North Korea and US politics

[mack341]

Would think he'd have an opinion if Trump's asking for help from Ukraine is a crime or not. I'd like to hear your opinion about it too!

Well he asked australia's pm for help too, but that doesn't seem to be a problem. I think it comes down to the quid pro quo, what that entails. stealing a penny chew is a crime but to fire a president I'd expect it to be because he's damaged the country in some major way. At the end of the day the voter can stick two fingers up to trump and vote in Biden if they so wish, the people have that ability, it should be their decision after all they're adults.

 

[vorcirion]

Well he asked australia's pm for help too, but that doesn't seem to be a problem. I think it comes down to the quid pro quo, what that entails. stealing a penny chew is a crime but to fire a president I'd expect it to be because he's damaged the country in some major way. At the end of the day the voter can stick two fingers up to trump and vote in Biden if they so wish, the people have that ability, it should be their decision after all they're adults.

Okay so it's fine if democratic candidates ask help from China to investigate if Trump and Epstein had some pedoparties together.
They could even promise China to get a better trade deal if they announced such investigation.
Maybe that's why Trump's justice department got rid of Epstein to erase the evidence.

 

[slotplayer]

I think he has been critical of trump's tweeting habits, I may have imagined that but I'm sure he said he'd prefer it if trump didn't tweet daily etc..

When I've got time and suitable examples, I'll paste some bias writing up and highlight how they ladle on their emphasis, and ignore counter points.

Years ago, in the 80's and 90's there was a distance between british tv news programmes and the politics they were covering, now there is much less distance to the point of becoming cheerleaders for particular viewpoints/policies, it's been a gradual change but is extremely noticeable now. The bbc is meant to be impartial, but it's a joke on matters like trump and brexit, anything that doesn't conform to their elite liberal agenda basically is trashed as often as possible.

When I read v's post even before I scrolled down to see yours I said to myself the fox people don't like the tweeting. Then I saw you post.

It's not just Tucker, a lot of the anchors say it, guests to.

I've watched a few BBC videos over the last couple of years, I think I've seen 2 that I thought to be fair reporting but the majority support the liberal agenda.

I do have a bone to pick with imo the worst of all media, The Guardian. They always seems to portrait the US in some sort of bad light. Even if the story was not about something going on or with the US there would be a link in the middle of the article to some unrelated anti-Trump/Anti-US article. The link seemed out of place.

However, all the Guardian US "bad light" spin is design to keep its followers indoctrinated into buying into the liberal progressive agenda.

If you want to see bias, you tube search "Guardian Ilan Omar".

 

[mack341]

When I read v's post even before I scrolled down to see yours I said to myself the fox people don't like the tweeting. Then I saw you post.

It's not just Tucker, a lot of the anchors say it, guests to.

I've watched a few BBC videos over the last couple of years, I think I've seen 2 that I thought to be fair reporting but the majority support the liberal agenda.

I do have a bone to pick with imo the worst of all media, The Guardian. They always seems to portrait the US in some sort of bad light. Even if the story was not about something going on or with the US there would be a link in the middle of the article to some unrelated anti-Trump/Anti-US article. The link seemed out of place.

However, all the Guardian US "bad light" spin is design to keep its followers indoctrinated into buying into the liberal progressive agenda.

If you want to see bias, you tube search "Guardian Ilan Omar".

If you have the time or inclination Slot read some of the coverage of the trump impeachment inquiry on the bbc website, there are several articles and even a kind of live stream update of posts, there bigging up something that mainly has it's origins in partisan, party politics, only one year ahead of a presidential election but if you went by the bbc's import on it you'd think it was another watergate:

You do not have permission to view link Log in or register now.

 

[mack341]

Here's a very small excerpt from the bbc website coverage, there's pages and reams of similar stuff which affords trump very little benefit of doubt, kind of guilty until he can prove himself innocent.

Regarding the bold parts, we don't know all of biden's thinking/motivation, the allegations have been discredited by whom? where's the mueller type investigation and acquittal, the phone call I read did not equate to 'pressing', mentioning or asking is more accurate, that might seem a litle thing but along with the other emphasises and inferences it builds up a 'over dramatic' picture of events...'there's an out of control criminal in the whitehouse' is the message they're trying to convey

"Mr Trump has pointed to a boast Mr Biden made in 2018 about how as vice-president he had threatened to withhold a billion dollars in aid from Ukraine unless the prosecutor was fired.

But motivation is key here. Mr Biden wanted him removed precisely because he was failing to crack down on corruption. And the vice-president was not acting alone, but rather as the focal point of a wider anti-corruption drive in Ukraine backed by the US government, European allies and the International Monetary Fund.

