Donald Trump said he would get rid of gangs in America

Alright Trump critics.

Stop acting like the left is made up of nothing, but Rhodes Scholars.

I have heard that so called mental superiority claim over the right for the past seven years.

And I STILL HAVEN'T seen it proven.

a reply to: madenusa

He should then, in theory, start with Congress and then move onto the CIA then FBI then DHS then TSA then NSA and finish off with the thugs in the militarized domestic police force.

Bikie gangs and drug cartels are light-weights in comparison.

If anyone in a gang hurt me or my family you can bet they will be getting headshotted out of a soundproof van if I can find their asses. That is the big problem though is fighting gangs is alot like fighting an insurgency since they blend right in.

a reply to: madenusa

We use the cartels in Mexico to police our southern border. They have that locked down far better than we ever could. In return for them not allowing terrorists to cross over, they get to smuggle ordinary people over and bring drugs into our country.

I think part of it is a matter of convenience, another part of it is that our system of government isn't immune to the corruption the cartels are able to buy, and it's better to take this deal than to let them work their way into our government the way they have in Mexico.

If Trump wanted to do something profound and change this policy, he would work on a way to get Mexico's permission to move our military into their territory and truly declare war on the cartels. That's something we should have done 20 years ago, and it's much more important to our national security than blowing up people in the middle east.

originally posted by: Swills
a reply to: madenusa

As if Trump can magically get rid of gangs. As if state and federal authorities haven't been in war against them for DECADES.

Ever stop to think Trump just talks out his ass? It's not like all presidential candidates make grandiose promises while on the campaign trail only to not fulfill them when in office.

It's actually rather easy to do. Legalize the drugs, and then make centers to freely treat addiction. It's cheaper than fighting against them, and the legal status is enough to drive down costs to the point where it decimates the cartels income. And since dealers will be acting legally, they'll fight in the courtroom over contracts rather than in shoot outs for territory.

Yes, Trump is full of 'i would', i'm quite curious to see if it will actually come to 'i do'.

a reply to: madenusa

so a goverment site tells you a fact and you believe it. pffft

originally posted by: Aazadan

originally posted by: Swills
a reply to: madenusa

As if Trump can magically get rid of gangs. As if state and federal authorities haven't been in war against them for DECADES.

Ever stop to think Trump just talks out his ass? It's not like all presidential candidates make grandiose promises while on the campaign trail only to not fulfill them when in office.

It's actually rather easy to do. Legalize the drugs, and then make centers to freely treat addiction. It's cheaper than fighting against them, and the legal status is enough to drive down costs to the point where it decimates the cartels income. And since dealers will be acting legally, they'll fight in the courtroom over contracts rather than in shoot outs for territory.

This is what Trump said in 1990! He, himself, never drinks, smokes, nor has he ever tried drugs.

Trump is clearly very good liar.....perhaps a little too good......

He fits right in to the position he is running for

a reply to: madenusa

He's also going to make sure every household has a unicorn.

a reply to: Aazadan

Not that easy.
Legalize drugs and kill their cash cow...they'll just move onto other illicit activities for their money.
Eg....sex trafficking, illegal weapons...etc etc etc.

Drugs are only a part of where their money comes from, and though it would set them back a bit, there are always others ways.

a reply to: bigfatfurrytexan

That done it for me. I'm voting Trump.

I've always wanted my own personal unicorn....and I will name him......well, I'm gonna have to think on that one.

originally posted by: zazzafrazz
He won't do Jack.
Anyone that believes his rhetoric is naive to say the least.
He is pitching to the lowest-loudest-largest common dominator to get the GOP vote, as soon as that happens, he will tone down ...mark my words.
He knows marketing.

I really don't quite understand why some people think Donald Trump is a worse choice than "Clinton part II" or "Bush part III".

Trump is running a Presidential Campaign and a company with 22,000+ employees, that has billions of dollars in real estate holdings. People need to start giving the guy some friggin credit. In contrast, what other organization, WITH EMPLOYED STAFF, was Obama "running" during his initial Presidential campaign? NONE, just his Presidential campaign, with some skeleton crew staffers left behind, to autopilot his Senate duties, same goes for "Bush part II" (just replace "Senator" with "Governor").

