groups that I mentioned.

I also said that the Portland knife killer was a very troubled individual, mentally unstable and acting on his own behalf. An act of individual madness, just as much as Fields was acting on his own behalf when he drove his car into the crowd in Charlottesville.

You brought up these two examples, so I examined them and based on the facts as we know them, neither JJ Christian nor Fields had any support from other people or groups when they committed their respective act of violence.

You're drawing the wrong conclusions and fabricate your argument based on a false assumption, which is rather futile to the discussion.

 

And yes - there can be fvcked up individuals acting on their own behalf AND group thinking and lethal self-justice on the left of the political spectrum in the US at the same time. One doesn't exclude the other.

 

As far as the "Alt-Right" are concerned, please make the effort and cite more factual examples that prove its actual existence instead of relying on CNN and MSNBC, two networks with their own bias and networks that have lied about facts in the past (as you confirmed in a previous post). "Alt-right" is a newly-constructed, modernist label, a very loose term and usually deployed to describe a very heterogenous and vague assembly of many groups and individuals, mainly based on the notion that they are on the right from the perspective of the people using that term - or in short, anyone who disagrees with ones Marxist, socialist, gender equality (of outcome), collectivist, SJW philosophy.

 

Btw, on the subject of "Alt-Right", I found you this:

https://www.spiked-online.com/2018/09/20/the-stupidity-of-modern-anti-racism/

 

 

 

 

 

 

Edited 25 September 2018 by MC Prussian

[leicsmac]

9 minutes ago, MC Prussian said:

That's not what I was saying.

I cited the example of members of the SDoA being part of a conspiracy against Trump and his administration, abusing their positions as government employees (which has been proven), I didn't stretch that accusation to other groups that I mentioned.

I also said that the Portland knife killer was a very troubled individual, mentally unstable and acting on his own behalf. An act of individual madness, just as much as Fields was acting on his own behalf when he drove his car into the crowd in Charlottesville.

You brought up these two examples, so I examined them and based on the facts as we know them, neither JJ Christian nor Fields had any support from other people or groups when they committed their respective act of violence.

You're drawing the wrong conclusions and fabricate your argument based on a false assumption, which is rather futile to the discussion.

 

 

1

Sorry, but again we disagree, I don't think I'm drawing the wrong conclusions at all - both Christian and Fields were, in my own opinion, part of an alt-right network that seeks to destroy and devalue its enemy using the same tactics you accuse organisations on the Left of doing. The evidence linking them to the alt-right and linking most left-wing actors to a single unified organisation like BLM or Antifa is about of equal strength. I believe that my own assumption in these matters has at least equal merit as yours.

 

If Fields and Christian aren't enough, where would you think Spencer and his followers play into all of this?

 

14 minutes ago, MC Prussian said:

And yes - there can be fvcked up individuals acting on their own behalf AND group thinking and lethal self-justice on the left of the political spectrum in the US at the same time. One doesn't exclude the other

1

Absolutely there can be - there just isn't in this case, IMO, and it's going to take a serious, serious amount of argument to convince me otherwise after what I have seen through various sources over the last year and a half and having spent time in the US.

 

15 minutes ago, MC Prussian said:

As far as the "Alt-Right" are concerned, please make the effort and cite more factual examples that prove its actual existence instead of relying on CNN and MSNBC, two networks with their own bias and networks that have lied about facts in the past (as you confirmed in a previous post). "Alt-right" is a newly-constructed, modernist label, a very loose term and usually deployed to describe a very heterogenous and vague assembly of many groups and individuals, mainly based on the notion that they are on the right from the perspective of the people using that term - or in short, anyone who disagrees with ones Marxist, socialist, gender equality (of outcome), collectivist, SJW philosophy.

 

Btw, on the subject of "Alt-Right", I found you this:

https://www.spiked-online.com/2018/09/20/the-stupidity-of-modern-anti-racism/

 

1

If the quality of source is an issue, I would be happy to run the spectrum for you (though I think the alt-right existing is a matter of public record at this point):

 

https://www.bbc.com/news/blogs-trending-43131290

 

https://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2017/08/16/harvard-mit-study-breitbart-is-not-alt-right/

 

https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2018/aug/9/unite-right-rally-fewer-white-supremacists-weapons/

 

So, the Beeb (political bias depending on what your own stance is really), Breitbart (very much to the right) and the WT (somewhat to the right) all believe that it exists and regularly attribute various works and acts to it, not to mention other media outlets that could also quote. (Though Breitbart were more focused on making sure they weren't labelled alt-right themselves, obvs.)

 

Thanks for the article - I can see where the writer is coming from wrt accusing lots of people of alt-right leanings as it makes them appear stronger than they might be, but all the same I'd rather such groups be brought out into the light anyway.