Mr Trump pressing a foreign leader to investigate the discredited allegations against Mr Biden is significant. This is because Mr Biden is the current favourite to win the Democratic nomination and, if chosen, he would be the man facing off against Mr Trump for the presidency in November 2020.

As Mr Biden is his biggest rival for the presidency, it opens Mr Trump up to claims he was working with a foreign power to influence the election. This - crucially - is against the law."

[It is very marginal if anything, and if bernie drops out warren will probably get his votes, thus doubling her poll ratings, at this stage 'working' is a bit of a stretch, we'd need to see more evidence]

They could've written this in more neutral, less dramatising ways, but their partisan bias prevents them and their shared goal
with liberals in the US to have trump removed from office because they feel this is the only way of achieving that, whether it further divides people as a consequence they're not bothered, it's worth a shot to them.

 

[trancemonkey]

Here's a very small excerpt from the bbc website coverage, there's pages and reams of similar stuff which affords trump very little benefit of doubt, kind of guilty until he can prove himself innocent.

Regarding the bold parts, we don't know all of biden's thinking/motivation, the allegations have been discredited by whom? where's the mueller type investigation and acquittal, the phone call I read did not equate to 'pressing', mentioning or asking is more accurate, that might seem a litle thing but along with the other emphasises and inferences it builds up a 'over dramatic' picture of events...'there's an out of control criminal in the whitehouse' is the message they're trying to convey

"Mr Trump has pointed to a boast Mr Biden made in 2018 about how as vice-president he had threatened to withhold a billion dollars in aid from Ukraine unless the prosecutor was fired.

But motivation is key here. Mr Biden wanted him removed precisely because he was failing to crack down on corruption. And the vice-president was not acting alone, but rather as the focal point of a wider anti-corruption drive in Ukraine backed by the US government, European allies and the International Monetary Fund.

Mr Trump pressing a foreign leader to investigate the discredited allegations against Mr Biden is significant. This is because Mr Biden is the current favourite to win the Democratic nomination and, if chosen, he would be the man facing off against Mr Trump for the presidency in November 2020.

As Mr Biden is his biggest rival for the presidency, it opens Mr Trump up to claims he was working with a foreign power to influence the election. This - crucially - is against the law."

[It is very marginal if anything, and if bernie drops out warren will probably get his votes, thus doubling her poll ratings, at this stage 'working' is a bit of a stretch, we'd need to see more evidence]

They could've written this in more neutral, less dramatising ways, but their partisan bias prevents them and their shared goal
with liberals in the US to have trump removed from office because they feel this is the only way of achieving that, whether it further divides people as a consequence they're not bothered, it's worth a shot to them.

I'm sorry, i don't see bias there at all. What am I missing?

 

[slotplayer]

there's an out of control criminal in the whitehouse' is the message they're trying to convey

This is why occasionally I ask forum members where they get their news. I can watch CNN and MSNBC and get the same hysteria. This is one of the reasons why Fox has the most viewers.

One of the polls I saw revealed that the voters see this latest witch hunt as more political than anything else.

 

[slotplayer]

I'm sorry, i don't see bias there at all. What am I missing?

The bias is what is emphasized and what is not.

 

[trancemonkey]

there's an out of control criminal in the whitehouse' is the message they're trying to convey

This is why occasionally I ask forum members where they get their news. I can watch CNN and MSNBC and get the same hysteria. This is one of the reasons why Fox has the most viewers.

One of the polls I saw revealed that the voters see this latest witch hunt as more political than anything else.

And yet Fox is exactly the same, but pro-trump. They are completely biased.

If you are pro-trump, then your idea of bias is entirely different to someone who is anti-trump. And you judge all information based on your own preconceptions or predisposition. It is human nature, but i don't see bias in the BBC coverage.

And there is an out of control liar in the White House. A president who intimidated witnesses, starts trade wars that are damaging the US economy, and lies almost every day.

And that is factual. And without bias.

 

[trancemonkey]

The bias is what is emphasized and what is not.

I doubt the BBC made the bits you made bold, bold. If so, please link to the original article.

 

[vorcirion]

The bias is what is emphasized and what is not.

Because maybe it's more important what the president of the USA (the most powerful person in the world) has actually done. Instead of what Hunter Biden may have done. One of them has the power to really affect what happens in the world. But for you two (slotplayer, mack) it seems to be more important what Hunter Biden does.
If there's some kind of suspicion of criminality then I'm sure FBI/CIA can handle it instead of Trump using the whole US government to pressure other countries to investigate whatever his conspiratorial mind comes up with. Or whatever might help him politically.