Although Trump did grow up rich, inheriting money and property from his fathers businesses, the Trump Family is self-made for the most part and do not seem to be directly connected with NWO/Old-Money types (all the Trumps are Tax Dodgers BTW). Trumps grandfather did not process properly through Ellis Island, in the late 1800's and had left behind many unpaid debt in Europe by the time he came to America and started his new businesses. What regualr people don't seem to understand is that folks like Donald Trump and Ross Perot are considered "trash" by the standards of the Romney and Bush clans types, with family members having held political offices, in the Untied States, as far back as the 1850's. Note, Reagan, Clinton, and Obama also had no direct family ties to the NWO/Old-Money types. However, they were not nearly as wealthy, nor as independently bold, as Trump or Perot and eventually all of them did "toe the line", following the orders of the NWO/Old-Money types.

The reality is that Trump will NEVER be accepted as part of the true "Owners of Capital" club because he is the decedent of regular working class immigrants from Germany, that came to the USA via Ellis Island. Whether voters believe it or not, people like Donald Trump and Ross Perot before him, are truly, the best chance, regular people have to being represented by someone in office who's family is not beholden to or part of the NWO/Old-Money types. Although I have not thoroughly checked, it does not appear that Donald Trump nor Ross Perot were ever invited to or attended the Bilderberg Conference. That's a GOOD sign, not a bad one.

Also there are some other things to consider, if Trump has a REAL chance at winning the republican nomination or somehow gets huge backing as an Independent, the "Owners of Capital" will simply do what they did to Ross Perot and once that process unfolds he will eventually decide to "willingly withdraw" from the race.

Also, do people really believe, that if someone like Donald Trump wins the election, that he will be able to do what he wants, as apposed to, what the "Military Industrial Complex" wants him to do?

Anyone who becomes President of the United States has to "cow tow" to the "Military Industrial Complex" and even Donald Trump is not immune to a guaranteed "CIA visit" once in office.

Be assured they will pay him a visit, if he ever wins, and like Ross Perot, Jessie Ventura, Arnold Schwarzenegger and Obama, he too will be told to "toe the line" and "play ball", as they dictate. For example, why in the world did Arnold Schwarzenegger need to do ANYTHING along party lines? His fame and popularity COMPLETELY transcended political parties, yet somehow he was still "answering" to politicians who "in theory" should have had no affect on his personal life, political career or personal fortune, all of which existed prior to being elected and was held COMPLETELY outside of the confines or influence of the "Military Industrial Complex".

Also consider this angle, there is a huge assets difference between someone like Mitt Romney, who has a $250 million net worth and Ross Perot with a $5 billion net worth (Donald Trump has a net worth of $4 Billion). Yet, someone like Romney was a shoe in for party nominations. As I alluded to above, its NOT the money nor the popular vote that matters, people like Mitt and Jeb Bush are government insiders and both come from families that always have been government insiders. That was not the case at all with Perot and the same goes for Trump, hence neither of them can be elected regardless of the popular vote or the public's desires or how much money they spend.

Ross Perot dropping out of the 1992 election was not happenstance either, nor simply about his daughters wedding:

Mr. Perot offered no evidence, only quoting friends and an unidentified "top Republican." "I can't prove any of it today," he said on tonight's CBS News program "60 Minutes." "But it was a risk I did not have to take," he added, "and a risk I would not take where my daughter is concerned." Mr. Perot accused the unidentified C.I.A. employee of being hired to tap into his computerized stock trading program to prevent him from having the money to revive his campaign.

Trump and Sanders, in my opinion, are the least likely, currently "visible candidates", to be heavily affiliated with NWO/Old-Money types. Trump and Sanders weren't "born into" the "right kind" of political families, in fact their ancestors were immigrants from the lower classes of Europe. Its actually really too bad they can't be on the same ticket, running as Independents, with Sanders as President and Trump as VP, with people like Ralph Nader, Jessie Ventura and Ron Paul filling the various cabinet positions (pooling campaign resources, with the intention of actually trying to win, as a team and not solo).

But if they tried to pull a "hat trick" like that, I'm sure quite a few of them would QUICKLY find themselves at risk of being in a "plane crash" or on the wrong end of a "car accident".