 

[mack341]

I doubt the BBC made the bits you made bold, bold. If so, please link to the original article.

The bold was applied by me to highlight where the text isn't neutral, it's subtle when you look at each example separately but the overall impression when read as a whole is 'anti trump', and it's none of the bbc's business to take sides in an issue which is largely being driven by party politics in the US.

They take the same approach to brexit, highlighting and concentrating on negative points of view and the pro-remain viewpoint.

If you surveyed all the journalists at the bbc, and they answered honestly, the majority probably detest trump and brexit, and with the nature of people being more politicised through social media and the pc agenda promoted by the liberal media, it would be surprising if their feelings and opinions weren't reflected in their writing, but it's up to editors to prune as much bias out as possible.

edit: the original articles can be found at

You do not have permission to view link Log in or register now.

 

[slotplayer]

And yet Fox is exactly the same, but pro-trump. They are completely biased.

If you are pro-trump, then your idea of bias is entirely different to someone who is anti-trump. And you judge all information based on your own preconceptions or predisposition. It is human nature, but i don't see bias in the BBC coverage.

And there is an out of control liar in the White House. A president who intimidated witnesses, starts trade wars that are damaging the US economy, and lies almost every day.

And that is factual. And without bias.

No, because the Fox Trump coverage is almost even.

You do not have permission to view link Log in or register now.

You do not have permission to view link Log in or register now.

 

[slotplayer]

Because maybe it's more important what the president of the USA (the most powerful person in the world) has actually done. Instead of what Hunter Biden may have done. One of them has the power to really affect what happens in the world. But for you two (slotplayer, mack) it seems to be more important what Hunter Biden does.
If there's some kind of suspicion of criminality then I'm sure FBI/CIA can handle it instead of Trump using the whole US government to pressure other countries to investigate whatever his conspiratorial mind comes up with. Or whatever might help him politically.

Most likely they're both guilty of something.

 

[trancemonkey]

No, because the Fox Trump coverage is almost even.

View attachment 114893

You do not have permission to view link Log in or register now.

View attachment 114894

You do not have permission to view link Log in or register now.

But those prove nothing...

If trump is doing consistently stupid stuff, then he deserves more negative press. The fact FOX is 50/50 doesn't prove they aren't biased.

 

[vorcirion]

No, because the Fox Trump coverage is almost even.

View attachment 114893

You do not have permission to view link Log in or register now.

View attachment 114894

You do not have permission to view link Log in or register now.

It shouldn't be even since Trump doesn't do anything for americans. All he does is attacking people and going just crazy. He's completely nuts.

 

[vorcirion]

Most likely they're both guilty of something.

Okay let's say both are guilty. One criminal who has no power...one criminal who has the most power in the world. Which one is more dangerous to people or to the USA or to the world? There's just no comparison between those two and that's why you should focus on what Trump does.

 

[slotplayer]

McCain / Obama Coverage

You do not have permission to view link Log in or register now.

 

[slotplayer]

It shouldn't be even since Trump doesn't do anything for americans. All he does is attacking people and going just crazy. He's completely nuts.

How would you know what positive things he's done because the left wing media does not cover it.
I'm not going to provide a list but if you watch Fox you'll hear some of the good things.

 

[slotplayer]

Okay let's say both are guilty. One criminal who has no power...one criminal who has the most power in the world. Which one is more dangerous to people or to the USA or to the world? There's just no comparison between those two and that's why you should focus on what Trump does.

The Hunter Biden thing is significant because as Tucker said, its "influence peddling". Or by putting Biden's son on the board it creates a fast track back channel to the White House.

 

[vorcirion]

The Hunter Biden thing is significant because as Tucker said, its "influence peddling". Or by putting Biden's son on the board it creates a fast track back channel to the White House.

How the hell that compares to using US government to threat other countries? Ukraine is fighting for its life and Trump is using that to help his campaign...like how those two things are even close?

 

[mack341]

And yet Fox is exactly the same, but pro-trump. They are completely biased.

If you are pro-trump, then your idea of bias is entirely different to someone who is anti-trump. And you judge all information based on your own preconceptions or predisposition. It is human nature, but i don't see bias in the BBC coverage.

And there is an out of control liar in the White House. A president who intimidated witnesses, starts trade wars that are damaging the US economy, and lies almost every day.

And that is factual. And without bias.

Let's Say you despise trump and enjoy reading the bbc's coverage, doesn't that kind of prove the coverage isn't neutral?
There is bias on Fox, but there are also prominent critical voices against trump like chris wallace, shep smith etc... you won't find the reverse on CNN I don't think, presenters defending trump.

There's always going to be a degree of bias, it's human nature, but when it's always in one direction that's a problem, the bbc should employ a range of writers with different political viewpoints and loyalties, not just one. The public will then be more fully informed on a range of opinion.

 

[vorcirion]

How would you know what positive things he's done because the left wing media does not cover it.
I'm not going to provide a list but if you watch Fox you'll hear some of the good things.

Mack had the same problems saying what positive things Trump has done for the americans. Trump really doesn't care about americans. He cares only himself and he's NRA's little bitch.

 

[mack341]

Because maybe it's more important what the president of the USA (the most powerful person in the world) has actually done. Instead of what Hunter Biden may have done. One of them has the power to really affect what happens in the world. But for you two (slotplayer, mack) it seems to be more important what Hunter Biden does.
If there's some kind of suspicion of criminality then I'm sure FBI/CIA can handle it instead of Trump using the whole US government to pressure other countries to investigate whatever his conspiratorial mind comes up with. Or whatever might help him politically.

If you read my previous posts I have categorically said I'm not particularly interested in the hunter biden angle, I doubt he's done much wrong more than any other politician's children benefiting from their father's status and connections, to single him out and forget the rest wouldn't be right. Trump's sons probably benefit from having their dad be the president, opportunities arise etc.. which wouldn't have if they were joe blogg's son.

 

[slotplayer]

How the hell that compares to using US government to threat other countries? Ukraine is fighting for its life and Trump is using that to help his campaign...like how those two things are even close?

The reason it matters is that was an energy company (the life blood of any economy) and by putting Biden Jr. on the board it could help influence energy policy.

Trump asking for campaign opo dirt is imo nothing in comparison. Energy prices effect everyone.

 

[vorcirion]

The reason it matters is that was an energy company (the life blood of any economy) and by putting Biden Jr. on the board it could help influence energy policy.

Trump asking for campaign opo dirt is imo nothing in comparison. Energy prices effect everyone.

Okay so for you energy prices (which can go up or down...well up most likely) are more important than how other countries view your country or how corrupt your president is or what that corrupt president can do to get a political benefit! Who cares about national security as long as you get a tad cheaper electricity...just great!

 

[mack341]

But those prove nothing...

If trump is doing consistently stupid stuff, then he deserves more negative press. The fact FOX is 50/50 doesn't prove they aren't biased.

what about the aggregate effect, 1 outlet in favour of trump and yet dozens and dozens against, and he won the election, millions wanted him to serve as their president, the media as a whole is not truly representative of public opinion, ignoring and denigrating broad swathes of voters who are decent, law abiding folk.

In the US nobody makes you watch cnn, it's privately owned etc.. but in the uk with our regulator ofcom and the bbc, a state broadcaster that has massive public resources/tax money at its disposal, impartiality is more important and not just providing one side of political opinion.

 

[slotplayer]

Mack had the same problems saying what positive things Trump has done for the americans. Trump really doesn't care about americans. He cares only himself and he's NRA's little bitch.

I could but that would just get things heated.
What I don't hear about in the media is the caravans, the vet waiting for weeks to see a doctor, the caliphate.

You have a double whammy, you hate Trumps moral compass and you also hate his right wing policies.

 

[mack341]

The left and democrats are beholden to identity politics now so they are of little interest to me, as going down that route is just going to divide people even more. Pushing for open borders when you already have big poverty and crime issues and the third largest population in the world, plus a 20 trillion govt debt, is just sheer stupidity and irresponsible.

Then to push for more globalisation that will damage employment opportunities for US workers is also wrong if you care about the public and not just greed and profit, trump has said he's against this, so it's up to the voter to put their cross on what they want.

 

[slotplayer]

Okay so for you energy prices (which can go up or down...well up most likely) are more important than how other countries view your country or how corrupt your president is or what that corrupt president can do to get a political benefit! Who cares about national security as long as you get a tad cheaper electricity...just great!

If Trump was doing anything remotely corrupt to the level you claim the Fox anchors would be all over it, same for the Republicans.

When push comes to shove, what matters to most American's is what they coin "kitchen table issues."

 

[trancemonkey]

If Trump was doing anything remotely corrupt to the level you claim the Fox anchors would be all over it, same for the Republicans.

When push comes to shove, what matters to most American's is what they coin "kitchen table issues."

So why do you think Fox is unbiased?