I think Ross Perot would have done a much better job than ANY of the "good ol' boys" that we've gotten as Presidents since then. Again, Perot dropping out of the 1992 election was not happenstance, nor was it simply about his daughters wedding. He was likely threatened in some way that none of us can imagine. Why has he been so quiet, for the last 20+ years? Donald Trump will be no different, but, if he decides to run for President and he somehow wins, best case scenario, it will be Arnold Schwarzenegger or Ronald Reagan all over again.

Trump is going to end cancer, and give everyone an IPhone

originally posted by: boohoo

originally posted by: zazzafrazz
He won't do Jack.
Anyone that believes his rhetoric is naive to say the least.
He is pitching to the lowest-loudest-largest common dominator to get the GOP vote, as soon as that happens, he will tone down ...mark my words.
He knows marketing.

I really don't quite understand why some people think Donald Trump is a worse choice than "Clinton part II" or "Bush part III".

Trump is running a Presidential Campaign and a company with 22,000+ employees, that has billions of dollars in real estate holdings. People need to start giving the guy some friggin credit. In contrast, what other organization, WITH EMPLOYED STAFF, was Obama "running" during his initial Presidential campaign? NONE, just his Presidential campaign, with some skeleton crew staffers left behind, to autopilot his Senate duties, same goes for "Bush part II" (just replace "Senator" with "Governor").

Although Trump did grow up rich, inheriting money and property from his fathers businesses, the Trump Family is self-made for the most part and do not seem to be directly connected with NWO/Old-Money types (all the Trumps are Tax Dodgers BTW). Trumps grandfather did not process properly through Ellis Island, in the late 1800's and had left behind many unpaid debt in Europe by the time he came to America and started his new businesses. What regualr people don't seem to understand is that folks like Donald Trump and Ross Perot are considered "trash" by the standards of the Romney and Bush clans types, with family members having held political offices, in the Untied States, as far back as the 1850's. Note, Reagan, Clinton, and Obama also had no direct family ties to the NWO/Old-Money types. However, they were not nearly as wealthy, nor as independently bold, as Trump or Perot and eventually all of them did "toe the line", following the orders of the NWO/Old-Money types.

The reality is that Trump will NEVER be accepted as part of the true "Owners of Capital" club because he is the decedent of regular working class immigrants from Germany, that came to the USA via Ellis Island. Whether voters believe it or not, people like Donald Trump and Ross Perot before him, are truly, the best chance, regular people have to being represented by someone in office who's family is not beholden to or part of the NWO/Old-Money types. Although I have not thoroughly checked, it does not appear that Donald Trump nor Ross Perot were ever invited to or attended the Bilderberg Conference. That's a GOOD sign, not a bad one.

Also there are some other things to consider, if Trump has a REAL chance at winning the republican nomination or somehow gets huge backing as an Independent, the "Owners of Capital" will simply do what they did to Ross Perot and once that process unfolds he will eventually decide to "willingly withdraw" from the race.

Also, do people really believe, that if someone like Donald Trump wins the election, that he will be able to do what he wants, as apposed to, what the "Military Industrial Complex" wants him to do?

Anyone who becomes President of the United States has to "cow tow" to the "Military Industrial Complex" and even Donald Trump is not immune to a guaranteed "CIA visit" once in office.

Be assured they will pay him a visit, if he ever wins, and like Ross Perot, Jessie Ventura, Arnold Schwarzenegger and Obama, he too will be told to "toe the line" and "play ball", as they dictate. For example, why in the world did Arnold Schwarzenegger need to do ANYTHING along party lines? His fame and popularity COMPLETELY transcended political parties, yet somehow he was still "answering" to politicians who "in theory" should have had no affect on his personal life, political career or personal fortune, all of which existed prior to being elected and was held COMPLETELY outside of the confines or influence of the "Military Industrial Complex".

Also consider this angle, there is a huge assets difference between someone like Mitt Romney, who has a $250 million net worth and Ross Perot with a $5 billion net worth (Donald Trump has a net worth of $4 Billion). Yet, someone like Romney was a shoe in for party nominations. As I alluded to above, its NOT the money nor the popular vote that matters, people like Mitt and Jeb Bush are government insiders and both come from families that always have been government insiders. That was not the case at all with Perot and the same goes for Trump, hence neither of them can be elected regardless of the popular vote or the public's desires or how much money they spend.