I've also watched Fox and Friends, which is one of the most biased, religiously influenced, crazy pieces of TV you can watch.

I would guess the reason you like Fox is because for some odd reason you still think trump is ok (if you think threatening a whistleblower is ok, making fun of disabled people is ok, killing your own economy with trade wars, ranting inane rubbish on Twitter, and asking foreign governments to subvert your own political system [which by the way the founding fathers definition of treason was exactly this], you have a bizarre moral compass).

I know you may be anchored in the "Trump is great camp (he isn't), and therefore your ability to be pragmatic about things is impossible, but I just don't understand how anyone can look at what he is doing and say "This is great for America, democracy and everything it stands for" when it so clearly isn't.

Before Trump was elected i thought he was nuts, but I'd have probably voted for him over Clinton and expected him to calm down if he won. But he hasn't. He is claiming witch hunt while publicly doing the things he denies!

If that isn't proof he is unhinged I don't know what is

 

[mack341]

Before Trump was elected i thought he was nuts, but I'd have probably voted for him over Clinton and expected him to calm down if he won. But he hasn't. He is claiming witch hunt while publicly doing the things he denies!

That's interesting I didn't expect you to say that, it's partly how I felt, that trump was the least worst option, in no way the perfect candidate, I'm more a rand paul man I think.

Trump's struggled to be calm as it's like being president in a bear pit, he hasn't had one day without negative press coverage, they just haven't given him a chance and in return he's come out fighting and been even more pugnacious.

He holds the press in low regard, he probably knows they are not whiter than white themselves irl but he's meant to just stand there and take a daily shellacking from them, it's not in his temperament to do that. The FBI /CIA also probably tried to torpedo his presidency too, and the media have sought to downplay that, under siege is a bit of an understatement.

I think if the media had gone down the route of a more impartial, considered analysis of his policies, and made valid criticisms based on his campaign promises etc... I'd have been more willing to listen and consider their opinions/views, but it's just been a deluge of bile sent in his direction, that he's race baiting, a russian agent, kim lover etc.. anything and everything that is negative and from the most condemning angle of looking at something.

Yet many previous politicians get a free pass for their actions, hillary, bush, obama, they all have faults, Mccain was eulogised by the democrats/centre left, yet he loved the idea of more war as a solution to things. If he'd been president, there'd been at least two more major wars in the ME alone.

 

[vorcirion]

That's interesting I didn't expect you to say that, it's partly how I felt, that trump was the least worst option, in no way the perfect candidate, I'm more a rand paul man I think.

Trump's struggled to be calm as it's like being president in a bear pit, he hasn't had one day without negative press coverage, they just haven't given him a chance and in return he's come out fighting and been even more pugnacious.

He holds the press in low regard, he probably knows they are not whiter than white themselves irl but he's meant to just stand there and take a daily shellacking from them, it's not in his temperament to do that. The FBI /CIA also probably tried to torpedo his presidency too, and the media have sought to downplay that, under siege is a bit of an understatement.

I think if the media had gone down the route of a more impartial, considered analysis of his policies, and made valid criticisms based on his campaign promises etc... I'd have been more willing to listen and consider their opinions/views, but it's just been a deluge of bile sent in his direction, that he's race baiting, a russian agent, kim lover etc.. anything and everything that is negative and from the most condemning angle of looking at something.

Yet many previous politicians get a free pass for their actions, hillary, bush, obama, they all have faults, Mccain was eulogised by the democrats/centre left, yet he loved the idea of more war as a solution to things. If he'd been president, there'd been at least two more major wars in the ME alone.

You keep ignoring the facts and keep blaming the media/deep state. Yeah Hillary got a freepass. How long did the republicans investigate her? And I'm pretty sure there were daily insults from Fox towards Hillary during the campaign and some time after it. And all those lock her up-chants...yeah freepass my ass. And how did Hillary react? Nothing like some 3-year old crybaby called Trump. His temperament isn't suited for any kind of important role. He's a pathetic man who doesn't want to learn anything. Is a criminal and racist and keeps lying many times a day and you keep defending him...sigh. It's just sad.

 

[Mouche12]

What about Obama's effigies hanging from nooses across the country? I may have mentioned this before, but that's far more serious (expressing KKK-like sentiments) than the press coverage Trump receives. Most of that is after all based on his own tweets, poor choice of words, poor actions (the trade war for example, which will cost American citizens some $2,000 per year, according to the latest estimate), etc., etc.

 

[Harry_BKK]

The Hunter Biden thing is significant because as Tucker said, its "influence peddling". Or by putting Biden's son on the board it creates a fast track back channel to the White House.

No, it is not. Burisma at the time employed 24 people, mostly foreigners, to the board in an effort to show transparency.

Geez, do your research first.

On the board were among others the ex-president of Poland, Aleksander Kwaśniewski and Joseph Cofer Black, an ex-CIA director under George W. Bush. Were they experts in oil and energy? I strongly suspect they were not.

But yeah, keep living your wet conspiracy dream!

 

[mack341]

You keep ignoring the facts and keep blaming the media/deep state. Yeah Hillary got a freepass. How long did the republicans investigate her? And I'm pretty sure there were daily insults from Fox towards Hillary during the campaign and some time after it. And all those lock her up-chants...yeah freepass my ass. And how did Hillary react? Nothing like some 3-year old crybaby called Trump. His temperament isn't suited for any kind of important role. He's a pathetic man who doesn't want to learn anything. Is a criminal and racist and keeps lying many times a day and you keep defending him...sigh. It's just sad.

Is your screensaver a big pic of hillary or something

anti clinton chants at a republican political rally, whatever next...shocking stuff.

I'm just reading this article on time magazine's website about democrat's who voted for trump:

You do not have permission to view link Log in or register now.

one of the tales mentioned clinton:

“Going way back when, if you were in a union, if you were a working class person, you were a Democrat,” says the real estate investor, whose father was a Teamster and whose mother worked in a textile mill. “That’s just the way the ball fell.” But in 2016, Woodrosky says she couldn’t “bring herself” to vote for Clinton, who she saw as compromised and untrustworthy—even if it meant foregoing an opportunity to shatter a glass ceiling. “I want a woman president. I want to see a woman president. I’m a woman. Why wouldn’t I?” she says. “ But she was not the one I wanted to see.”

“Honestly, the one thing she said that stuck in my head was, ‘If you were happy with the last eight years, vote for me and we’ll continue that,’” Woodrosky said, and then laughed out loud. “Well, I wasn’t happy with the last eight years, so she was also telling her not to vote for her!”

[Obama was pretty much a failure compared to what he said he'd do during his campaigns, and prior to him there was bush, so people wanted big change, they thought obama was going to do it but as noted above he was effectively the male version of hillary clinton, with very little policy differences, in fact he made her his secretary of state in the 2nd term]

Sandy Lewis, 56, Swoyersville, PA
A self-described “life-long Democrat,” Lewis works at the county welfare office and fiercely defends those who find themselves with no other choice but to depend on food stamps and state housing assistance. Recently, she started learning sign language with an eye toward helping people who are deaf access what they need in the community. Lewis’ son, Tom Curry, who died of cancer in 2007, was the president and founder of the Luzerne County Young Democrats and represented his neighbors in the state’s Democratic Party.

Lewis voted for Trump in November in part because she couldn’t bring herself to cast a vote for Clinton and in part because she believed the New York businessman is the best choice to “shake up” Washington. “I was raised a Democrat, pure Democrat. I’m still a Democrat,” she says, before pausing to collect her thoughts. “Do I feel like a traitor? A little bit. But you know, if my son was here he would say, ‘Mom, you did the right thing.’”

Removing trump won't alter any of these reasons such as 'shaking up washington', it's the same in the uk, many people feel the politicians live in their own little world and won't address the problems facing ordinary people.

Joseph Dougherty, 49, Nanticoke, PA

A lifelong Democrat, the former mayor of Nanticoke became a Republican this year to vote for Trump, who he sees as more representative of “hard-working, blue collar workers looking for family-sustaining jobs.” To Dougherty, the problem lies in part with the Democratic Party, who he believes sidelined their core constituency in the Rust Belt states. “We didn’t leave the Democratic Party. The Democratic Party left us,” he says.

------------
I'm no expert but I'd guess many will see this impeachment process as just another 'washington' inspired witch hunt to unseat a democratically elected populist president, and on what we've heard so far will likely fail badly and make the dems look silly.

 

[Mouche12]

Not included in the above comments is the fact that the GOP blocked some 500 bills during Obama's presidency - that would explain the "very little policy differences".

 

[slotplayer]

So why do you think Fox is unbiased?

I've also watched Fox and Friends, which is one of the most biased, religiously influenced, crazy pieces of TV you can watch.

I would guess the reason you like Fox is because for some odd reason you still think trump is ok (if you think threatening a whistleblower is ok, making fun of disabled people is ok, killing your own economy with trade wars, ranting inane rubbish on Twitter, and asking foreign governments to subvert your own political system [which by the way the founding fathers definition of treason was exactly this], you have a bizarre moral compass).