Ross Perot dropping out of the 1992 election was not happenstance either, nor simply about his daughters wedding:

Mr. Perot offered no evidence, only quoting friends and an unidentified "top Republican." "I can't prove any of it today," he said on tonight's CBS News program "60 Minutes." "But it was a risk I did not have to take," he added, "and a risk I would not take where my daughter is concerned." Mr. Perot accused the unidentified C.I.A. employee of being hired to tap into his computerized stock trading program to prevent him from having the money to revive his campaign.

Trump and Sanders, in my opinion, are the least likely, currently "visible candidates", to be heavily affiliated with NWO/Old-Money types. Trump and Sanders weren't "born into" the "right kind" of political families, in fact their ancestors were immigrants from the lower classes of Europe. Its actually really too bad they can't be on the same ticket, running as Independents, with Sanders as President and Trump as VP, with people like Ralph Nader, Jessie Ventura and Ron Paul filling the various cabinet positions (pooling campaign resources, with the intention of actually trying to win, as a team and not solo).

But if they tried to pull a "hat trick" like that, I'm sure quite a few of them would QUICKLY find themselves at risk of being in a "plane crash" or on the wrong end of a "car accident".

I think Ross Perot would have done a much better job than ANY of the "good ol' boys" that we've gotten as Presidents since then. Again, Perot dropping out of the 1992 election was not happenstance, nor was it simply about his daughters wedding. He was likely threatened in some way that none of us can imagine. Why has he been so quiet, for the last 20+ years? Donald Trump will be no different, but, if he decides to run for President and he somehow wins, best case scenario, it will be Arnold Schwarzenegger or Ronald Reagan all over again.

I totally agree with you. I am shocked at the ATS mind set about Trump. For years the tin foil hat brigade has cried unmercifully the mantra that both parties are the same, or both parties are owned by TPTB. This election cycle is different we have a man running who is being attacked by both parties and the MSM and all the tin foils hats are jumping on the hate Trump bandwagon. I give Trump the benefit of the doubt that he will do what he says he says. He has built his life around his word as a businessman and if he doesn't do what he says then he will destroy his companies reputation.
The people who want to try another social experiment with Frosty the Hag or Commie Sanders are plain nuts.

Will Donald Trump get rid of the Ivory Tower gangs?


Those that sit in swanky board rooms, lush hotels like the Billderberger, corporate and banksters dragon’s dens, will he fight those gangs that has practically all the power that really matters.
The gang of the Military industrial complex that lives like vampires off the blood of the youth of the world

I doubt it

He’ll go after the black and brown street gangs and those ivory tower gangs will drink champagne to their new clown puppet Manchurian slave Trump, as again the real gangsters get away with murder and every other crime imaginable.

originally posted by: zazzafrazz
a reply to: queenofswords

Lets talk if he gets nominated and IF his rhetoric stays the same.
He is on a campaign trail.....

Its so simple, I don't know what people can't see it.

While you may be right, it's amazing that this argument wasn't mentioned when Trump was talking about banning all Muslims. it was OUTRAGE over how insensitive he was.

I doubt he will be anything more than a flash in the pan when Bush somehow is able to step in and save the day to run against the criminal Hillary, But the idea to go after gangs to reduce gun violence is kind of a smart thing. It actually makes more sense than making killing more illegal then it already is.

originally posted by: bigfatfurrytexan
Trump is going to end cancer, and give everyone an IPhone

Iphone 6? if so, I am now a Trump guy!

originally posted by: hopenotfeariswhatweneed
Trump is clearly very good liar.....perhaps a little too good......

He fits right in to the position he is running for

That's what it boils down to.

Who ever is the best liar WINS at election time.

originally posted by: Jakal26
Not that easy.
Legalize drugs and kill their cash cow...they'll just move onto other illicit activities for their money.
Eg....sex trafficking, illegal weapons...etc etc etc.

Drugs are only a part of where their money comes from, and though it would set them back a bit, there are always others ways.

It still reduces demand. I grew up in Reno Nevada so I'm quite used to living in a place with legalized prostitution, it wouldn't bother me one bit if we made that legal too. Illegal weapons is a problem that solves itself, if gambling, prostitution, and drugs are legal and regulated there's not really a need to have an illegal weapon because all of your activity is already above the table. And I don't think it really matters who owns what as far as weapons go if we remove the motivation to use those weapons.