I know you may be anchored in the "Trump is great camp (he isn't), and therefore your ability to be pragmatic about things is impossible, but I just don't understand how anyone can look at what he is doing and say "This is great for America, democracy and everything it stands for" when it so clearly isn't.

Before Trump was elected i thought he was nuts, but I'd have probably voted for him over Clinton and expected him to calm down if he won. But he hasn't. He is claiming witch hunt while publicly doing the things he denies!

If that isn't proof he is unhinged I don't know what is

I've posted this before. I don't watch Fox n Friends. I didn't even during the Obama years because it was just a 3 hour bash fest. Not unlike what the MSM is doing now. Plus Fox n Friends doesn't carry much credibility compared to the other Fox shows.

Trump, no you have it wrong, I see what you see but I process it differently. Were there a few things he did that crossed the line with me or came close, sure there is. Do I like the tweeting, not really. Do I like his style, not really. There are even a couple policies I don't like.

However, Trump is trying to address some of the problems the US population has heard about ad nauseam for the last 20-30 years. Immigration, Nafta, China for example.

 

[slotplayer]

No, it is not. Burisma at the time employed 24 people, mostly foreigners, to the board in an effort to show transparency.

Geez, do your research first.

On the board were among others the ex-president of Poland, Aleksander Kwaśniewski and Joseph Cofer Black, an ex-CIA director under George W. Bush. Were they experts in oil and energy? I strongly suspect they were not.

But yeah, keep living your wet conspiracy dream!

I head it was for transparency and ethics but would have bought it if it wasn't the Vice president's son. They could have found someone other than Hunter whom was more of a boy scout, don't you think?

 

[Harry_BKK]

I head it was for transparency and ethics but would have bought it if it wasn't the Vice president's son. They could have found someone other than Hunter whom was more of a boy scout, don't you think?

He was employed from 2014 onwards when no one was talking whatsoever about the prosecutor (the one supposed to investigate Burisma for the period 2010-2012, not 2014, but let it go dormant) to be fired.

We don't know how and why they employed Hunter and anything that is said is pure speculation. Personally, I would not have taken the job with daddy being VP to avoid any misconceptions.

It is funny how you complain about Hunter, but are fine with the most blatant nepotism Mr T has been promoting since his inauguration.

Also funny, that Mr T says "it is about corruption" but could not answer the question from a reporter during the last Chopper Talk as to what other cases of corruption aside from the alleged Biden/Biden Jr cases he is investigating or has been asking other governments for assistance! So it is only when it benefits him, not really to investigate corruption. I'm rather flabbergasted that you can't comprehend that much.

I would say investigate Biden/Biden Jr but then also Ivanka, Don Jr, Eric, Jared etc. Why only one side and not the other?

E.g. Jared got tons of money from Qatar, conveniently funnelled via a Canadian company for his failed 666 project. Has Mr T asked for an investigation whether there was corruption? This people basically paid upfront the rent for a 99-year lease. I have yet to see such a deal in any country. And it happened right when Qatar was isolated by its neighbours and they were in dire need of political support.

 

[slotplayer]

He was employed from 2014 onwards when no one was talking whatsoever about the prosecutor (the one supposed to investigate Burisma for the period 2010-2012, not 2014, but let it go dormant) to be fired.

We don't know how and why they employed Hunter and anything that is said is pure speculation. Personally, I would not have taken the job with daddy being VP to avoid any misconceptions.

It is funny how you complain about Hunter, but are fine with the most blatant nepotism Mr T has been promoting since his inauguration.

Also funny, that Mr T says "it is about corruption" but could not answer the question from a reporter during the last Chopper Talk as to what other cases of corruption aside from the alleged Biden/Biden Jr cases he is investigating or has been asking other governments for assistance! So it is only when it benefits him, not really to investigate corruption. I'm rather flabbergasted that you can't comprehend that much.

I would say investigate Biden/Biden Jr but then also Ivanka, Don Jr, Eric, Jared etc. Why only one side and not the other?

E.g. Jared got tons of money from Qatar, conveniently funnelled via a Canadian company for his failed 666 project. Has Mr T asked for an investigation whether there was corruption? Because it happened right when Qatar was isolated by its neighbours and they were in dire need of political support.

The only thing I know about the T kids is I hear they don't get a salary.

I don't think Trump is serious about investigating Biden, its just a political strategy to deflect some of the heat off of him.

 

[trancemonkey]

I've posted this before. I don't watch Fox n Friends. I didn't even during the Obama years because it was just a 3 hour bash fest. Not unlike what the MSM is doing now. Plus Fox n Friends doesn't carry much credibility compared to the other Fox shows.

Trump, no you have it wrong, I see what you see but I process it differently. Were there a few things he did that crossed the line with me or came close, sure there is. Do I like the tweeting, not really. Do I like his style, not really. There are even a couple policies I don't like.

However, Trump is trying to address some of the problems the US population has heard about ad nauseam for the last 20-30 years. Immigration, Nafta, China for example.

Trying to address them by damaging the US economy... yeah that's really clever of him.

There is only so much press coverage of his lunacy because he's a lunatic. If he shut up, stayed off Twitter and just got on with the Job, you think there would be so much press coverage of him? Of course not.

You're clearly a Trump apologist, and you consistently ignore all the demonstrable lies he tells, the way he is subverting the seat of the president, and all his other foibles.

And I just don't understand how anyone can do that. The China trade war is demonstrably hurting the US economy.

 

[mack341]

er currently the USA has about a 500 billion annual trade deficit running with china, how can they address this trade inbalance?

Cheap consumer goods from china are probably unsustainable in the long run for the environment etc..., it's so cheap we just throw it away and then go out and buy more. So some tariffs on chinese imports may not be such a mad idea in the long run.

I think the 'trade war' may also be about North korea and forcing china to come to the table, the timing seems too coincidental to me, NK peace talks started roughly at the same time as financial pressure was applied to china's export economy, and now that their country has grown more reliant on western markets, this gambit could be effective when it wouldn't have been in the 80's say.

 

[Steviedoo]

All this talk about Biden and his son. Kettle calling the pot black?

The trumps and son in law are profiting every single day.

It’s amazing to me that the rules only apply to one side.

Just on his golf trips alone they’ve made tons of money.

 

[slotplayer]

Trying to address them by damaging the US economy... yeah that's really clever of him.

There is only so much press coverage of his lunacy because he's a lunatic. If he shut up, stayed off Twitter and just got on with the Job, you think there would be so much press coverage of him? Of course not.

You're clearly a Trump apologist, and you consistently ignore all the demonstrable lies he tells, the way he is subverting the seat of the president, and all his other foibles.

And I just don't understand how anyone can do that. The China trade war is demonstrably hurting the US economy.

Taking on China and the trade imbalance is doing the job. The economy here is still in the 2+ percentage growth. Unemployment is 3.5% here.

 

[trancemonkey]

Taking on China and the trade imbalance is doing the job. The economy here is still in the 2+ percentage growth. Unemployment is 3.5% here.

TAll industries caught up in the trade war are suffering. Look at the facts, rather than the trump rhetoric...

You do not have permission to view link Log in or register now.

Why would the fed lower interest rates if the economy is super strong?

 

[slotplayer]

TAll industries caught up in the trade war are suffering. Look at the facts, rather than the trump rhetoric...

You do not have permission to view link Log in or register now.

Why would the fed lower interest rates if the economy is super strong?

You listen to Trump more than me. Of course Trump is going to play up the economy.

I watch the Business news daily actually. The economy is good but its not flying on all cylinders.

The fed lowers rates to keep a healthy economy going and raises them to keep an economy from heating up and causing inflation. The fed chairman admitted he raised them too fast early on.

The Obama economy didn't rebound until 2014. Experts said it would take about 5 years to recover all the (5 million if I remember correctly) jobs lost from the 2008 crisis. They were pretty close in their estimate.

I think its time for a little Stu.
May 2, 2019

 

[trancemonkey]

You listen to Trump more than me. Of course Trump is going to play up the economy.

I watch the Business news daily actually. The economy is good but its not flying on all cylinders.

The fed lowers rates to keep a healthy economy going and raises them to keep an economy from heating up and causing inflation. The fed chairman admitted he raised them too fast early on.

The Obama economy didn't rebound until 2014. Experts said it would take about 5 years to recover all the (5 million if I remember correctly) jobs lost from the 2008 crisis. They were pretty close in their estimate.

I think its time for a little Stu.
May 2, 2019

I think Trump is the worst thing ever to happen to the US. And the GOPs inability to hold him to account is a total travesty...

 

[vorcirion]

I heard Tucker actually criticized Trump? Mack/Slotplayer...are you okay? Must've been traumatic experience I imagine!
And Trump making some friends in Syria. Pretty smart abandoning allies there too. It's like he's intentionally trying to screw things up and just testing his supporters just how low can they go.

 

[goatwack]

It was quite clearly a Deepfake

or a Tucker stunt-double